IV.C.1.

Criminal Aspect
IV.C.1.a.Generally
Rule 110, Sec. 1. Institution of criminal actions
Criminal actions shall be instituted as follows:

(a) For offenses where a preliminary investigation is required pursuant to section 1 of Rule 112, by filing
the complaint with the proper officer for the purpose of conducting the requisite preliminary
investigation.

(b) For all other offenses, by filing the complaint or information directly with the Municipal Trial Courts
and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts, or the complaint with the office of the prosecutor. In Manila and
other chartered cities, the complaint shall be filed with the office of the prosecutor unless otherwise
provided in their charters.

The institution of the criminal action shall interrupt the running period of prescription of the offense
charged unless otherwise provided in special laws.

RJCL, Sec. 11. Duties of a Person in Authority Taking a Child into Custody. –Any person taking into custody a child in conflict with the law shall:
(a) Assign an alias to the child;
(b) Ensure that the blotter details containing the true name of the child, if any, are modified, to reflect the alias by which the child shall be known throughout the
proceedings;
(c) Explain to the child in simple language and in a dialect that can be understood the reason for placing the child under custody, and the offense allegedly
committed;
(d) Advise the child of his/her constitutional rights in a language or dialect understandable to the child;
(e) Present proper identification to the child;
(f) Refrain from using vulgar or profane words and from sexually harassing or abusing, or making sexual advances on the child;
(g) Avoid displaying or using any firearm, weapon, handcuffs or other instrument of force or restraint, unless absolutely necessary and only after all methods of
control have been exhausted and have failed;
(h) Avoid violence or unnecessary force and refrain from subjecting the child to greater restraint than is necessary for apprehension and custody;
(i) Ensure that a body search of the child is done only by a law enforcement officer of the same gender as that of the child;
(j) Ensure expedited transfer of the child by immediately, or not later than eight (8) hours after apprehension, turning over custody of the child to the local social
welfare and development office or other accredited non-government organizations;
(k) Notify the child’s parents, guardians or custodians or in their absence, the child’s nearest relative and the Public Attorney’s Office of the child’s apprehension;
(l) Ensure that the child is not locked up in a jail or detention cell during the investigation;
(m) Bring the child immediately to an available government medical or health officer for a thorough physical and mental examination;
(n) Ensure that should detention of the child in conflict with the law be necessary, the segregation of the child be secured in quarters separate from that of the
opposite sex and adult offenders, except where a child is taken into custody for reasons related to armed conflict, either as combatant, courier, guide or spy, and
families are accommodated as family units in which case, the child shall not be separated from the family;
(o) Record all the procedures undertaken in the initial investigation including the following: whether handcuffs or other instruments of restraint were used, and if so,
the reason for such use; that the parents or guardian of the child, the Department of Social Welfare and Development, and the Public Attorney's Office were
informed of the taking into custody of the child and the details thereof; the measures that were undertaken to determine the age of the child, and the precise details
of the physical and medical examination or in case of failure to submit a child to such examination, the reason therefor; and
(p) Ensure that all statements signed by the child during the investigation are witnessed and signed by the child’s parents or guardian, social worker or legal counsel
in attendance.

For offenses where a preliminary investigation is required

 Required where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day without
regard to fine
 Proper office – Provincial or City Prosecutors and other offices as may be authorized by law
For all other offenses
 Complaint or information accompanied by affidavits of the complainant and witnesses in such
number of copies as there are accused plus two copies for the court’s files. If this requirement is
not complied with within five days from date of filing, the case may be dismissed (Rules on
Summary Procedure, Sec. 11)
Suspension of Prescription
 Criminal Action – instituted once complaint has been filed in the proper office; bars running of
prescriptive period, unless otherwise provided by special law (Francisco v. CA)
 o Includes RPC and Special Law, NOT ordinances
 Criminal Prosecution – commenced once the information is filed in court; bars running of
prescriptive period for violations of ordinances
 Cases falling under the Lupon – bars running of prescriptive period upon filing the complaint
with the punong barangay
o Resumes upon receipt by the complainant of the Complaint or the Certificate of
Repudiation or Certification to file action issued by the lupon or pangkat secretary
o Interruption shall not exceed 60 days
Remedies of the Offended Party if the Prosecutor Refuses to File an Information
1. Take up the matter with the Secretary of Justice in accordance with the Revised Administrative
Code or with the President in Special Cases
2. Lodge a New Complaint before the court having jurisdiction over the offense where there is no
double jeopardy
3. Institute Administrative charges against the erring Prosecutor
4. File Criminal action against the Prosecutor under Art. 208, Prosecution of Offenses; Negligence
and Tolerance
5. File Civil action for damagers under Art. 27 of the Civil Code for failure to render service by a
public officer
6. File an action for Mandamus in case of grave abuse of discretion
a. General Rule: The writ of mandamus is not available to control the discretion of the
Prosecutor to determine which persons appear responsible for the crime.
b. Exception: when prosecutor finds the person liable (MBT v. Reynaldo)
7. Ask for a Special Prosecutor (Hoey v. Provincial Fiscal of Rizal)

Uy v. Sandiganbayan (2001)
Ombudsman Desierto filed a motion for further classification on the authority of the ombudsman to
prosecute cases falling within the jurisdiction of regular courts. The Court held that the law recognizes
the concurrence of jurisdiction between the Office of the Ombudsman and other investigative agencies
of government in the prosecution of cases cognizable by regular courts involving public officials and
employees.
SEC v. Interport (2008)
Board of directors of Interport approved a MOA with Ganda Holdings Brand. SEC alleged that Interport
failed to make a timely disclosure of its negotiations. Interort alleged that SEC had no authority to
investigate since under PD 902-A, as amended by PD 1758, it was under the prosecution and
enforcement department of SEC. The Court held that SEC did retain its jurisdiction to investigate
violations. The repeal cannot deprive SEC of its jurisdiction to continue investigation the case. The
petitioners also alleged that the instant case has prescribed. The Court held that is is established
doctrine that a preliminary investigation interrupts the prescription period. According to Sec. 45 of the
Revised Securities Act, SEC has the authority to make such investigations as it deems necessary. It is
equivalent to a preliminary investigation so prescription is interrupted.

Criminal actions, when enjoined

General Rule: Criminal prosecutions may not be restrained or stayed by injunction, preliminary of final
(People v. Grey)
Exception
1. To afford adequate protection to the constitutional rights of the accused (Hernandez v. Albano)
 2. When necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of
actions (Domondon v. Sandiganbayan)
3. When there is a prejudicial question which is subjudice (Paderanga v. Drilon)
4. When the acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority (Planas v. Gil)
5. When the prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation (Young v. Rafferty)
6. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent (Paderanga v. Drilon)
7. When the court had no jurisdiction over the offense (Lopez v. City Judge)
8. When it is a case of persecution rather than prosecution (Paderanga v. Drilon)
9. When the charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust for vengeance (Domondon v.
Sandiganbayan)
10. When there is clearly no prima facie case against the accused and a motion to quash on the
ground has been denied (Salonga v. Pano)
11. To prevent the threatened unlawful arrest of petitioners (Brocka v. Enrile)

DM Consunji v. Esguerra (1996)

DM Consunji found out that there was systemic pilferage of company property by their own store clerks
and drives. NBI conducted an investigation and filed a complaint with the Prosecutor’s Office against the
one buying (hardware store owners) in violating of the Anti-Fencing Law and Qualified Theft but was
dismissed due to lack of probable cause and was also denied by DOJ. DM Consunji filed a petition for
certiorari and mandamus. The Court ruled that mandamus is not proper to compel the respondents to
file the information. There was no probable cause because of the lack of knowledge that the goods were
proceeds from a crime. The determination of probable cause may be executive or judicial prerogative.

