Sie sind auf Seite 1von 23

I.

General Principles Differences between Criminal Procedure and


Criminal Law
Remedial Law - details the methods for Criminal Law Criminal
enforcing rights or obtaining redress for their Procedure
invasion (Black’s Law Dictionary) Substantive Nature Remedial
Criminal Procedure Define what Purpose Provides how
acts are acts are punished
– rules of law governing the procedures by punishable
which crimes are investigated, prosecuted, Defines Subject Method by
adjudicated, and punished crimes, treats Matter which the
for their accused is
- a proceeding whereby the State prosecutes a nature, arrested, tried,
person for an act or omission punishable by
provides for and punished if
law their convicted
- method prescribed by law for apprehension punishment
and prosecution of persons accused at any
criminal offense (Herrera)
Adversarial/Accusatory System
- treats of the series of processes by which the
- contemplates two contending parties before
criminal laws are enforced and by which the
a court which hears them impartially renders
state prosecutes persons who violate the penal
judgment only after trial (Queto v Catolico)
laws
- requires all crimes, except the so-called
- concerned with the procedural steps through
private offenses which must be commenced by
which a criminal case passes, commencing
the complaint of the offended party, to be
with the initial investigation of a crime and
prosecuted by a public prosecutor. The
concluding with the unconditional release of
accused has the right to be present at any stage
the offender or punishment in case of
of the proceedings and to be heard personally
conviction
and by counsel. Trial is conducted publicly,
- describes the network of laws and rules and the right of the accused against self-
which governs the procedural administration incrimination is guaranteed. Furthermore, the
of criminal justice, that is, laws and court rules accused enjoys the presumption of innocence
governing arrest, search and seizure, bail, etc which lasts until his guilt is proved beyond
(Black’s Law Dictionary) reasonable doubt. The right to appeal is a
characteristic feature of this system, although
- starts with the initial contact of the alleged the judgment of the trial court does not
lawbreaker with the justice machinery and require the imprimatur of the court of last
concludes either with a judgment exonerating resort before it may attain finality. (Pamaran,
the accused or the final imposition of a penalty 2007)
against him
-It is of the essence of the accusatorial system
grounded in the due process school of

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
criminology that there be moral certainty of - Formal defects and technicalities which do
guilt to defeat the constitutional presumption not affect the substantial rights of the parties
of innocence (People v Egot) should be cured during the trial.

- confrontative and trial is publicly held and - It is elementary that rules of criminal
ends with magistrate rendering verdict (Riano) procedure are given retroactive application
insofar as they benefit the accused (Buebos v
Essence: Presumption of innocence People)
Inquisitorial System - “…the Rules of Court frowns upon hair-
- court has active role and it is not limited to splitting technicalities that do not square with
their liberal tendency and with the ends of
the evidence presented before it. The court
may utilize evidence gathered outside the justice.” (Cabunilas v CA)
court and a judge or a group of judges under Purpose: to protect the substantial rights of the
this system actively participates in gathering accused as the justice machinery of the state
facts rather than mere passively receiving will attempt to intrude into the accused’s right
information. The judge steers the course of the to life, liberty, and property
proceedings by directing and supervising the
gathering of evidence. Counsel has less active Jurisdiction
role. (Riano)
- power given by law to court to hear and
- secret inquiry to discover culprit; judge may determine cases (Herrera v Barreto) and to
proceed with own inquiry execute the judgment thereon (Echegaray v
Secretary of Justice) and it is coram judice
- the prosecution of crimes is wholly in the whenever a case is presented which brings the
hands of the prosecuting officer and the court. power into action
The presence of the accused before the
magistrate is not a requirement. The judgment, - authority to inquire into the facts, apply the
however, does not become final until it has law, and pronounce judgment
been ratified and confirmed by the court of
last resort (US v Samio) - derived from the two Latin words “juris” and
“dico” (I speak by the law) which means
Essence: secrecy fundamentally the power or the capacity given
by the law to a court or tribunal to entertain,
Construction of rules hear and determine certain controversies
- “These rules shall be liberally construed in (People v Mariano)
order to promote their objective of securing a - the power to hear and determine matters in
just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of controversy according to established rules of
every action and proceeding.” (Sec. 6, Rule 1 law and to carry the sentence or judgment of
of the Rules of Court) the court into execution (Morando v Rovira)
- must be viewed as tools to facilitate the - includes not only the power expressly
attainment of justice conferred by law, but all such power as may be

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
necessary for the full exercise and enjoyment Elements:
of that expressly conferred (State ex rel. 1. Nature and penalty of the offense
Dauphin v Ellis) 2. What is alleged in the Information
3. Where the offense is committed
Elements: 4. The law in force at the time of the
1. The law has given the tribunal capacity to institution of the complaint/Information
entertain the complaint (exception: if the repealing law provides
2. Such complaint has actually been preferred otherwise)
3. The person or thing sought to be charged or
affected has been properly brought before the REQUISITES FOR A VALID EXERCISE OF
tribunal to answer the charge therein CRIMINAL JURISDICTION
contained (Republic v Sunga) 1. JURISDICTION OVER THE SUBJECT
MATTER)
Note: Jurisdiction is vested in the Court, not
in the judges. - The offense is one which the court has
authority to take cognizance of
Venue
- the authority to hear and determine a
- particular geographical area in which a court particular criminal case
with jurisdiction may hear and determine a
case (Black’s Law Dictionary) - jurisdiction over the nature of the cause of
action and of the relief sought
- place of trial
- the power to hear and determine cases of the
- geographical location where the case shall be general class to which the proceedings in
instituted, heard, and tried (Tan) question belong and is conferred by the
sovereign authority which organizes the court
VENUE JURISDICTION
and defines its powers (Reyes v Diaz)
Deals with the Treats of the power of
locality, the place the court to decide - In order to ascertain whether a court has
where the suit may be the case on the merits jurisdiction or not, the provisions of the law
had shall be inquired into (Soller v Sandiganbayan)
Procedural Substantive
Elements:

The place where the crime is committed 1. nature of the offense


determines not only the venue of the action 2. authority to impose penalty
but is an essential element of jurisdiction. 3. territorial jurisdiction of court imposing
penalty
Criminal Jurisdiction
Note:
- the authority to hear and try a particular
 it can be challenged at any stage of the
offense and impose the punishment for it
proceedings and for lack of it, a court can
(People v Mariano)
dismiss a case ex mero motu.

