Criminal Procedure Memory Aid – Annex A
Salient changes in the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure
Rule 110 Prosecution of Offenses
- The institution of allcriminal actions, including cases governed by the Rule on Summary Procedure, shall now be the same.
- Preliminary investigation is now required for an offense punishable by imprisonment of at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day.
à Except lawful warrantless arrests provided for under Section 7.
à Thus, preliminary investigation is required for all offenses cognizable by the RTC and for some cases cognizable by the MTC.
3. The institution of the criminal action shall interrupt the running of the prescriptive period of the offense except for offenses punishable by special laws.
à This is in accordance with the ruling in Zaldivia vs. Reyes, which stated that the Rules of Court cannot amend special laws, and under Act no. 3326**, the prescriptive period for violation of special laws and municipal ordinances was interrupted only upon the filing of the complaint or information in court.
- Qualifying and aggravating circumstances is now required to be alleged in the complaint or information.
à The failure to specifically allege either circumstance, even if proved, cannot be taken into account.
- Rape is removed from the list of private offenses since it is now classified as a crime against persons under R.A. 8353.
- Any amendment before plea, which
- Downgrades the nature of the offense charged in the complaint or information OR
- Excludes any accused from the complaint or information
à can only be made upon motion by the prosecutor, with
- Notice to the offended party AND
ii. With leave of court
à The court shall state its reasons in resolving the motion and copies of its order shall be furnished all parties, especially the offended party.
à This amendment is intended to prevent the prosecution from abusing the process of amendment before plea by dropping any of the accused from the information or reducing the offense charged, whether the accused had been arraigned or not and whether it was due to a reinvestigation of the fiscal or a review by the Secretary of Justice (Crespo vs. Mogul).
Rule 111 Prosecution of Civil Action
1. Only the civil liability arising from the offense charged is deemed instituted (not merely “impliedly”) with the criminal unless the offended party:
- Waives the civil action
- Reserves his right to institute it separately OR
- Institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.
2. The independent civil actions under Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 are no longer deemed or impliedly instituted with the criminal action or considered as waived
à Even if there is no reservation.
à They may proceed independently of the criminal action and shall require only a preponderance of evidence.
3. The reservation applies only to the civil liability arising from the offense charged.
à The employer may not longer be held civilly liable for quasi-delict in the criminal action as ruled in Maniago vs. Court of Appeals since quasi-delict is not deemed instituted with the criminal.
à If at all, the only civil liability of the employer in the criminal action would be his subsidiary liability under the Revised Penal Code.
4. The present rule has also done away with third-party complaints and counterclaims in criminal actions. These claims must have to be ventilated in a separate civil action.
à Thus, even if a counterclaim or cross-claim of the accused arises out of or is connected with the transaction or occurrence which is the subject matter of the offended party’s claim, it is NOT compulsory.
5. The extinction of the civil liability refers exclusively to civil liability arising from crime;
à Whereas, the civil liability for the same act considered as quasi-delict only and not as a crime is not extinguished even by a declaration in the criminal case that the criminal act charged has not happened or has not been committed by the accused.
à Both actions may proceed separately, the only limitation is the prohibition to recover damages twice based on the same act or omission.
6. Except for civil actions provided for in Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code, the civil action which has been reserved cannot be instituted until final judgment has been rendered in the criminal action.
à The action contemplated herein is a civil action arising from a crime if reserved or filed separately and if a criminal case is filed, it has to be suspended.
à During the pendency of the criminal action, the period of prescription of the civil action which cannot be instituted separately or whose proceeding has been suspended shall not run.
7. The death of the accused after arraignment and during the pendency of the criminal action shall extinguish the civil liability arising from the delict.
à This rule would only apply if any of the civil actions under section 3 is consolidated with the criminal action, otherwise, since the actions under section 3 are purely civil actions, the effects of death of a party are to be governed by the Rules on Civil Procedure.
8. A prejudicial question is limited to a “previously instituted civil action” in order to minimize possible abuses by the subsequent filing of a civil action as an after thought for the purpose of suspending the criminal action.
Rule 112 Preliminary Investigation
- Preliminary investigation now includes offenses punishable by at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day, even if the same is cognizable by the Municipal Trial Court.
- The complaint should be accompanied by affidavits of the complainant and his witnesses as well as other supporting papers relied upon by the complainant to establish probable cause.
- A motion to dismiss is now a prohibited pleading during preliminary investigation.
- The respondent is now required to submit counter-affidavits and other supporting documents relied upon by him for his defense.
- The respondent now has the right to examine the evidence submitted by the complainant of which he may not have been furnished and to obtain copies thereof at his expense.
à If the records are voluminous, the complainant may be required to identify those which he intends to present to support his charge and these shall be made available for examination, copying or photographing by respondent at his expense.