IV.C.1.b.Venue and Jurisdiction

Rule 110, Sec. 15. Place where action is to be instituted
(a) Subject to existing laws, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the
municipality or territory where the offense was committed or where any of its essential ingredients
occurred.

(b) Where an offense is committed in a train, aircraft, or other public or private vehicle while in the
course of its trip, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of any municipality or
territory where such train, aircraft or other vehicle passed during such its trip, including the place of its
departure and arrival.

(c) Where an offense is committed on board a vessel in the course of its voyage, the criminal action shall
be instituted and tried in the court of the first port of entry or of any municipality or territory where the
vessel passed during such voyage, subject to the generally accepted principles of international law.

(d) Crimes committed outside the Philippines but punishable under Article 2 of the Revised Penal Code
shall be cognizable by the court where the criminal action is first filed.

BP 129
Sec. 20. Jurisdiction in criminal cases. – Regional Trial Courts shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction in all criminal cases not within the exclusive jurisdiction of
any court, tribunal or body, except those now falling under the exclusive and concurrent jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan which shall hereafter be exclusively taken
cognizance of by the latter.
Sec. 32. Jurisdiction of Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in criminal cases. – Except in cases falling within the
exclusive original jurisdiction of Regional Trial Courts and of the Sandiganbayan, the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial
Courts shall exercise:
(1) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all violations of city or municipal ordinances committed within their respective territorial jurisdiction; and
(2) Exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with imprisonment not exceeding six (6) years irrespective of the amount of fine, and regardless of other
imposable accessory or other penalties, including the civil liability arising from such offenses or predicated thereon, irrespective of kind, nature, value, or amount
thereof: Provided, however, That in offenses involving damage to property through criminal negligence they shall have exclusive original jurisdiction thereof. (as
amended by R.A, No. 7691)
RJCL, Sec. 14. Conduct of Initial Investigation by the Police. – The police officer conducting the initial investigation of a child in conflict with the law shall do so in the
presence of either or both of the parents, guardian or custodian, or in their absence, the nearest relative of the child, the child’s counsel of choice, or a lawyer from
the Public Attorney's Office, and the local social welfare officer. A representative of a non-government organization, religious group, or member of the Barangay
Council for the Protection of Children shall be allowed to be present at the investigation in the absence of the parents, guardian, relative, or social welfare officer.

Venue is Jurisdictional
 Territorial Jurisdiction cannot be waived or changed by agreement of the parties or by the
consent of the defendant (Alfelor, Sr. v. Mercado)
 Where the evidence during the trial of a criminal case shows the venue was misplaced, the court
shall dismiss the case since venue is jurisdictional (Navaja v. De Castro)

Principal of Territoriality
General Rule: Subject to existing laws, in all criminal prosecutions, the action must be instituted and
tried in the courts of the municipality or territory where the offense was committed or any of its
essential ingredients occurred.
 Written defamation – If public or private individual, It shall be filed where it was first printed and
first published. There are additional avenues for private individuals – RTC of the province where
the accused resided.
Exception
1. Felonies under Art. 2 of the RPC – cognizable by the proper court where the criminal action was
first filed (Rule 110, Sec. 15d)
2. Where an offense is committed on a railroad train, in an aircraft, or in any other public or
private vehicle in the court of its trip – instituted in the court of any municipality or territory
where it passed during the trip, including departure and arrival (Rule 110, Sec. 15b)
3. Where an offense is committed on Board a vessel in the court of its voyage – instituted and
tried in the proper court of the first port of entry or any municipality or territory through which
the vessel passed during such voyage subject to the generally accepted principles of
international law (Rule 110, Sec. 15c)
4. Piracy – no territorial limits, tried anywhere (People v. Lol-lo)
5. Libel (Art. 360, RPC)
a. Where the libelous article is printed and first published; the information must allege this
b. If offended party is a private individual, where they actually reside at the time of the
commission of the offense
c. If the offended party is a public official, where the latter holds office at the time of the
commission of the offense
d. Cybercrime – RTC, special court
6. In Exceptional Circumstances – To ensure a fair trial and impartial inquiry, the SC shall have the
power to order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid miscarriage of justice (Art. VIII, Sec.
5(4))
7. BP 22 (Bouncing Check Law) – where the check was dishonored or issued or in a crossed check,
place of the depositary or collecting bank (Morillo v. People)
8. Where the case is cognizable by the Sandiganbayan – where the court actually sits
9. In Illegal Recruitment Cases – victim has option to file in place of residence or place where
crime was committed (Sto Tomas v. Salac)
10. Violation of Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012 – RTC
11. Expanded Anti-Trafficking
12. Human Security Act
13. Crimes Against International Humanitarian Law
Malaloan v. CA (1994)
Lt. Salboro of CAPCOM filed an application for a search warrant in Caloocan RTC in connection with the
illegal possession of firearms committed in Quezon City by the petitioners. The firearms were seized and
the petitioners were indicted. The Petitioners filed a motion to quash the search warrant on the ground
that the search warrant was invalid since it was issued by Caloocan RTC and the item were in QC, hence
beyond the jurisdiction of Caloocan RTC. QC RTC denied this invoking paragraph 3b of the Interim Rules
and Guidelines which provides that search warrants can be served not only within the territorial
jurisdiction of the issuing court but anywhere in the judicial region of the issuing court. The Court held
that it was valid because a search warrant is merely a judicial process designed by the Rules to respond
only to an incident in the main case, if one has already been instituted or in anticipation thereof. It
would take judicial clairvoyance to require observances of the rules as to where a criminal case may
eventually be filed. Furthermore, it is possible that different trial courts have concurrent original
jurisdiction over the same criminal offense.

Unionbank v. People (2012)

Tomas was charged with perjury for making a false narration in a certificate against forum shaping
stating that Union Bank has not commenced any other action or proceeding involving the same issues in
another tribunal or agency aside from Pasay City RTC for the collection of sum of money with writ of
replvin filed against Tamondong and a John Doe. Tomas filed a motion to quash arguing that MTC
Makati does not have jurisdiction as, though it was notarized in Makati, it was used in Pasay RTC. The
Court held that Makati MTC had jurisdiction because Tomas’ deliberate and intentional assertion of
falsehood was made before a notary public in Makati City.

IV.C.1.c.Complaint/Information
Rule 110, Sec.2. The Complaint or Information
The complaint or information shall be in writing, in the name of the People of the Philippines and against
all persons who appear to be responsible for the offense involved.