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
 In order to determine the jurisdiction of motion to quash or by appearing at the
the court, the complaint must be examined arraignment or participating in the trial or
for the purpose of ascertaining the entering trial.
abovementioned elements.  The voluntary appearance of the accused,
 The court’s jurisdiction in the first through counsel, at the pre-suspension
instance is determined by facts alleged in hearing held in connection with an anti-
the complaint and not by the qualification graft charge, is considered to be
of the crime made in the title of the submission to the jurisdiction of the court
complaint or by the result of proof after over his person, even if no warrant has
trial been issued for his arrest. (Layosa v
 Applicable statute is the one in force at the Rodriguez)
time of the institution of the action and  If the court lawfully acquires jurisdiction
not the one at the time of its commission of his person after he is within reach of its
(People v Lagon) process, the means used to bring him there
 Conferment must be clear, not presumed will not be inquired into (Pamaran, 2007)
 Cannot be fixed by the will of the parties  May be waived through special appearance
 Not conferred by mere administrative
policy of any trial court (Cudia v CA) USE OF IMPOSABLE PENALTY: consider
 In case the court has no jurisdiction over the penalty which may be imposed upon the
the subject matter, it shall be a ground for accused and not the actual penalty imposed
a motion to quash under Sec 3 Rule 117 after the trial. The penalty imposable shall be
and the case will be dismissed. (Tan) determined by what the law imposes for the
offense on the basis of the facts alleged in the
2. JURISDICTION OVER THE PERSON OF information
THE ACCUSED
GENERAL RULE: Filing pleadings seeking
- the taking into custody by court of the affirmative relief constitutes voluntary
person of the accused in order that he may be appearance and consequent submission of
bound to answer for the commission of the one’s person to the jurisdiction of the court
offense (Pamaran, 2007)
EXCEPTION: Pleadings whose prayer is
- authority of the court over the person precisely for the avoidance of jurisdiction and
charged which leads to special appearance:

- person charged must have been brought into A. in civil cases – motion to dismiss due to lack
its forum for trial, forcibly by warrant of arrest of jurisdiction over the person of defendant
or voluntarily by voluntary surrender (failure to file is waiver of the defense of lack
(Antiporda v Garchitorena) of jurisdiction)

Note: B. in criminal cases – motion to quash due to


lack of jurisdiction (failure to file is waiver of
 Voluntary submission of the accused may the defense of lack of jurisdiction)
be effected by posting bail or by filing a

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
C. motion to quash warrant of arrest Rationale: The principle seeks to preclude
(questions legality of court process) harassment of the defendant and to save him
from the inconvenience and expense in
 A special appearance before the court to looking for his witnesses and other evidence in
challenge the jurisdiction of the court over another place
the person is NOT tantamount to estoppel
or a waiver of the objection and is not a Note: The concept of venue is jurisdictional.
voluntary submission to the jurisdiction of The place where the crime was committed
the court (Garcia v Sandiganbayan) determines not only the venue of the action
 Failure to make objection to the but is an essential element of jurisdiction.
jurisdiction of the court is waiver of such How determined: By the allegations in the
right information as the situs of the crime. Hence,
 Being in custody of the law ≠ being under even if the court subsequently dismisses the
the jurisdiction of court
action upon proof that the offense was
committed outside its territory, all proceedings
Being in custody of the law – signifies restraint
prior thereto are valid (People v Galano)
on the person, who is thereby deprived of his
own will and liberty, binding him to become Exception: Extraterritorial Jurisdiction
obedient to the will of the law; being in
custody over the body of the accused 1. Where the offense was committed under
the circumstances enumerated in Article 2
Nolle Prosequi – dismissal of criminal case by RPC – “Except as provided in the treaties and
the government before the accused is placed laws of preferential application, the provisions
on trial and before he is called to plead, with of this Code shall be enforced not only within
approval of the court in the exercise of its the Philippine archipelago, including its
judicial discretion atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime
zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction,
3. JURISDICTION OVER THE TERRITORY against those who:

- the offense must have been committed/ its a. Should commit an offense while on a
essential ingredients took place in the territory Philippine ship or airship;
where the court has jurisdiction to take b. Should forge or counterfeit coin or
cognizance or try the offense currency note of the Philippine Islands
or obligations and securities issued by
- limits of geographical boundaries of a place the Government of the Philippine
within which a court has jurisdiction to act Islands;
judicially c. Should be liable for acts connected
- the criminal action shall be instituted and with the introduction into these
tried in the court of the municipality or Islands of the obligations and securities
province wherein the offense was committed mentioned in the preceding number;
or where any of its essential ingredients took d. While being public officers or
place (Sec. 15, Rule 110) employees, should commit an offense
in the exercise of their functions; or

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
e. Should commit any of the crimes JD: the criminal action may be instituted and
against national security and the law tried in the court of any municipality or
of nations, defined in Title One, Book territory where such train, aircraft, or other
Two of this Code.” vehicle passed during such trip, including the
place of departure and arrival
Crimes against national security:
1. Treason 4. Where an offense is committed on board a
2. Conspiracy and Proposal to commit treason vessel in the course of its voyage
3. Misprision of treason JD: The criminal action may be instituted and
4. Espionage tried in the proper court of the first port of
5. Inciting to war and giving motives for entry or in the municipality or territory
reprisal through which the vessel passed during such
6. Violation of neutrality voyage subject to the generally accepted
7. Correspondence with hostile country principles of international law
8. Flight to enemy country
5. Where the case is cognizable by the
Crimes against law of nations: Sandiganbayan
1. Piracy 3. Qualified Piracy JD: depends upon the nature of the offense
2. Mutiny and the position of the accused as conditions
sine qua non before the Sandiganbayan can
JD: the offense is triable before Philippine validly take cognizance of the case
courts notwithstanding the fact that it was
committed outside of the Philippine territory. Sec.2 RA8249
JD in case of piracy: Pirates are in law “hostes When the greater convenience of the accused
humani generis”. Piracy may be punished in and of the witnesses or other compelling
the competent tribunal of any country where reasons require, a case originating from one
the offender may be found or into which he geographical region may be heard in another
may be carried. geographical region

2. Where the Supreme Court, pursuant to its 6. Where the offense is written defamation
constitutional powers, orders a change of
venue or place of trial to avoid miscarriage of Art 360 RPC – “…may be filed in the province
justice or city where the offended party held office at
the time of commission of the offense if he is a
Sec. 5 (4) Article VIII 1987 Constitution: public officer or in the province or city where
The Supreme Court has the power to order a he actually resided at the time of the
change of venue or place of trial to avoid a commission of the offense in case the offended
miscarriage of justice party is a private individual.”