- The prosecutor is required to resolve the complaint based on the evidence presented by the complainant, in the event that:
- The respondent cannot be subpoenaed OR
- The respondent, if subpoenaed, does not submit a counter-affidavit within the 10-day period.
- The clarificatory hearing shall only to limited to facts and issues which the investigating officer believes need to be clarified.
à The clarificatory hearing shall be held within 10 days from:
- The submission of the counter-affidavit and other documents, OR
- The expiration of the period for their submission.
à The clarificatory hearing shall be terminated within 5 days.
- After the clarificatory hearing:
à The investigation shall be deemed concluded AND
à The hearing officer shall determine whether there is sufficient ground to hold the respondent for trial upon the evidence adduced, within 10 days.
- Whether the recommendation of the investigating officer is to file or dismiss the case, he shall, within 5 days from his resolution, forward the records to:
- The provincial or city prosecutor or chief state prosecutor
- The ombudsman or his deputy, for offenses cognizable by the Sandiganbayan in the exercise of its original jurisdiction
à Who shall taken appropriate action within 10 days from receipt and immediately inform the parties of said action.
- A party has the right to appeal to the Secretary of Justice and require that the parties be notified of the recommendation of the action to be taken therefrom.
- The judge must determine the existence of probable cause within 10 days from the filing of the information.
à If the accused has already been arrested, the judge must determine within 10 days the existence of probable cause and issue an order of commitment.
à The judge may disregard the prosecutor’s report and require the submission of additional evidence to determine the existence of provable case. If he still finds no probable cause, he shall dismiss the case.
- Two types of offenses may be filed in the Municipal Trial Court for preliminary investigation:
- A case is cognizable by the RTC may be filed with the MTC for preliminary investigation.
- Even if it is cognizable by the MTC because it is an offense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day without regard to the fine.
à The MTC is authorized in either case to issue a warrant of arrest if there is necessity of placing the respondent under immediate custody, in order not to frustrate the ends of justice.
- Outline on Issuance of Warrants of Arrest by Municipal Trial Judge
- During preliminary investigation
à Searching questions and answers is mandatory.
- In exercise of its original jurisdiction, distinguish:
- Cases which require Preliminary Investigation even if it falls within its original jurisdiction
à After searching questions and answers, determine probable cause and necessity of placing accused in custody in order not to frustrate the ends of justice.
- Cases investigated by MTC but remanded by the prosecutor
à The necessity rule inapplicable
iii. No warrants:
(1) If one already issued OR
(2) The complaint or information filed under Section 7 (order of detention must be issued) OR
(3) Offenses punishable by fine.
- Cases which do not require preliminary investigation
- Evaluate evidence OR
ii. Conduct searching questions or answers or require additional evidence.
- No warrants
- If the judge is satisfied that there is no necessity for placing the accused under custody (issues summons instead)
ii. Cases under the Revised Rules on Summary Procedure (no warrants except for failure to appear)
iii. Rule on necessity
à It is only in the issuance of warrants of arrest during preliminary investigation and in cases which do not require preliminary investigation, that the Municipal Trial Judge is called upon to apply the principle of necessity. The principle does not apply to cases remanded by the Prosecutor.
- In case a person is arrested without a warrant, a complaint or information may only be filed after an inquest conducted in accordance with existing rules.
à Provided that in the absence or unavailability of an inquest prosecutor, the complaint may be filed by the offended party or a peace officer directly with the proper court on the basis of the affidavit of the offended party or arresting officer or person.
- Before the filing of a complaint or information, the person arrested without a warrant may ask for a preliminary investigation by a proper officer, but he must sign a waiver of the provisions of Article 125 of the Revised Penal Code.
à The waiver may be made only in the presence of his counsel pursuant to R.A. no. 7438.
à In case the case has been filed in court without a preliminary investigation, the accused may, within 5 days from the time he learns of its filing, ask for a preliminary investigation with the same right to adduce evidence in his defense.
à The request for preliminary investigation must be made before plea, otherwise the right to ask for a preliminary investigation shall be deemed waived.
- The court must evaluate the resolution of the investigating prosecutor and the supporting evidence adduced during the preliminary investigation, and such evidence must be included in filing the information.
- Issuance of warrants of arrest by the MTC for actions filed in the exercise of its original jurisdiction provides for two distinct situations: Case may be filed
- Directly in the MTC OR
- By the prosecutor in Metro Manila or other chartered cities.
- If complaint is filed with the prosecutor for offenses which do not require a preliminary investigation, the procedure is as follows:
- The complaint shall state the known address of the respondent
- Accompanied by:
- Affidavits of the complainant and his witness AND
- Other supporting documents relied upon by the complainant to establish probable cause
- Affidavits must be sworn before any prosecutor, state prosecutor or government official authorized to administer oath, or a notary public (in their absence or unavailability)
- The prosecutor, et. al., must certify that he personally examined the affiants and that he is satisfied that they voluntarily executed and understood their affidavits.