Rule 110, Sec. 3. Complaint defined

A complaint is 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.

Rule 110, Sec. 4. Information defined

An information is an accusation in writing charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the
prosecutor and filed with the court.

DOJ-NPS Manual, Part III, Sec. 8. Complaint. - For purposes of preliminary investigation, the complaint filed with the prosecutor's office shall, as far as practicable, be
accompanied or covered by an Information Sheet and shall state, among others -
1. the full and complete names and exact home, office or postal addresses of the complainant and his witnesses;
2. The full and complete name and exact home, office or postal address of the respondent;
3. The offense charged and the place and exact date and time of its commission; and
4. Whether or not there exists a related case and, if so, the docket number of said case and the name of the Investigating Prosecutor thereof.

Guinhawa v. People (2005)

People v. Villanueva (2003)
People v. Sandiganbayan (Castillo) (2015)

Formal Requisites of Complaint and Information

1. In Writing
 2. In the name of the People of the Philippines
3. Against all persons who appear to be Responsible for the offense involved
Offended Party (filed under which name)
 Crime – People of the Philippines
 Civil – Private Person
 When the criminal action instituted in the name of the private person, the defect is merely of
form and may be cured by amendment (Ricarze v. CA)
Complaints
 A sworn written statement charging a person with an offense subscribed by the offended party,
any peace officer, or public officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated
 The want of an oath is a mere defect of the form because it does not affect substantial rights so
the judgment cannot be set aside based on this (People v. Historillo)
Types of Complaint
 Complaint filed with the Court – for the commencement of a criminal action for the violation of
a crime, private crimes, or those cannot be prosecuted de officio
o Offenses that cannot be prosecuted de officio – where the offense is private in nature,
where the law requires that it is to be started by a Complaint sworn to by the offended
party or when it pertains to those which need to be enforced by specified public officers
 Complaint filed with the Prosecutor’s Office – purposes of preliminary investigation
Requisites of a Complaint
1. It must be subscribed by the offended party, by any peace officer or public officer charged with
the enforcement of the law violated
2. It must charge a person with an offense
3. It must be under Oath and in Writing
4. It must be in the name of the People of the Philippines
Persons Who May File a Complaint
1. Offended Party
2. Any Peace officer
3. Other public officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated
Information
 An accusation in writing charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the Prosecutor and
filed with the court
Requisites of an Information
1. It must be in writing
2. It must charge a person with an offense
3. It must be subscribed by the Prosecutor
4. It must be filed in court
A prosecutor is required to indicate in the information the number and date of issuance of his MCLE
Compliance Certificate since an Information is a pleading
Persons authorized to file Information
1. City or Provincial Prosecutor and their assistants
2. Duty appointed special prosecutors
Effect of Infirmity in the Information (ex. Lack of authoriy) – It constitutes a jurisdictional defect, hence
cannot be cured by silence, acquiescene or even by express consent (Miaque v. Patag)
Complaint Information
Subscribed by the offended party, peace officer, Subscribed by prosecutor
or other officers charged with the enforcement of
 law
Filed either in court or prosecutor’s office Filed in court
Made under oath Need not be in oath since the fiscal filing it is
already acting under oath
Usually felonies which cannot be prosecuted de Public crimes
offiio

IV.C.1.d.Person prosecuting criminal action

Rule 110, Sec. 5. Who must prosecute criminal action (amended by AM No. 02-2-07-SC)
All criminal actions either commenced by complaint or by information shall be prosecuted under the
direction and control of a public prosecutor. In case of heavy work schedule of the public prosecutor or
in the event of lack of public prosecutors, the private prosecutor may be authorized in writing by the
Chief of the Prosecution Office or the Regional State Prosecutor to prosecute the case subject to the
approval of the court. Once so authorized to prosecute the criminal action, the private prosecutor shall
continue to prosecute the case up to end of the trial even in the absence of a public prosecutor, unless
the authority is revoked or otherwise withdrawn.

The crimes of adultery and concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the
offended spouse. The offended party cannot institute criminal prosecution without including the guilty
parties, if both alive, nor, in any case, if the offended party has consented to the offense or pardoned
the offenders.

The offenses of seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness shall not be prosecuted except upon a
complaint filed by the offended party or her parents, grandparents or guardian, nor, in any case, if the
offender has been expressly pardoned by any of them. If the offended party dies or becomes
incapacitated before she can file the complaint, and she has no known parents, grandparents or
guardian, the State shall initiate the criminal action in her behalf.

The offended party, even if a minor, has the right to initiate the prosecution of the offenses of
seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness independently of her parents, grandparents, or
guardian, unless she is incompetent or incapable of doing so. Where the offended party, who is a minor,
fails to file the complaint, her parents, grandparents, or guardian may file the same. The right to file the
action granted to parents, grandparents or guardian shall be exclusive of all other persons and shall be
exercised successively in the order herein provided, except as stated in the preceding paragraph.

No criminal action for defamation which consists in the imputation of the offenses mentioned above
shall be brought except at the instance of and upon complaint filed by the offended party.

The prosecution for violation of special laws shall be governed by the provisions thereof.

Who must prosecute criminal actions

 Full discretion and control of the public prosecutor because the crime is an outrage against the
sovereign of the State (Chua v. Padillo)
 The institution of a criminal action depends upon the sound discretion of the fiscal but once the
case is filed, the same can no longer be withdrawn or dismissed without the court’s approval
(Crespo v. Mogul)
 The fiscal can ask permission to conduct a reinvestigation of the case (Crespo v. Mogul)
Reason: Since a criminal offense is an outrage against the sovereignty of the State, it necessarily follows
that a representative of the State shall direct and control the prosecution (Chua v. Padillo).
Criminal action in the MTC or MCTC
When the prosecutor assigned is not available, the action may be prosecuted by
1. The offended party
2. Any peace officer
3. Public officer charged with enforcement of the law violated
Prosecution of special laws
Where the offense is a violation of a special law, the same shall be prosecuted pursuant to the
provisions of said law.
Conditions for a Private Prosecutor to Prosecute
1. The public prosecutor has a heavy work schedule or there is no public prosecutor assigned in the
province or city
2. The private prosecutor is authorized in writing by the Chief of the Prosecutor Office or the
Regional State Prosecutor
3. The private prosecutor shall continue to prosecute the case up to the end of the trial unless the
authority is withdrawn or otherwise revoked
4. The authority of the private prosecutor must be approved by the court
5. In case of the withdrawal or revocation of the authority of the private prosecutor, the same
must be approved
Criminal Proceedings before the Supreme Court and CA
General Rule: Only the solicitor general may bring or defend actions in behalf of the Republic of the
Philippines, or represent the People of the Philippines or State in criminal proceeding before the
Supreme Court and CA
Exception
1. When there is denial of due process of law to the prosecution and the state or its agents refuse
to act on the case to the prejudice of the state and the private offended party
2. When the private offended party questions the civil aspect of a decision of a lower court (Heirs
of Delgado v. Gonzales)
Prosecution of Cases by the Special Prosecutor
General Rule: In all cases elevated to the Sandiganbayan and from the Sandiganbayan to the SC, the
Office of the Ombudsman through its Special Prosecutor shall represent the People of the Philippine.
Exception – EO 1, 2, 14, 14-A (1986, PCGG
Note: The Office of the Ombudsman and investigative agencies of the government in the prosecution of
government service-related cases have concurrent jurisdiction when it is cognizable by regular courts
(Uy v. Sandiganbayan)