3. Where an offense is committed in a railroad RA 4363


train, aircraft, or other public or private “The criminal and civil actions for damages in
vehicle in the course of its trip cases of written defamations…shall be filed

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
simultaneously or separately with CFI of the HOW CRIMINAL JURISDICTION IS
province or city where the libelous article is DETERMINED
printed and first published OR where any of
the offended parties actually resides at the 1. In case of complex crimes – jurisdiction is
time of the commission of the offense…” with the court having jurisdiction to impose
the maximum and most serious penalty
Agbayani v Sayo imposable on the offense forming part of the
A. If the offended party is a public official or a complex crime (Cuyos v Garcia)
private person, the criminal action may be
filed in RTC of the province/city where the 2. In case what is imposed is only fine– the
libelous article is printed and first published amount shall determine the jurisdiction
MTC – penalty of P4,000 or less
B. If the offended party is a private individual, RTC – penalty of more than P4,000, including
it may be filed in RTC of the province where offenses by public officer or employee in
he actually resided at the time of the relation to their office except in cases of
commission of the offense. criminal negligence involving damage to
property
C. If the offended party is a public officer
whose office is in Manila at the time of the 3. In case of continuing crimes –courts of
commission of the offense, the action may be territories where the essential ingredients of
filed in RTC Manila. the crime took place have concurrent
jurisdiction but the court which first acquires
D. If the offended party is a public officer jurisdiction excludes others.
holding office outside Manila, it may be filed
in the RTC of the province/city where he held 4. In case of crimes of destierro – jurisdiction
office at the time of the commission of the is lodged in Municipal Trial Courts
offense.
EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION –
 If the offended party used as basis the The power of the court to take judicial
circumstance where the libel was printed cognizance of a case instituted for judicial
and first published as basis for venue, the action for the first time under the conditions
information must allege with particularity provided by law, and to the exclusion of other
where the defamatory article was printed courts. (Tan)
and first published.
ORIGINAL JURISDICTION – the power of
 If defamatory material appears on a the court to take judicial cognizance of a case
website, the place where it is first accessed instituted for judicial action for the first time
CANNOT BE equated with “printing and under the conditions provided by law. (Tan)
first publication”
EXCLUSIVE JURISDICTION – the power to
 Circulation in an area ≠ publication adjudicate a case or proceeding to the
 Place of work ≠ residence exclusion of all other courts at that stage. (Tan)

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
constitutionality of such action. The
APPELLATE JURISDICTION – the power and consequences of course would be national in
authority conferred upon a superior court to scope. There are, however, some cases where
rehear and determine causes which have been resort to courts at their level would not be
tried in lower courts, the cognizance which a practical considering their decisions could still
superior court takes of a case removed to it , be appealed before the higher courts, such as
by appeal or writ of error, from the decision of the CA. (The Diocese of Bacolod v COMELEC)
a lower court, or the review by a superior
court of the final judgment or order of some
lower courts. (Tan)

CONCURRENT JURISDICTION – also called


coordinate or confluent jurisdiction. It is the
power conferred upon different courts,
whether of the same or different ranks, to take
cognizance at the same stage of the same case ADHERENCE OF JURISDICTION
in the same or different judicial territories. - Once jurisdiction is vested in court, that
(Tan) jurisdiction continues until the court has done
all that it can do in the exercise of that
DOCTRINE OF THE HIERARCHY OF jurisdiction (until final determination). The
COURTS jurisdiction is not affected by subsequent
The doctrine that requires the respect for the legislation vesting jurisdiction in another
hierarchy of courts was created by the court to tribunal.
ensure that every level of the judiciary
performs its designated roles in an effective Exception to the rule: when a statute expressly
and efficient manner. Trial courts do not only provides/is construed to the effect that it is
determine facts from the evaluation of intended to operate upon actions pending
evidence presented before them. They are before its enactment.
likewise competent to determine issues of law
which may include the validity of ordinance, DUE PROCESS IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
statute, or even an executive issuance in
relation to the Constitution. To effectively Source: Sec 1 Article III Bill of Rights 1987
perform these functions, they are territorially Constitution – “No person shall be deprived of
organized into regions and then into branches. life, liberty, or property without due process of
Their writs generally reach within those law…”
territorial boundaries. Necessarily, they mostly
perform the all-important task of inferring the Requirements:
facts from the evidence as these are physically 1. Court is properly clothed with judicial
presented before them. In many instances, the power to hear and determine the matter
facts occur within their territorial jurisdiction, before it
which properly present the ‘actual case’ that 2. Jurisdiction must be lawfully acquired by
makes ripe a determination of the the court over the person of the accused

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
3. Defendant must be given an opportunity to INJUNCTION TO RESTRAIN CRIMINAL
be heard PROSECUTION
4. Judgment must be rendered upon lawful
hearing General Rule: The court will not issue writs of
prohibition or injunction, preliminary or final,
RAISING THE ISSUE OF JURISDICTION to enjoin or restrain criminal prosecution
FOR THE FIRST TIME IN THE SUPREME
COURT Exceptions:
1. When the injunction is necessary to afford
Fukuzume v People : An accused is not adequate protection to the constitutional
precluded from raising the issue of jurisdiction rights of the accused
of the trial court over the offense charged 2. When it is necessary for the orderly
because the issue may be raised or considered administration of justice or to avoid oppression
motu proprio by the court at any stage of the or multiplicity of actions
proceedings or on appeal. 3. When there is a prejudicial question which
is subjudice
Antiporda v Garchitorena : A party cannot 4. When the acts of the officer are without or
invoke the jurisdiction of the court to secure in excess of authority
affirmative relief against his opponents and 5. Where the prosecution is under an invalid
after obtaining or failing to obtain such relief, law, ordinance, or regulation
repudiate or question that same jurisdiction. 6. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent
7. Where the court has no jurisdiction over
People v Munar : After voluntarily submitting the offense
a cause and encountering an adverse decision 8. Where it is a case of persecution rather than
on the merits, it is too late for the loser to prosecution
question the jurisdiction or power of the court. 9. Where the charges are manifestly false and
motivated by the lust for vengeance
Tijam v Sibonghanoy : A party may be 10. When there is clearly no prima facie case
estopped from questioning the jurisdiction of against the accused and a motion to quash on
the court for reasons of public policy as when that ground has been denied
he initially invokes the jurisdiction of the
court and then later on repudiates that same PRESCRIPTIVE PERIOD FOR CRIMES –
jurisdiction. INTERRUPTION