- The prosecutor shall take appropriate action based on the affidavits and other supporting documents submitted by the complainant within 10 days from its filing.
à He may either dismiss the case or file it in court
- If complaint is filed directly with the MTC for an offense punishable by less than 4 years, 6 months and 1 day, the procedure is similar to (18).
à The judge should then personally examine in writing and under oath the complainant.
- No warrant of arrest shall issue for cases covered by the Revised Rules on Summary Procedure.
Rule 113 Arrest
- Instances of valid warrantless arrests:
- When, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actually committing, or is attempting to commit an offense;
- When an offense has just been committed and he has probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts or circumstances that the person to be arrested has committed it; AND
- When the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped from a penal establishment or place where he is serving final judgment or is temporarily confined while his case is pending, or has escaped while being transferred from one confinement to another.
- 1(b) removed the requirement that an offense must have in fact been committed and clarified that probable cause to believe based on personal knowledge of “facts and circumstances” that the person to be arrested has committed it would be sufficient to justify a warrantless arrest for an offense that has just been committed.
- Indubitable existence of a crime is not necessary to justify a warrantless arrest and that ‘personal knowledge of facts’ in arrests without warrant must be based upon probable cause, which means an actual belief or reasonable grounds of suspicion.
à The grounds of suspicion are reasonable when, in the absence of actual belief of the arresting officers, the suspicion that the person to be arrested is probably guilty of committing the offense, is based on actual facts, i.e., supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to create the probable cause of guilt of the person to be arrested.
à A reasonable suspicion therefore must be founded on probable cause, coupled “with good faith on the part of the peace officers making the arrest.”
Rule 114 Bail
- Bail is a matter of right
- Before or after conviction by the MTC AND
- Before conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment
- 2. Bail is a matter of discretion after conviction by the RTC of an offense not punishable by death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment.
- Photos taken ‘recently’ means photos taken within the last six months.
- The application for bail may be filed and acted upon by the trial court despite the filing of a notice of appeal, provided it has not transmitted the original record to the appellate court.
à However, if the decision of the trial court convicting the accused changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the application for bail can only be filed with and resolved by the appellate court.
Æ This provision modified the ruling in Obosa vs. Court of Appeals in the sense that except for decisions which changed the nature of an offense from bailable to non-bailable cases, the trial court may still act on the application of bail even if a notice of appeal have been filed.
Æ Even if there is no notice of appeal if the decision of the trial court convicting the accused changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the application for bail can only be filed with and resolved by the appellate court.
5. Bail may be filed with:
- The court where the case is pending OR
- Another judge of the same court within the province or city
à In the absence or unavailability of the judge thereof.
6. When the presence of the accused is required by the court or these Rules, his bondsmen shall be notified to produce him before the court on a given date and time.
7. An application for bail by the accused shall NOT be considered as a waiver of his right to challenge the legality of his arrest or the absence of a preliminary investigation.
à Provided such objections are raised before plea.
Rule 116 Arraignment and Plea
- When the accused pleads guilty but presents exculpatory evidence, his plea shall be deemed withdrawn and a plea of not guilty shall be entered for him.
à This refers to a situation where an accused pleads guilty but invokes the mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense under Article 13, paragraph 1 of the Revised Penal Code as amended.
Æ If the accused, after being allowed to present evidence, however adduces proof, not only to establish incomplete self-defense, but that he acted with complete legal justification, his earlier plea of guilty shall be deemed withdrawn and a plea of not guilty shall be entered for him.
- While R.A. No. 8493 or the Speedy Trial Act provides that the accused shall be arraigned within 30 days from the time a court acquires jurisdiction over his person, Rule 116, §1(e) provides for a shorter time within which an accused who is under preventive detention should be arraigned.
à Where an accused is detained, his case should be raffled within 3 days from the filing of the information or complaint against him, and the judge to whom his case is raffled shall have him arraigned within 10 days from receipt by the judge of the records of the case.
à The pre-trial conference shall be held within 10 days after the arraignment.
- The consent of both the prosecutor and the offended party is required before an accused may be allowed by the court to plead guilty to a lesser offense.
à The conviction for the lower offense would not give rise to double jeopardy if the plead of guilty for the lower offense was without the consent of the offended party.
- The presence of the offended party is now required at the arraignment and also to discuss the matter of accused’s civil liability.
à In case the offended party fails to appear despite due notice, the trial court may allow the accused to plead guilty to a lower offense with solely the conformity of the trial prosecutor.