Matters Falling Within the Control and Discretion of the Prosecution

1. What case to file (People v. Pineda)
2. Whom to prosecute (People v. Devaras)
3. Manner of prosecution (People v. Nazareno)
4. Right to withdraw information before arraignment even without notice and hearing (Galvez v.
CA)
Matters within the Control of the Court After Case is Filed
1. Suspension of arraignment (Crespo v. Mogul)
2. Reinvestigation (Velasquez v. Tuquero)
3. Continuation of the Prosecution of the case (Sta Rosa Mining v. Zabala)
4. Dismissal of the case (Dungog v. CA)
 5. Downgrading of offense or dropping of accused even before plea (Rule 110, Sec. 14)

Crimes that Cannot be Prosecuted de Oficio

1. In certain crimes against chastity (concubinage, adultery, seduction, abduction, acts of
lasciviousness)
2. Defamations imputing any of the aforesaid offenses wherein a sworn written Complaint is
required

Prosecution of Private Crimes

1. Concubinage and Adultery – offended spouse who is still married with the offender (Pilapil v.
Ibay-Somera)
a. Both guilty parties must be included in the complaint
b. Offended party must have not given consent or pardoned both offenders
c. The death of the offended spouse before filing bars prosecution but if after filing, the
action continues because the participation is only the initiation, not the maintenance
(People v. Diego)
2. Seduction, Abduction and Acts of Lasciviousness –
a. by the offender party, including minors if not incompetent or incapable
b. by the parents, grandparents or legal/judicial guardians if offended party is incompetent
or incapable
c. by the State pursuant to the Doctrine of Parens Patriae
i. when the offended party dies or becomes incapacited before filing the
complaint and no known parents, grandparents or guardian
If the offender has been expressly pardoned by the offended party or her parents, grandparents or
guardian, a complaint cannot be filed.
3. Defamation imputing crimes of concubinage, adultery, seduction, abduction or acts of
lasciviousness – only the offended party (regardless if the person dies)
4. Violations of the Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination Act
a. Offended party
b. Parents or guardian
c. Ascendant or collateral relative within the the third civil degree of consanguinity
d. Officer, social worker or representative of a licensed child-caring institution
e. Officer or social worker of DSWD
f. Barangay chairman
g. At least three concerned, responsible citizens where the violation occurred.
Rule in Giving Pardon
1. Offended Minor – if with sufficient discretion and no parents or the accused is her own father
and her mother is dead
2. Parents, Grandparents or Guardian (in that order) cannot extend valid pardon without
conformity of the offended party even if minor
3. Offended woman is of age and not incapacitated (Benga-Oras v. Evangelista)
Subsequent Marriage
General Rule: In crimes against chastity, the subsequent marriage between the offended party and the
accused extinguishes the criminal liability of the latter or shall remit the penalty already imposed upon
him together with that of the co-principals, accomplices and accessories
Exception
1. Adultery and concubinage
 2. Marriage was invalid or contracted in bad faith to escape criminal liability
3. Private libel (concubinage, adultery, seduction, abduction or acts of lasciviousness) and slander
by deed (People v. Orzame)
4. Multiple rape – other people accused

Intervention of offended party

Rule 110, Sec. 16. Intervention of the offended party in criminal action
Where the civil action for recovery of civil liability is instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule
111, the offended party may intervene by counsel in the prosecution of the offense.

General rule: The offended party has the right to intervene by counsel in the prosecution of the criminal
action, where civil action for recovery of civil liability is instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule
111.
Exception
1. Where from the nature of the crime and the law defining and punishing it, no civil liability arises
in favor of the offended party (ex. Treason, rebellion, espionage and contempt)
2. Where the offended party has waived his right to civil indemnity
3. Where the offended party has expressed reserved his right to institute a separate civil action
4. Where the offended party has already instituted said action

People v. Beriales (1977)

People v. Madali (2001)
People and AAA v. CA (2015)
Rodriguez v. Ponferrada (2005)
Chua v. CA (2004)
Lee Pue Liong v. Chua Pue Chin Lee (2013)
Merciales v. CA (2002)
People v. Piccio (2014)
Crespo v. Mogul (1987)
Roberts v. CA (1996)

Non-retroactivity of removal of complaint requirement in rape

People v. Galigao (2003)

IV.C.1.e. Form and content

Rule 110, Sec. 6. Sufficiency of complaint or information
A complaint or information is sufficient if it states the name of the accused; the designation of the
offense given by the statute; the acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense; the name
of the offended party; the approximate date of the commission of the offense; and the place where the
offense was committed.

When an offense is committed by more than one person, all of them shall be included in the complaint
or information.
Contents of a Valid Complaint or Information
1. Name and surname of the accused or any appellation or nickname by which he is known or has
been known (all the accused)
 2. The designation of the offense given by the statue
3. The acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense
4. The name of the offended party
5. The approximate date of the commission of the offense
6. The place where offense was committed
Purpose
1. To inform the accused of the nature and cause of accusation against him
2. To notify the defendant of the criminal acts imputed to him so that he can duly prepare his
defense (People v. Dimaano)
Criteria for the Sufficiency of an Indictment
1. Whether the indictment contains the elements of the offense intended to be charged, and
sufficiently apprises the defendant of what he must be prepared to meet
2. In case any other proceedings are taken against him for a similar offense, whether the records
show with accuracy to what extent he may plead a former acquittal or conviction (Russel v. US)
Test – whether the crime is described in intelligible terms with such particularity as to apprise the
accused with reasonable certainty of the offense charged (Lazarte, Jr. v. Sandiganbayan) so that the
accused is enabled to prepare for the defense.
Objections – Objections relating to the form of the complaint or information can be moved before
arraignment either for a bill of particulars, or for the quashal of the information (People v. Teodoro)
Defective Information
General Rule: A substantially defective information cannot support a judgment of conviction.
Exception:
1. When the formal defect in the information was cured by evidence during the trial and no
objection appears to have been raised (Abunado v. People)
2. Failure to object upon arraignment is deemed to be a waiver

IV.C.1.e.i.Form and content – Procedural

Name of accused and offended party
Rule 110, Sec. 7. Name of the accused
The complaint or information must state the name and surname of the accused or any appellation or
nickname by which he has been or is known. If his name cannot be ascertained, he must be described
under a fictitious name with a statement that his true name is unknown.

If the true name of the accused is thereafter disclosed by him or appears in some other manner to the
court, such true name shall be inserted in the complaint or information and record.

Rule 110, Sec. 12. Name of the offended party

The complaint or information must state the name and surname of the person against whom or against
whose property the offense was committed, or any appellation or nickname by which such person has
been or is known. If there is no better way of identifying him, he must be described under a fictitious
name.