Pangilinan v CA : Even on appeal, and even if RPC: Article 91 – “The period of prescription
the reviewing parties did not raise the issue of shall commence to run from the day on which
jurisdiction, the reviewing court is not the crime is discovered by the offended party,
precluded from ruling that the lower court the authorities, or their agents, and shall be
had no jurisdiction over the case. interrupted by the filing of the complaint or
information, and shall commence to run again
when such proceedings terminate without the
accused being convicted or acquitted, or are

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
unjustifiably stopped for any reason not General Rules:
imputable to him. The term of prescription 1. No lawyers are allowed in barangay
shall not run when the offender is absent from hearings.
the Philippine archipelago.” 2. Not all cases go to the Katarungan
Pambarangay.
Special laws: Sec 2 Act 3326 – “Prescription 3. Execution may be filed in court.
shall begin to run from the day of the 4. The Lupong Tagamayapa is NOT a court.
commission of the violation of the law, and if
the same be not known at the time, from the Prerequisites to filing of complaint in court
discovery thereof and the institution of  A confrontation between the parties
judicial proceeding for its investigation and before the lupon chairman or the pangkat
punishment. The prescription shall be ng tagapagkasundo is needed before the
interrupted when proceedings are instituted complaint, petition, action, or proceeding
against the guilty person, and shall begin to may be filed or instituted directly in court
run again if the proceedings are dismissed for or any other government office for
reasons not constituting jeopardy.” adjudication.

Romualdez v Marcelo:  The parties thereto may still go to the


Parameters of Prescription: court either (1) when the lupon secretary
1. Period of prescription of offense charged or pangkat secretary as attested to by the
2. Time the period starts to run lupon or pangkat chairman certifies that
3. Time the prescriptive period is interrupted no conciliation or settlement has been
reached, or (2) when the parties
II. Jurisdiction repudiated the settlement.

KATARUNGANG PAMBARANGAY Exceptions:


- Local Government Code, Book III, Title I, The following may go directly to court:
Chapter 7 1. If the person is already detained.
- Barangay Justice System introduced in 1978 2. In case of habeas corpus.
for resolution of local level disputes. Its 3. There is provisional remedy.
function is not to judge but to assist. 4. Offense has prescribed
- the referral of a case to the Lupon for
conciliation or settlement is required before a  Where the offense is punishable by
complaint, petition, or action is filed in court. imprisonment of at least 4 years, 2 months and
The invocation of judicial authority shall be 1 day, barangay conciliation is not required.
allowed only if a certification is issued by the  Rules on criminal procedure begin to
proper barangay official that judicial grind when a complaint in affidavit form is
intervention may now be availed of because filed before an authorized officer. (Riano,
the desired conciliation or settlement was not 2011)
reached.(Riano, 2011)

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
Arbitration Conciliation Mediation • If it involves work, in the place of where
the workplace or institution is located.
Arbitrator Assistance/ Assistance
determines the Negotiation
outcome Steps in the Amicable Settlement
No formal rules There is no There is a
of procedure structured structured
process process

Functions of the Lupon


1. Supervise the various pangkat.
2. Meet regularly for the amicable
settlements. Settlement is final when?
 Within 10 days
What cases are not included?  Must be executed within 6 mos.
1. One party is the government.  Report to the court
2. One party is a public officer and the
dispute is related to his performance of MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURTS,
official functions METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURTS,
3. Offenses punishable by imprisonment MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURTS
exceeding one (1) year or a fine exceeding
Five thousand pesos (P5,000.00); I. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction
4. No private offended party
5. Real property from different PROVISIONS INVOLVED:
municipalities Sec. 32 BP 129 , as amended by RA 7691:
6. Disputes involving parties who actually Except in cases falling within the exclusive
reside in barangays of different cities or original jurisdiction of Regional Trial Courts
municipalities, except when such and of the Sandiganbayan, the Metropolitan
barangays adjoin each other Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and
7. Such other classes of disputes which the Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, shall exercise:
President may determine in the interest of (1) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all
justice or upon recommendation of the violations of city or municipal ordinances
Secretary of Justice. committed within their respective territorial
jurisdiction; and
Where is the venue? (2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all
• If both parties are residents of the same offenses punishable with imprisonment not
barangay, before the lupon of the exceeding six (6) years irrespective of the
barangay. amount of fine, and regardless of other
• Different barangays but in the same imposable accessory or other penalties,
municipality, in the barangay of the including the civil liability arising from such
respondent. offenses or predicated thereon, irrespective of
• If real property is involved, in the place kind, nature, value, or amount thereof:
where the real property is situated. PROVIDED, however, that in offenses

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
involving damage to property through accomplices or accessories, punishable with
criminal negligence, they shall have exclusive imprisonment of not more than 6 years with a
original jurisdiction thereof. salary grade of less than 27. (Tan)

Art. 27 Revised Penal Code : MTC has II. Special Jurisdiction


jurisdiction over offenses punishable by up to
the maximum of prision correccional which PROVISION INVOLVED:
shall not exceed six years (EXCEPTION: Sec. 35 BP129 : In the absence of all the
express provision of law) Regional Trial Judges in a province or city, any
Metropolitan Trial Judge, Municipal Trial
RA 7691 : In case of offenses where fine is Judge, Municipal Circuit Trial Judge may hear
P4,000 or less and determine petitions for a writ of habeas
corpus or applications for bail in criminal cases
RA 8249 : In criminal cases of government in the province or city where the absent
officials with offenses punishable by Regional Trial Judges sit.
imprisonment of 6 years or less or a fine of
P4,000 or less and with Salary Grade lower What are the cases falling under the special
than 27 jurisdiction of the MTC/MCTC?