(a) In offenses against property, if the name of the offended party is unknown, the property must be
described with such particularity as to properly identify the offense charged.
(b) If the true name of the of the person against whom or against whose properly the offense was
committed is thereafter disclosed or ascertained, the court must cause the true name to be inserted in
the complaint or information and the record.

(c) If the offended party is a juridical person, it is sufficient to state its name, or any name or designation
by which it is known or by which it may be identified, without need of averring that it is a juridical
person or that it is organized in accordance with law.
Rules in Stating the Name of the Accused
1. The complaint or information must state the name and surname of the accused or any
appellation or nickname by which he has been or is known must be stated
2. If his name cannot be ascertained, a fictitious name with a statement that his true name is
unknown.
3. If his true name is thereafter ascertained, such name shall be inserted in the complaint or
information or record.
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 of the accused must be proven
(People v. Amodia; People v. Tumambing).
Rules in stating the Name of the Offended Party
1. His name and surname or any appellation or nickname by which he has been known or is known
2. If there is no other way of identifying him, he must be described under a fictitious name.
3. If it involves an offense against his property and if his name is unknown, the property must be
described with such particularity as to properly identify the offense charged
4. If the true name of the person against whom or against whose property the offense was
committed is thereafter disclosed or ascertained, the court must cause such true name to be
inserted in the Complaint or Information and the record.
5. Generally, error in the designation of offended party is not a ground for acquittal except where
the designation of the offended party is material like in oral defamation (Senador v. People).
6. If it is a juridical person, the complaint or information must state its name, or any name or
designation by which it is known or by which it may be identified, without need of averring that
it is a juridical person or that it is organized in accordance with law.

People v. Guevarra (1989)

Designation of offense
Rule 110, Sec. 8. Designation of the offense
The complaint or information shall state the designation of the offense given by the statute, aver the
acts or omissions constituting the offense, and specify its qualifying and aggravating circumstances. If
there is no designation of the offense, reference shall be made to the section or subsection of the
statute punishing it.

DOJ-NPS Manual, Part III, Sec. 40. Designation of offense charged. - For offenses that are punishable under the Revised Penal Code, the caption shall set forth the
denomination of the offense and the specific article and paragraph of the statute violated.
Where there is another charge or countercharge in the same case having one case number or in case of a consolidated resolution involving two or more criminal
cases with two or more docket numbers, the caption shall also contain said information.

Purpose
1. To enable a person of common understanding to know what offense is intended to eb charged
2. To enable the court to pronounce proper judgment
The Information or Complaint must state or designate the following whenever possible:
1. The designation of the offense given by the statute; if there is no designation of the offense,
reference shall be made to the section or subsection of the statute punishing it
2. The statement of the acts or omissions constituting the offense, in ordinary, concise and
particular words and
3. The specific qualifying and aggravating circumstances must be stated in ordinary and concise
language
Allegations prevail over the designation of the offense in the information (People v. Dasmarinas).
 It is axiomatic that 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 (People v.
Quemeggen).
 The accused may be convicted of a crime more serious than that named in the title or
preliminary part if such crime is covered by the facts alleged in the body of the Information and
its commission is established by evidence (Buhat v. CA)
 An accused cannot be convicted under one act when he is charged with a violation of another if
the change from one statute to the other involves
o A change in the theory of that trial
o Requires of the defendant a different defense
o Surprises the accused in any way (US v. Panlilio)
People v. Buayaban (2003)
People v. Delim (2003)
People v. Fernandez (2003)
People v. Valdez (2012)
People v. Avendano (2003)
Conceran v. People (2015)

Formal amendment

People v. Degamo (2003)

Villaflor v. Vivar (2001)

IV.C.1.e.ii.Substantive
Single offense; duplicity of offense
Rule 110, Sec. 13. Duplicity of the offense
A complaint or information must charge but one offense, except when the law prescribes a single
punishment for various offenses.

Duplicity of Offense – when two or more separate and distinct or different offense in one and the same
information or complaint (Soriano v. People). The reason or this rule is to prevent confusing the
defendants for their defense (People v. Ferrer).

General Rule: A complaint or information must charge only one offense.

Exception
1. Complex Crime – when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies or an
offense is a necessary means for committing the other
2. Special Complex Crime – where the law provides a single penalty for two ro more component
offenses (People v. Laog)
 3. Continuous Crime – a single crime consisting of a series of acts arising from a single criminal
resolution or intent not susceptible of division (Gamboa v. CA)
4. Crimes susceptible of being committed in various modes
5. Crimes of which another offense is an ingredient
6. When a single act violates different statutes
The test to be applied to determine whether there are two offenses or only one is whether each
provision requires proof of a fact which the other does not (Blockburger v. US).

If there is duplicity of crimes, a motion to quash the information must be done before arraignment if it
appears the information or complaint charged more than one offense, otherwise the objection is
deemed waived.
Requisites of a Continuous Crime
1. Plurality of acts performed separately during a period of time
2. Unity of penal provision infringed upon or violated
3. Unity of criminal intent which means that two or more violations of the same penal provision
are united on one and the same intent leading to the perpetration of the same criminal purpose
or claim (People v. Ledesma)
Principle of Absorption
If the ingredients of a crime form part of another, it is absorbed by the same and cannot be punished
separately or by application of Art. 48 (People v. Hernandez).
 Mala in se felonies cannot absorb mala prohibita crimes (Loney v. People)
 If there is duplicity in the offense charged, the remedy of the accused is to timely file a motion
to quash. If there is failure, it is deemed waived. In this case, the accused may be tried and
convicted for as many offenses charged and proved by the prosecution during the trial. A
separate penalty for each offense shall be imposed.
 A defendant should not be harassed with various prosecutions based on the same act by
splitting the same into various charges, all emanating from the same law violated when the
prosecution could easily and well embody them in a single information (People v. Diaz).
People v. Lopez (1999)
People v. Avendano (2003)
Ivler v. Judge San Pedro (2010)

Cause of accusation
Rule 110, Sec. 9. Cause of the accusation
The acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense and the qualifying and aggravating
circumstances must be stated in ordinary and concise language and not necessarily in the language used
in the statute but in terms sufficient to enable a person of common understanding to know what offense
is being charged as well as its qualifying and aggravating circumstances and for the court to pronounce
judgment.

Cause of the Accusation

General Rule: An accused cannot be convicted of an offense, unless it is clearly charged in the Complaint
or Information (Andaya v. People)
Exception: when there is a variance between the offense charged in the Complaint or Information and
that proved and the offense as charged is included in or necessarily includes the offense proved, the
accused shall be convicted of the offense proved which is included in the offense charged, or of the
offense charged which is included in the offense proved.
Qualifying and Aggravating Circumstances
The qualifying and aggravating circumstances cannot be appreciated even if proved unless alleged in the
information (Viray v. People). The failure to allege such circumstances cannot be cured by an
amendment of the information after the accused entered his plea (people v. Antonio). However, if not
alleged, it can still be a basis for exemplary damages (People v. Evina)

Negative Averments
General rule: If there are special situations exempted from the coverage of the statute, the information
does not need to allege that the accused is not part of it (US v. Chan Toco)
Exception: where the statute alleged to have been violated applies only to a specific class of persons and
to special conditions, the information must allege facts establishing that the accused falls within the
specific class affected and not those excepted from the coverage of law (US v. Pompeya).

Complex Crime
It is sufficient that the information contains allegations which show that one offense was a necessary
means to commit the other (People v. Alagao).

People v. Gallo (1999)

Vasquez v. CA (1999)
People v. Llanto (2003)
People v. Tampos (2003)
Canceran v. People (2015)

Date, place and time of commission

Rule 110, Sec. 10. Place of commission of the offense
The complaint or information is sufficient if it can be understood from its allegations that the offense
was committed or some of the essential ingredients occurred at some place within the jurisdiction of the
court, unless the particular place where it was committed constitutes an essential element of the
offense or is necessary for its identification.

Rule 110, Sec. 11. Date of commission of the offense

It is not necessary to state in the complaint or information the precise date the offense was committed
except when it is a material ingredient of the offense. The offense may be alleged to have been
committed on a date as near as possible to the actual date of its commission.
Place of Commission of the Offense
General Rule: The Complaint or Information is sufficient if it can be understood from its allegations that
the offense was committed or some of its essential ingredients occurred at some place, within the
jurisdiction of the court.
Exception: unless the particular place where it was committed constitutes an essential element of the
offense charged and is necessary for identification (trespass to dwelling, destructive arson, robbery in an
inhabited house, violation of domicile, penalty on the keeper, watchman, visitor of opium den and
violation of election law.

Date of Commission of Offense

General Rule: It is not necessary to state in the Complaint or Information the precise date the offense
was committed. The offense may be alleged to have been committed on a date as near as possible to
the actual date of its commission
Exception: when the date is a material ingredient of the offense (infanticide, abortion, bigamy, violation
of Sunday statute in Election Law)

The remedy against an indictment that fails to allege the time of commission of the offense with
sufficient definiteness is a Motion for Bill of Particulars.

People v. Buca (2015)

People v. Delfin (2014)
People v. Lizada (2003)
People v. Ladrillo (1999)
People v. Losano (1999)
People v. Lualhati (1989)
Rocaberte v. People (1991)

Need not be alleged

People v. Perez (2003)

IV.C.1.f.Suspension of criminal action by reason of prejudicial question

Rule 111, Sec. 6. Suspension by reason of prejudicial question
A petition for suspension of the criminal action based upon the pendency of a prejudicial question in a
civil action may be filed in the office of the prosecutor or the court conducting the preliminary
investigation. When the criminal action has been filed in court for trial, the petition to suspend shall be
filed in the same criminal action at any time before the prosecution rests.

Rule 111, Sec. 7. Elements of prejudicial question

The elements of a prejudicial question are: (a) the previously instituted civil action involves an issue
similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal action, and (b) the resolution
of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed.

DOJ-NPS Manual, Part III, Sec. 23-24

Concept of prejudicial question.- A prejudicial question is one the resolution of which is a logical antecedent of the issue involved in a case and the cognizance of
which pertains to another tribunal. It is based on a fact distinct and separate from the crime charged but so intimately connected with it that it determines the guilt
or innocence of the accused. To suspend the criminal action, it must not only appear that said case involves facts intimately related to those upon which the criminal
prosecution would be based but also that in the resolution of the issue or issues raised in the civil case, the guilt or innocence of the accused would necessarily be
determined.
Elements of prejudicial question. - The essential elements of a prejudicial question are:
1. the civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal action;
2. the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed ; and
3. the cognizance of the said issue pertains to another tribunal.

Suspension by reason of prejudicial question

 The court can motu proprio suspend (Ark Travel v. Abroagar)
 A petition for suspension of the criminal action by reason of prejudicial question in a civil action
may be filed in the office of the Prosecutor or the court conducting the preliminary
investigation.
 Petition to suspend criminal action on the ground of prejudicial question when no civil case has
been filed is a prohibited motion and shall be denied outright without need of comment and/or
opposition.
Prejudicial Question
 Definition: an issue involved in a civil case which is similar or intimately related to the issue
raised in the criminal action, the resolution of which determines whether or not the criminal
action may proceed.
 Reason: to avoid two conflicting decisions in the civil case and in the criminal case (Sy Thiong
Siou v. Sy Chim)
 Nature: question of merits of a criminal charge although non-criminal
 Test: It must appear that the civil case does not only involve the same facts upon which the
criminal prosecution is based but also that the resolution of the issues raised in said civil action
would necessary be determinative of the guilt or innocence of the accused (Yap v. Paras).
 Not applicable when civil case did not arise from quasi-delict (includes, contractual, quasi-delict,
quasi-contract, and law like independent civil actions, Art. 32-34, 2176 because they may
proceed independently or other sources of obligations from)
Elements of a Prejudicial Questions
1. The civil action must be instituted prior to the criminal action
2. It involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal
action
3. The resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed
4. Jurisdiction to try said question must be lodged in another tribunal (People v. Arambulo)
Prejudicial question may not be invoked when
1. Both criminal
2. Both civil
3. Both administrative
4. One is administrative and the other civil
5. One is administrative and the other criminal
a. Exception: if administrative is civil in nature
When to File Petition for Suspension by Reason of a Prejudicial Question
1. During preliminary investigation
2. In court before the prosecution rests its case
Where to file petition for suspension by reason of prejudicial question
1. Office of the prosecutor
2. Court where the criminal action has been filed for trial at any time before the prosecution rests
its case.

People v. Arambulo (2015)

Marbella-Bobis v. Bobis (2000)
Ark Travel Express v. Abrogar (2003)
People v. Consing Jr. (2003)
San Miguel Properties v. Perez (2013)

IV.C.1.g.Remedies available
Amendment/substitution of information
Rule 110, Sec. 14. Amendment or substitution
A complaint or information may be amended, in form or in substance, without leave of court, at any
time before the accused enters his plea. After the plea and during the trial, a formal amendment may
only be made with leave of court and when it can be done without causing prejudice to the rights of the
accused.
However, any amendment before plea, which downgrades the nature of the offense charged in or
excludes any accused from the complaint or information, can be made only upon motion by the
prosecutor, with notice to the offended party and with leave of court. The court shall state its reasons in
resolving the motion and copies of its order shall be furnished all parties, especially the offended party.

If it appears at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the proper offense,
the court shall dismiss the original complaint or information upon the filing of a new one charging the
proper offense in accordance with section 19, Rule 119, provided the accused shall not be placed in
double jeopardy. The court may require the witnesses to give bail for their appearance at the trial.