What are the cases falling under the exclusive In the absence of all the Regional Trial Judges
original jurisdiction of MTC in ordinary in a province or city, any Metropolitan Trial
criminal action? Judge, Municipal Trial Judge, Municipal
Circuit Trial Judge may hear and decide the
1. All violations of city or municipal following:
ordinances committed within their respective
territorial jurisdictions; 1. Petition for habeas corpus; and
2. Application for bail in criminal case. (Tan)
2. All offenses punishable with imprisonment
of not more than 6 years irrespective of the III. Rule on Summary Procedure
amount of fine;
PROVISION INVOLVED:
3. In all cases of damage to property through Sec. 1 par B of the 1991 Rules on Summary
criminal negligence, regardless of other Procedure:
penalties and the civil liabilities arising
therefrom; and 1. Violations of traffic laws, rules and
regulations;
4. All offenses (except violations of RA3019,
RA1379, and Articles 210-212 of the RPC) 2. Violations of the rental law;
committed by public officers and employees in
relation to their office, including those 3. Violations of municipal or city ordinances;
employed in GOCCs and by private
individuals charged as co-principals,

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
4. All other criminal cases where the penalty Does the MTC/MCTC have jurisdiction over
prescribed by law for the offense charged is all offenses punishable by imprisonment not
imprisonment not exceeding 6 months, or a exceeding 6 years?
fine not exceeding one thousand pesos No, Sec. 32 of BP129, as amended by RA7691,
(P1,000) or both, irrespective of other is qualified by the phrase “Except in cases
imposable penalties, accessory or otherwise, or falling within the exclusive original
of the civil liability arising therefrom; jurisdiction of the Regional Trial Court and of
PROVIDED, however, that in offenses the Sandiganbayan” which only means that
involving damage to property through there are offenses though punishable by an
criminal negligence, this Rule shall govern imprisonment of not exceeding 6 years falls
where the imposable fine does not exceed ten within the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan
thousand pesos (P10,000). or the RTC as prescribed by law. (Tan)

This Rule shall not apply to a civil case where What are the instances where the penalty of
the plaintiff’s cause of action is pleaded in the imprisonment imposed by law does not exceed
same complaint with another cause of action 6 years but jurisdiction lies with the RTC/SB?
subject to the ordinary procedure; nor to a 1. Libel case by means of writing or similar
criminal case where the offense charged is means is penalized under Art355 RPC with a
necessarily related to another criminal case penalty of PC min-max period or a fine
subject to the ordinary procedure. ranging from P200 to P6,000 but falls under
the jurisdiction of the RTC under Art 360 of
What are the cases falling under the Rules on the same Code;
Summary Procedure in criminal cases? 2. Other forms of direct bribery penalized
1. Traffic violations under Art 210 of the RPC with penalty of
imprisonment of PC med falls within the
2. Violations of the rental law jurisdiction of the SB pursuant to Sec 4 (a)
PD1606 as amended by RA8249;
3. Violations of city or municipal ordinances 3. Indirect bribery penalized under Art 211
RPC with a penalty of imprisonment of PC
4. All other offenses where the penalty does med and max also falls within the jurisdiction
not exceed 6 months liabilities arising of SB pursuant to Sec 4(a) PD1606 as amended
therefrom, and in offenses involving damage by RA8249, as further amended by RA 10660
to property through criminal negligence (Tan)
where the imposable fine does not exceed
P10,000 SUMMARY PROCEEDING SUMMARY PROCEDURE
Court action in which Immediate process,
5. Violation of BP22/Bouncing Checks Law the formal procedures issuing and taking
normally applicable effect without
6. Damage to property through criminal to matters are intermediate
negligence where fine does not exceed dispensed with applications or delays
P10,000 (Tan)

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
BP 22 violation vis-a-vis RPC Art. 315 4. In cases where the only penalty provided by
violation law is a fine, RTC have jurisdiction if the
Sec.5 BP22: amount of the fine exceeds P4,000
Liability under the Revised Penal Code –
Prosecution under this Act shall be without 5. Jurisdiction over complex crimes
prejudice to any liability for violation of any Jurisdiction over the whole complex crime
provision of the RPC. must logically be lodged with the trial court
having jurisdiction to impose the maximum
REGIONAL TRIAL COURTS and most serious penalty imposable on an
offense forming the complex crime. A complex
I. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction crime must be prosecuted integrally and the
latter made the subject of multiple
PROVISION INVOLVED: informations possibily brought in different
Sec. 20 BP 129 : Regional Trial Courts shall courts. (Cuyos v Garcia)
exercise exclusive original jurisdiction in all
criminal cases not within the exclusive 6. Illegal recruitment cases as penalized under
jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body, RA8042
except those now falling under the exclusive 7. Violation of the provisions of the
and concurrent jurisdiction of the Intellectual Property Code
Sandiganbayan which shall hereafter be
exclusively taken cognizance of by the latter. 8. Violation of Environmental laws, rules and
regulations (sec. 2 Rule 9 Part IV of Rules of
What are the cases falling within the exclusive Procedure of Environmental Cases, AM No.
original jurisdiction of the RTC? 09-6-8 SC) (Tan)

1. Criminal cases not within the exclusive Morales v CA:


jurisdiction of any court, tribunal, or body (sec RTC will try even if punishment is 6 years or
20, BP129) less: (mnemonic: LIDO)
Libel
2. Criminal cases where the penalty provided Intellectual Property Law violations
by law exceeds 6 years of imprisonment Dangerous Drugs Act violations
irrespective of the fine (RA7691) Omnibus Election Code violations

3. In cases where none of the accused are If offender is a government official –


occupying positions corresponding to SG27 or The offense must be punishable by
higher, as prescribed in RA6758, or military or imprisonment of more than 6 years or the fine
PNP officers mentioned above, exclusive is more than P4,000 and the official must have
original jurisdiction thereof shall be vested in a salary grade of less than 27 for the RTC to
the proper RTC, MTC/MCTC, as the case may have jurisdiction over the criminal case
be, pursuant to their respective jurisdictions. (PD1606 as amended by RA8249)