DOJ-NPS Manual, Part III, Sec. 4. Effect of amendment of information. - In case an information is amended, a new preliminary investigation shall be conducted if the
amended charge is not related to the crime originally charged; if there is a change in the nature of the crime charged; or if the information on its face is null and void
for lack of authority to file the same.
Rule 10, Rules of Court
Section 1. Amendments in general. — Pleadings may be amended by adding or striking out an allegation or the name of any party, or by correcting a mistake in the
name of a party or a mistaken or inadequate allegation or description in any other respect, so that the actual merits of the controversy may speedily be determined,
without regard to technicalities, and in the most expeditious and inexpensive manner. (1)
Section 2. Amendments as a matter of right. — A party may amend his pleading once as a matter of right at any time before a responsive pleading is served or, in
the case of a reply, at any time within ten (10) days after it is served. (2a)
Section 3. Amendments by leave of court. — Except as provided in the next preceding section, substantial amendments may be made only upon leave of court. But
such leave may be refused if it appears to the court that the motion was made with intent to delay. Orders of the court upon the matters provided in this section
shall be made upon motion filed in court, and after notice to the adverse party, and an opportunity to be heard. (3a)
Section 4. Formal amendments. — A defect in the designation of the parties and other clearly clerical or typographical errors may be summarily corrected by the
court at any stage of the action, at its initiative or on motion, provided no prejudice is caused thereby to the adverse party. (4a)
Section 5. Amendment to conform to or authorize presentation of evidence. — When issues not raised by the pleadings are tried with the express or implied
consent of the parties they shall be treated in all respects as if they had been raised in the pleadings. Such amendment of the pleadings as may be necessary to
cause them to conform to the evidence and to raise these issues may be made upon motion of any party at any time, even after judgment; but failure to amend
does not effect the result of the trial of these issues. If evidence is objected to at the trial on the ground that it is not within the issues made by the pleadings, the
court may allow the pleadings to be amended and shall do so with liberality if the presentation of the merits of the action and the ends of substantial justice will be
subserved thereby. The court may grant a continuance to enable the amendment to be made. (5a)
Section 6. Supplemental pleadings. — Upon motion of a party the court may, upon reasonable notice and upon such terms as are just, permit him to serve a
supplemental pleading setting forth transactions, occurrences or events which have happened since the date of the pleading sought to be supplemented. The
adverse party may plead thereto within ten (10) days from notice of the order admitting the supplemental pleading. (6a)
Section 7. Filing of amended pleadings. — When any pleading is amended, a new copy of the entire pleading, incorporating the amendments, which shall be
indicated by appropriate marks, shall be filed. (7a)
Section 8. Effect of amended pleadings. — An amended pleading supersedes the pleading that it amends. However, admissions in superseded pleadings may be
received in evidence against the pleader, and claims or defenses alleged therein not incorporated in the amended pleading shall be deemed waived.
Amendment
 Definition: refers to a change in either the form or substance of the same offense in the
information (Teehankee Jr. v. Madayag)
 It is not a new information because it does not charge another offense different or distinct from
that charged in the original one (People v. Taruc).
 It supersedes the originalinformation but relates back to the date at which the original
information was filed (People v. Taruc).
Kinds of Amendments
1. Formal Amendment
a. Where it neither affects nor alters the nature of the offense charged
b. Where the charge does not deprive the accused of a fair opportunity to present his
defense
c. Where it does not involve a change in the basic theory of the prosecution (People v.
Rivera)
d. Additional allegation of conspiracy provided it does not change the theory of the
prosecution (Buhat v. CA)
2. Substantial Amendment
a. States a different manner of committing the felony
 b. Conspiracy where it involves a change in basic theory of the prosecution (People v.
Zulueta)
c. Change in the date of the commission of the offense that would be prejudicial to the
accused (Wong v. Yatco)
Rules on Amendment
1. Before plea – General Rule: does not need leave of court
a. Exception – Any amendment before plea which downgrades the nature of the offense
charged or excludes any accused from the complaint or information can be made only
i. upon motion by the prosecutor
ii. with notice to the offended party
iii. with leave of court
iv. Reason: to inform and protect the offended party that there will be a change in
favor of the accused and by preventing the prosecuting officer from exercising
oppressively its unlimited discretion to amend
b. General Rule: All defects in an information are curable by amendment prior to entry of
please
i. Exception: Information void ab initio or vests jurisdiction upon the trial court
(Leviste v. Alameda)
2. After the plea – covers only formal amendments provided that
a. Leave of court is obtained
b. Such amendment is not prejudicial to the rights of the accused
Doctrine of Supervening Event
When a fact supervenes which changes the nature of the crime charged in the information or upgrades
it to a higher crime, in which case, amendment may be made but there is a need for another
arraignment of the accused under the amended information.
 An amendment due to a supervening event is considered only as a formal amendment as it did
not adversely affect any substantial right of the appellant (People v. Degamo)
Test for Propriety of Amendment After Plea – If affirmative, only form, not substance
1. Whether or not a defense under the information as it originally stood would be equally available
after the amendment is made
2. Whether or not any evidence which the accused might have would be equally applicable to the
information in one form as in the other (Mendez v. People)
Examples of Formal Amendment (Matalam v. Sandiganbayan)
1. new allegations which relate only to the range of the penalty that the court might impose in the
event of conviction;
2. an amendment which does not charge another offense different or distinct from that charged in
the original one;
3. additional allegations which do not alter the prosecution's theory of the case so as to cause
surprise to the accused and affect the form of defense he has or will assume;
4. an amendment which does not adversely affect any substantial right of the accused;
5. an amendment that merely adds specifications to eliminate vagueness in the information and
not to introduce new and material facts, and merely states with additional precision something
which is already contained in the original information and which adds nothing essential for
conviction for the crime charged.
Substantial Amendments after Plea
General Rule: There can be no substantial amendment in the information after the plea because:
1. Violates the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation against him as the
accused should be informed during the plea (People v. Opemia)
 2. Violates the rule on double jeopardy as the previous case shall be dismissed and a subsequent
information containing the same shall be filed (People v. Labatete; Teehankee v. Madayag)
3. Violates right to due process because any substantial amendment will burden the accused in
preparing the defense (Corpus, Jr. v. Pamular)
Exception: a substantial amendment after arraignment is allowed if the same is beneficial to the accused
(Fronda-Baggao v. People)

Requisites of Double Jeopardy

1. First Jeopardy must have attached
a. A valid information is filed
b. Before a court of competent jurisdiction
c. After a valid arraignment
d. A valid plea has been entered (Cerezo v. People)
2. First jeopardy must have been terminated
a. The accused has been acquitted
b. Convicted or
c. Dismissed or terminated without express consent (Cerezo v. People)
3. Identity between two offenses when the second offense
a. Is the same offense
b. An attempt to commit the said offense
c. A frustration of said offense
d. Any offense which necessarily includes the first offense OR
e. Any offense which necessarily included the first offense charged (Teehankee v.
Madayag)

Substitution
Rule 119, Sec. 19. When mistake has been made in charging the proper offense. — When it becomes manifest at any time before judgment that a mistake has been
made in charging the proper offense and the accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or any other offense necessarily included therein, the accused shall
not be discharged if there appears good cause to detain him. In such case, the court shall commit the accused to answer for the proper offense and dismiss the
original case upon the filing of the proper information.

General Rule – If it appears at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in charging the
proper offense, the court shall dismiss the original complaint or information upon the filing of a new one
charging the proper offense, provided the accused shall not be placed in double jeopardy (Carmelo v.
People)
Exception – does not apply to appealed cases
Rule on Substitution, Limitation
1. No judgment has yet been rendered
2. The accused cannot be convicted of the offense charged or of any other offense necessarily
included therein
3. The accused would not be placed in double jeopardy

Amendment Substitution
Involves the same, attempted, frustrated, Involves different offenses
necessarily includes or necessarily included
offense
Formal or substantial change Substantial change
May proceed without leave of the court Must always be with the leave of the court
Where it is a formal amendment, no need for Requires another preliminary investigation and
 another preliminary investigation and plea plea
Accuse can claim double jeopardy Accused cannot claim double jeopardy

Situations
1. When offense proved less serious and is necessarily included in the offense charged, convicted
of the offense proved
2. When offense proved more serious and is necessarily included in the offense charged, convicted
of the offense charged
3. When offense proved is neither included in nor does it include, court should dismiss the action
and order the filing of new information charging the proper offense.

Teehankee v. Madayag (1992)

Matalam v. The Second Division of the Sandiganbayan (2005)
Soberano v. People (2005)
Braza v. Sandiganbayan (2013)

Motion to Quash
Rule 117 Motion to Quash
Rule 15, Section 9. Omnibus motion. – Subject to the provisions of [S]ection 1 of Rule 9, a motion attacking a pleading, order, judgment, or proceeding shall include
all objections then available, and all objections
not so included shall be deemed waived.

General Rule: Motion to quash must be applied before arraignment

Exception
1. Information charges no offense
2. Trial court has no jurisdiction
3. Penalty or offense has been extinguished
4. Double jeopardy has attached
It is the mode by which an accused assails the validity of a criminal complaint or information filed
against him for insufficiency on its face in point of law or for defects which are apparent in the face of
the information (People v. Odtuhan).

Rule 117, Section 3. Grounds.

The accused may move to quash the complaint or information on any of the following grounds:
a. That the facts charged do not constitute an offense;
b. That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged;
c. That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the person of the accused;
d. That the officer who filed the information had no authority to do so;
e. That it does not conform substantially to the prescribed form;
f. That more than one offense is charged except when a single punishment for various offenses is
prescribed by law;
g. That the criminal action or liability has been extinguished;
h. That it contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal excuse or justification; and
i. That the accused has been previously convicted or acquitted of the offense charged, or the case
against him was dismissed or otherwise terminated without his express consent.

Cruz v. CA (1991)

Bill of Particulars
Rule 116, Sec. 9. Bill of particulars. — The accused may, before arraignment, move for a bill of particulars to enable him properly to plead and to prepare for trial.
The motion shall specify the alleged defects of the complaint or information and the details desired.

The office of a bill of particulars is to supply vague facts or allegations in the Complaint or Information to
enable the accused to properly plead and prepare for trials (Enrile v. People).

Enrile v. People (2015)

Provisional Remedies
Rule 127, Sec. 1. Availability of provisional remedies
The provisional remedies in civil actions, insofar as they are applicable, may be availed of in connection
with the civil action deemed instituted with the criminal action.

Rule 127, Sec. 2. Attachment

When the civil action is properly instituted in the criminal action as provided in Rule 111, the offended
party may have the property of the accused attached as security for the satisfaction of any judgment
that may be recovered from the accused in the following cases:

(a) When the accused is about to abscond from the Philippines;

(b) When the criminal action is based on a claim for money or property embezzled or fraudulently
misapplied or converted to the use of the accused who is a public officer, officer of a corporation,
attorney, factor, broker, agent, or clerk, in the course of his employment as such, or by any other person
in a fiduciary capacity, or for a willful violation of duty;

(c) When the accused has concealed, removed, or disposed of his property, or is about to do so; and

a) When the accused resides outside the Philippines.

Rule 57 Preliminary Attachment

Rule 58 Preliminary Injunction
Temporary Protection Orders and Permanent Protection Orders
Anti-Violence Against Women and Children Rules on TPO/PPO, RA 9262 Sec. 8, 15-18;
IRR of RA 9262 (2004), Rule III, Sec. 10; Rule IV, Sec. 11-12, 17-24
AM No. 04-10-11-SC (2004)

Rule 57, Sec. 1. Grounds upon which attachment may issue.

At the commencement of the action or at any time before entry of judgment, a plaintiff or any proper
party may have the property of the adverse party attached as security for the satisfaction of any
judgment that may be recovered in the following cases:
a. In an action for the recovery of a specified amount of money or damages, other than moral and
exemplary, on a cause of action arising from law, contract, quasi-contract, delict or quasi-delict
against a party who is about to depart from the Philippines with intent to defraud his creditors;
b. In an action for money or property embezzled or fraudulently misapplied or converted to his
own use by a public officer, or an officer of a corporation, or an attorney, factor, broker, agent,
or clerk, in the course of his employment as such, or by any other person in a fiduciary capacity,
or for a willful violation of duty;
c. In an action to recover the possession of property unjustly or fraudulently taken, detained or
converted, when the property, or any part thereof, has been concealed, removed, or disposed
of to prevent its being found or taken by the applicant or an authorized person;
 d. In an action against a party who has been guilty of a fraud in contracting the debt or incurring
the obligation upon which the action is brought, or in the performance thereof;
e. In an action against a party who has removed or disposed of his property, or is about to do so,
with intent to defraud his creditors; or
f. In an action against a party who does not reside and is not found in the Philippines, or on whom
summons may be served by publication.

Provisional Remedies
 Those to which party-litigants may resort for the preservation or protection of their rights or
interests and for no other purposes during the pendency of the action (Calo v. Roldan)
 They are applied to a pending litigation for the purpose of securing the judgment or preserving
the status quo and in some cases after judgment, for the purpose of preserving or disposing of
the subject matter (Calo v. Roldan)
 These ancillary remedies may be availed of by the offended party in the criminal case only
where the criminal action carries with it civil liability or where the offended party has not
reserved or waived the civil claim or has not instituted a separate civil action.
Kinds of Provisional Remedies
1. Receivership
2. Attachment
3. Injunction
4. Delivery of personal property (replevin)
5. Support pedente lite
Who may apply for preliminary attachment
1. Aggrieved party in whose behalf the civil aspect of the criminal action is prosecuted or the
prosecutor in the criminal action for the protection of the interest of the offended party
2. Notice or hearing to adverse party not required, only affidavit and bond of application
(Mindanao Savings v.CA)
Attachment may be availed of only when the civil action arising, from the crime has not been
expressly waived or not reserved and only in the following cases:
1. When the accused is about to abscond from the Philippines
2. When the criminal action is based on a claim for money or property embezzled or fraudulently
misapplied or converted to the use of the accused who is a public officer, officer of a
corporation, attorney, factor, broker, agent or clerk, in the course of his employment as such or
by any other person in a fiduciary capacity or for a willful violation of duty
3. When the accused has concealed, removed or disposed of his property or is about to do so
4. When the accused resides outside the Philippines

Tua v. Mangrobang (2014)

Ocampo v. Arcaya-Chua A.M. OCA IPI No. 07-2630-RTJ (2010)