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
II. Concurrent and Original Jurisdiction
2. Cases against minors cognizable under
1. Concurrent with the Supreme Court RA9165/CDDA
- Actions affecting ambassadors, public
ministers, and consuls (Sec. 21 (1) BP129) 3. Violations of RA7160 (Special Protection of
Children against Child Abuse, Exploitation,
2. Concurrent with Supreme Court and CA and Discrimination Act)
- Petitions for habeas corpus and quo warranto
(sec.5(1) Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution) 4. Violations of RA9775 (Anti-Child
Pornography Act of 2009)
3. Concurrent with SC, CA, and SB
- Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and 5. Cases of violence against women and their
mandamus, if they relate to an act or omission children under RA9262 (Anti-VAWC Act),
of a trial court, corporation, board, officer, or including applications for Protection Order
person (sec. 4 Rule 65 as amended by AM No. under the same Act
07-7-12-SC)
- Petitions for writ of amparo and writ of 6. Criminal cases involving juveniles if no
habeas data (Sec.3 AM No. 07-9-12-SC) preliminary investigation is required under
Sec. 1 Rule 112 of the Revised Rules on
4. With MTC/MCTC Criminal Procedure (Tan)
- Application for Protection Order under Sec.
10 RA 9282, unless there is a Family Court in IV. Dangerous Drugs Court
the residence of petitioner
RTC has jurisdiction in criminal cases of
III. Family Court violations of CDDA except in case of minor
violators.
RA8369 – Family Court’s Act of 1997; it
established the Family Courts and granted V. Appellate Jurisdiction
them exclusive original jurisdiction over child
and family cases, as follows: PROVISION INVOLVED:
Sec 22 BP129: RTCs shall exercise appellate
1. Criminal cases where one or more of the jurisdiction over all cases decided by
accused is below 18 years of age but not less Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial
than 9 years of age, when one or more of the Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in
victims is a minor at the time of the their respective territorial jurisdictions. Such
commission of the offense: PROVIDED, that if cases shall be decided on the basis of the entire
the minor is found guilty, the court shall record of the proceedings had in the court of
promulgate sentence and ascertain any civil origin such memoranda and/or briefs as may
liability which the accused may have incurred. be submitted by the parties or required by the
The sentence, however, shall be suspended RTCs. The decisions of the RTCs in such cases
without need of application pursuant to shall be appealable by petition for review to
PD1903 (The Child and Youth Welfare Code) the CA which may give it due course only

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
when the petition shows prima facie that the penal laws, or local government ordinances,
lower court has committed an error of fact or the case must be filed in PROPER CIVIL
law that will warrant a reversal or COURTS
modification of the decision or judgment EXCEPTION: when the offense is service-
sought to be reviewed. connected (case is cognizable by court
martial)
What are the cases falling under the appellate
jurisdiction of the RTC? RA10175 – Cybercrime Law
RTC has appellate jurisdiction over decisions RTC has jurisdiction in cybercrime cases -
and final orders of the: 1. involving offenses by Filipino national,
1. Metropolitan Trial Court regardless of place of commission;
2. Municipal Trial Court 2. committed within the Philippines or where
3. Municipal Circuit Trial Court (Tan) the computer is used in the Philippines;
3. where damage is caused to a person in the
VI. Special Jurisdiction Philippines.

PROVISION INVOLVED: SANDIGANBAYAN


Sec. 23 BP129: The Supreme Court may
designate certain branches of the RTCs to  A special court of the same level as the CA
handle exclusively criminal cases, juvenile and and possessing all the inherent power of a
domestic relations cases, agrarian cases, urban court of justice
land reform cases which do not fall under the
jurisdiction of quasi-judicial bodies and I. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction
agencies, and/or such other special cases as the
SC may determine in the interest of a speedy RA8249:
and efficient administration of justice. 1. Violations of RA3019, RA1379, and CH2
Sec2 Title VII Book II of RPC, where one or
What are the cases falling under the special more of the accused are officials occupying the
jurisdiction of the RTCs? following positions in the government
1. exclusively criminal cases whether in a permanent, acting or interim
2. juvenile and domestic relations cases capacity, at the time of the commission of the
3. agrarian cases offense:
4. urban land reform cases which do not fall
under the jurisdiction of quasi-judicial bodies A. Officials of the executive branch
5. Other special cases as the SC may determine occupying the positions of regional director
in the interest of a speedy and efficient and higher, otherwise classified as SG27
administration of justice (Tan) and higher, including:

VII. Other laws i. Provincial governors, vice-governors,


members of the Sangguniang
RA7005 – In criminal cases of officials of Panlalawigan and provincial treasurers,
AFP/PNP involving violations of RPC, special

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
assessors, engineers, and other provincial 2. Other offenses or felonies whether simple
department heads; or complexed with other crimes committed by
the public officials and employees mentioned
ii. City mayors, vice-mayors, members of in (1)
the Sangguniang Panglunsod and city
treasurers, assessors, engineers, and 3. Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to
other city department heads; and in connection with EO 1, 2, 14, 14-A
issued in 1986
iii. Officials of the diplomatic service
occupying the position of consul and 4. Violations of RA9160 (AMLA) when
higher; committed by public officers and private
persons who are in conspiracy with such
iv. Philippine army and air force public officers.
colonels, naval captains, and all officers
of higher rank;  Those enumerated are subject to the
jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan
v. Officers of the PNP, while occupying REGARDLESS of salary grade. If not
the position of provincial director and specifically enumerated, SG matters to
those holding the rank of senior determine whether under the jurisdiction
superintendent or higher; of SB.
 Rule: NO SPLIT JURISDICTION in cases
vi. City and provincial prosecutors and of private individuals in conspiracy with
their assistants, and officials and public officers aforementioned
prosecutors in the Office of the
Ombudsman and special prosecutor; Original and exclusive jurisdiction of the SB
over recovery and sequestration of ill-gotten
vii. Presidents, directors or trustees, or wealth of the Marcoses and associates under
managers of GOCCs, state universities or EO 1, 2, 14, 14-A
educational institutions or foundations;
EO 1 – refers to cases of recovery and
B. Members of Congress and officials sequestration of ill-gotten wealth amassed by
thereof classified as SG27 and higher the Marcoses, their relatives, subordinates, and
C. Members of the judiciary without close associates, directly or through nominees,
prejudice to the provisions of the by taking undue advantage of their public
Constitution office and/or by using their powers, authority,
D. Chairmen and members of influence, connections, or relationships.
Constitutional Commissions, without
prejudice to the provisions of the EO 2 – states that all ill-gotten wealth includes
Constitution assets and properties in the form of estates and
E. Other national and local officials real properties in the Philippines and abroad.
classified as SG27 and higher

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
EO 14 & 14-A – pertain to the What to consider to determine jurisdiction of
Sandiganbayan’s jurisdiction over criminal and SB: (1) position of the accused
civil cases relative to the ill-gotten wealth of (2) nature of the crime committed
the Marcoses and their cronies.
 Even if the position is not an essential
Metropolitan Bank and Trust Company v ingredient of the offense charged, the
Sandoval: Information/complaint must aver that the
Although the Republic has not imputed any offense is intimately connected with the
responsibility to Asian Bank for the illegal office and that it is perpetrated while in
accumulation of wealth by the original performance of official functions because
defendants, or has not averred that Asian Bank the factor that characterizes the charge is
was a business associate, dummy, nominee, or the actual recital of facts in the complaint
agent of the Marcoses, the allegation in its or information
amended complaint in Civil Case No. 0004  The phrase “in relation to official duties”
that Asian Bank acted with bad faith for in the Information is not what determines
ignoring the sequestration of the properties as the jurisdiction. What is controlling is the
ill-gotten wealth has made the cause of action specific factual allegations in the
against Asian Bank incidental or necessarily Information. The phrase is merely a
connected to the cause of action against conclusion of law, not a factual averment
original defendants. that would show close intimacy between
the offense charged and discharge of
PCGG v Sandiganbayan: accused’s official office.
The Sandiganbayan has original and exclusive
jurisdiction not only over principal causes of RA1379 – involves forfeiture cases arising out
action involving recovery of ill-gotten wealth of a cause of action separate and different from
but also over all incidents arising from, a plunder case. Preponderance of evidence is
incidental to, or related to such cases. required which is proven by disproportion of
respondent’s properties to his legitimate
What is the effect if there is no specific income.
allegation showing that the offense was
committed in relation to public office? II. Appellate Jurisdiction

The original jurisdiction shall fall in the Decisions and final orders of RTCs in the
proper MTC/RTC. (Tan) exercise of their original or appellate
jurisdiction under PD1606, as amended, shall
“in relation to office” be appealable to the Sandiganbayan in the
1. in performance of official functions manner provided by Rule 122 of the Rules of
2. the offense cannot exist without the office Court
3. authority/office is an element of crime
committed

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
Ancillary writs and processes in aid of COURT OF TAX APPEALS
appellate jurisdiction
I. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction
Ancillary writ- exists only as part of an
independent action; remedy invoked in aid of - over all criminal offenses arising from
collection of plaintiff’s demand in action. violations of the National Internal Revenue
Code or Tariff and Customs Code and other
- mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas laws administered by the BIR or BoC:
corpus, injunction, quo warranto PROVIDED: PROVIDED, however that..
the jurisdiction is not exclusive of Supreme 1. offenses or felonies mentioned in this
Court or that the quo warranto is filed under paragraph where the principal amount of taxes
EO 1, 2, 14, 14-A and fees, exclusive of charges and penalties,
claimed is less than P1M; OR
III. Original/concurrent jurisdiction 2. where there is no specified amount claimed
shall be tried by the regular courts and the
1. Concurrent with SC and CA jurisdiction of the CTA shall be appellate.

- Petitons for issuance of writs of certiorari,  Any provision of law or the Rules of
prohibition, mandamus, habeas corpus, and Court contrary notwithstanding, the
injunction and other ancillary writs in aid of criminal action and the corresponding
its appellate jurisdiction, including quo civil action for recovery of civil
warranto arising in cases falling under EO 1, 2, liability for taxes and penalties shall at
14, 14-A all times be simultaneously instituted
- Petitions for issuance of writ of amparo with, and jointly determined in the
(sec.3 AM no 07-9-12-SC) same proceeding by the CTA, the
- Over petition for habeas data (sec.3 AM No. filing of the criminal action being
08-1-16 SC) deemed to necessarily carry with it the
filing of the civil action and no right to
2. Concurrent with SC, CA and RTC reserve the filing of such civil action
- Petitions for writ of amparo and writ of separately from the criminal action
habeas data when action concerns public data will be recognized
files of government offices (sec.3 AM No. 07-
9-12-SC or The Rule on the Writ of Amparo) II. Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction
- Petitions for certiorari, prohibition, and
mandamus, relating to an act or omission of a Rule IV of the Revised Rules of the Court of
Municipal Trial Court, corporation, board, Tax Appeals (AM No. 05-11-07 CTA)
officer, or person (Sec. 4 Rule 65 as amended Sec 1 : The Court shall exercise the exclusive
by AM No. 07-7-12-SC) original jurisdiction over OR appellate
jurisdiction to review by appeal the cases
specified in RA 1125 Sec 7, as amended by
RA9282 Sec 7

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
Sec 2: The CTA en banc shall have exclusive criminal cases arising from violations of
appellate jurisdiction to review by appeal the NIRC/TCC and other laws administered by the
following: BIR/BoC

1. Decisions or resolutions on MFR or new 7. Decisions, resolutions, or orders on MFR or


trial of the Court in Divisions in the exercise new trial of the Court in Division in the
of its EAJ over: exercise of its EAJ over criminal offenses
a. cases arising from administrative mentioned in the proceeding subparagraph
agencies – BIR, BoC, DoF, DTI, DA
8. Decisions, resolutions, or orders of the RTC
b. local tax cases decided by the RTC in in the exercise of their AJ over criminal
the exercise of their OJ offenses mentioned in subpar (f).

c. tax collection cases decided by the COURT OF APPEALS


RTCs in the exercise of their OJ involving
final and executory assessments of taxes, Nature: It is primarily designed as an appellate
fees, and charges and penalties, where the court that reviews the determination of facts
principal amount of taxes and penalties and law made by the trial courts. It is
claimed is less than one million pesos. collegiate in nature. This nature ensures
standpoints in the review of the actions of the
2. Decisions, resolutions, or orders of the RTC trial court. But the CA also has original
in local tax cases decided or resolved by them jurisdiction over most special civil actions.
in the exercise of their appellate jurisdiction Unlike the trial courts, its writs can have a
nationwide scope. It is competent to
3. Decisions, resolutions, or orders of the RTC determine facts and ideally, should act on
in tax collection cases decided or resolved by constitutional issues that may not necessarily
them in the exercise of their appellate be novel unless there are factual questions to
jurisdiction determine. (The Diocese of Bacolod v
Comelec)
4. Decisions, resolutions, or orders on MFR or
new trial of the Court in Division in the I. Original Jurisdiction
exercise of its EOJ over tax collection cases
Sec 9 BP 129: mandamus, prohibition,
5. Decisions of the Central Board of certiorari, habeas corpus, and quo warranto,
Assessment Appeals (CBAA) in the exercise of and auxiliary writs or processes, whether or
its AJ over cases involving assessment and not in aid of its appellate jurisdiction.
taxation of real property originally decided by
the provincial or city board assessment appeals AM No. 07-9-12-SC : Writ of Amparo
AM No. 08-1-16-SC : Habeas data
6. Decisions, resolutions, or orders on MFR or
new trial of the Court in Division in the Sec 4 AM 05-11-04-SC : Petition for freeze
exercise of its EOJ over cases involving order on any monetary instrument, property,

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
or proceeds relating to or involving any 2. By petition for review
unlawful activity as defined under Sec 3(j) of
RA9160 as amended by RA9194  Decisions and final orders rendered by
the RTC in the exercise of its AJ can be
II. Concurrent Jurisdiction appealed to CA by petition for Review
under Rule 122 in relation to Rule 42
 With SC, SB, RTC over petitions for of the Rules of Court
certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, quo
warranto, injunction, habeas corpus, Procedural basis: Sec3(b) Rule 122 RRCP
amparo, and data. provides for the mode of appeal from RTC in
exercise of its AJ to CA – shall be by petition
Constancio F. Mendoza and Sangguniang for review under Rule 42.
Brgy. of Balatasan, Bulalacao, Oriental
Mindoro, GR No. 187256: 3. Automatic review of the decision of the
RTC when the penalty imposed is death, RP,
Such concurrence does not give the petitioner or life imprisonment
unrestricted freedom of choice of court forum;
A becoming regard for that judicial hierarchy People v Val Delos Reyes: With the Court’s
most certainly indicates that petitions for the pronouncement in the 2004 case of People v
issuance of extraordinary writs against first Mateo, providing for and making mandatory
level courts should be filed with the RTC and the intermediate review by the CA of cases
those against the latter with the CA; A direct involving the DP, RP, LI, the proper course of
invocation of the original jurisdiction to issue action would be to remand these cases to the
those writs should be allowed only when there appellate court for the conduct of an
are special and important reasons therefore; intermediate review.
clearly and specially set out in the petition.

III. Appellate Jurisdiction IV. Exclusive Appellate Jurisdiction

Sec 9 (3) of BP129 : CA shall exercise EAJ over


1. By ordinary appeal
all final judgments, decisions, resolutions,
 Decision and final order by the RTC in orders or awards of :
the exercise of its OJ, except those
appealable to SC/SB/CTA 1. RTCs

2. Quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities,


Procedural Basis: Sec3(a) RRCP provides for
boards or commissions, including Securities
the mode of appeal from RTC to CA:
and Exchange Commission, Social Security
A. By filing a notice of appeal with the court Commission, the Employees Compensation
which rendered the judgment or final order Commission, and the Civil Service
appealed from; AND Commission, except those falling within the
AJ of the SC in accordance with the
B by serving a copy thereof upon the adverse Constitution, Labor Code, the provisions of
party. BP129 and subpar(1) of 3rd par and subpar(4)
of 4th par of Judiciary Act of 1948

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
SUPREME COURT B. Decisions, resolutions, or orders by
the Sandiganbayan (under PD1606 as
I. Exclusive Original Jurisdiction amended by RA 7975 and RA8249)
 Over cases affecting ambassadors, public
ministers, and consuls C. Decisions, resolutions, or orders of
 Over petitions for certiorari, prohibition, the CTA en banc (pursuant to Sec11 of
mandamus, quo warranto, habeas corpus RA9282 in relation to Rule 45)
(Sec.5 par 1 Art VIII of the 1987
D. Decisions, resolutions, or orders of
Constitution)
the RTCs on purely question of law
II. Concurrent Jurisdiction
 With CA, SB and RTC: petitions for E. Decision of the Shari’ah Appellate
certiorari, prohibition, mandamus, Courts
habeas corpus, amparo, and data.
F. Decisions, resolutions, or orders of
CA, SB, and RTC in petition for writ of
Limitation:
Despite concurrence, it does not give amparo filed in a pending criminal
petitioner unrestricted freedom of choice of case
court forum. The rationale is two-fold:
G. Decisions, resolutions, or orders of
1. It would be an imposition upon the precious CA, SB and RTC in a petition for
habeas data filed in a pending criminal
time of the Court
case
2. It would cause an inevitable and resultant
delay, intended or otherwise, in the 2. Constitutional basis on the exercise of the
adjudication of the case, which in some SC of its AJ to review decisions of lower courts
instances had to be remanded or referred to
the lower court as the proper forum under the
Par 2 Sec 5 Art VIII of the 1987 Constitution:
rules of procedure, or as better equipped to Review, revise, reverse, modify, or affirm on
resolve the issues because the SC is not a trier appeal or certiorari, as the law or the Rules of
Court may provide, final judgments and orders
of facts (CREBA v Sec of Agrarian Reform)
of lower courts in:
III. Appellate Jurisdiction
A. All cases in which the constitutionality or
1. Cases falling under AJ of SC validity of any treaty, international or
executive agreement, law, presidential decree,
 By way of petition for review on
proclamation, order, instruction, ordinance, or
certiorari under Rule 45 of the 1997
regulation is in question
Rules of Civil Procedure in relation to
Rule 125 of the RRCP:
B. All cases involving the legality of tax,
impost, assessment, or toll, or any penalty
A. Decision, final order or resolution
imposed in relation thereto.
by the CA (under Rule 45)

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017
C. All cases in which the jurisdiction of any
lower court is in issue.

D. All criminal cases in which the penalty


imposed is RP or higher

E. All cases in which only an error or question


of law is involved

3. Procedural basis
 by way of petition for review on
certiorari under Rule 45
 the petition shall only raise a question
of law

Question of law – exists when there is doubt


or controversy as to what law is on a certain
state of facts.

Question of fact – exists when the doubt or


controversy arises as to the truth or falsity of
the alleged facts. The resolution of a question
of fact necessarily involves a calibration of the
evidence, the credibility of the witnesses, the
existence and the relevance of surrounding
circumstances, and the probability of specific
situations (Cabaron v People)

JURISDICTION OF GOVERNMENT
AGENCIES, TRIBUNALS, AND ENTITIES
PERFORMING PROSECUTORY AND/OR
INVESTIGATIVE POWERS INVOLVING
VIOLATION OF PENAL STATUTE

I. Office of the Ombudsman

Notes on Criminal Procedure under Atty. Senga


Intellectual Property of Mikkaela Mones, 2C AY 2016-2017