- The arraignment shall be held within 30 days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused.
à Unless a shorter period is provided by special law or Supreme Court circular.
à The time of the pendency of a motion to quash or for a bill of particulars or other causes justifying suspension of the arraignment shall be excluded in computing the period.
- Certain laws and SC Circulars provide for a shorter time within which the accused should be arraigned:
- Republic Act no. 4908
à In criminal cases where the complainant is about to depart form the Philippines with no definite date of return, the accused should be arraigned without delay and his trial should commence within 3 days from the arraignment and that no postponement of the initial hearing should be granted except on the ground of illness on the part of the accused or other grounds beyond the control of the court.
- Republic Act no. 7610 or the Child Abuse Act
à The trial of cases falling under said law shall be commenced within 3 days from arraignment.
- Dangerous Drugs Law
- Cases falling under the SC Admin Order No. 104-96, i.e., heinous crimes, violations of the Intellectual Property Rights Law
à These cases must be tried continuously until terminated within 60 days from commencement of the trial and to be decided within 30 days from the submission of the case.
- A plea of guilty to a lesser offense may be allowed only if the lesser offense is necessarily included in the offense charged.
à Consent of the prosecutor and offended party must be obtained.
- A counsel de oficio who is appointed to defend the accused at the arraignment is given a reasonable time to consult with the accused as to his plea before proceeding with the arraignment.
Rule 117 Motion to Quash
- Grounds for motion to quash a complaint or information:
- The facts charged do not constitute an offense
- The court has no jurisdiction over the offense charged
- The court has no jurisdiction over the person of the accused
- The officer who filed the information had no authority to do so
- It does not conform substantially to the prescribed form
- More than one offense is charged
à Except when a single punishment for various offenses is prescribed by law.
- The criminal action or liability has been extinguished
- It contains averments which, if true, would constitute a legal excuse or justification AND
- 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.
- Conviction of an accused shall not be a bar to another prosecution for an offense which necessarily includes the offense charged in the former complaint or information under the following instances:
- The graver offense developed due to supervening facts arising from the same act or omission constituting the former charge
- The facts constituting the graver charge became known or were discovered only after a plea was entered in the former complaint or information OR
- The plea of guilty to the lesser offense was made without the consent of the prosecutor and of the offended party except as provided in §1(f) of Rule 116.
- A case may not be provisionally dismissed without:
- The express consent of the accused AND
- Notice to the offended party
- The provisional dismissal of offenses punishable by imprisonment not exceeding 6 years shall become final after 1 year from the issuance of the order without the case being revived.
- The provisional dismissal of offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding 6 years shall become permanent 2 years from the issuance of the order without the case having been revived.
Rule 118 Pre-Trial
1. In all criminal cases cognizable by the (1) Sandiganbayan, (2) Regional Trial Court, (3) Metropolitan Trial Courts, (4) Municipal Trial Court in Cities, (5) Municipal Trial Court and (6) Municipal Circuit Trial Court
à The court shall order a pre-trial conference (this must be held within 30 days from the date the court acquires jurisdiction over the person of the accused, unless a shorter period is provided for in special laws or circulars of the Supreme Court)
2. The following shall be considered during the pre-trial conference:
- Plea bargaining
- Stipulation of facts
- Marking for identification of evidence of the parties
- Waiver of objections to admissibility of evidence
- Modification of the order of trial if the accused admits the charge but interposes a lawful defense; AND
- Such matters as will promote a fair and expeditious trial of the criminal and civil aspects of the case
3. All agreements or admissions made or entered during the pre-trial conference shall be:
- Reduced to writing and
- Signed by the accused and counsel
à Otherwise, they cannot be used against the accused.
à The agreements covering the matters referred to in section 1 of this Rule shall be approved by the court.
4. If the counsel for the accused or the prosecutor does not appear at the pre-trial conference and does not offer an acceptable excuse for his lack of cooperation
à The court may impose proper sanction or penalties.
Rule 119 Trial
1. After a plea of not guilty is entered
à The accused shall have at least 15 days to prepare for trial
2. The trial shall commence within 30 days from receipt of the pre-trial order.
3. Other laws, rules and regulations prescribe speedy trial for a shorter period for other offenses:
- Criminal cases covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure or where the penalty prescribed by law does not exceed 6 months imprisonment, or a fine of P1,000 or both, irrespective of other imposable penalties
à Governed by Rule 123
- R.A. No. 4908, An Act Requiring Judges of Courts to Speedily Try Criminal Cases Wherein the Offended Party is a Person About to Depart from the Philippines with No Definite Date of Return
à Requires such cases to take precedence over all other cases before our courts except election and habeas corpus cases
à The trial in these cases shall commence within 3 days from the date the accused is arraigned and no postponement of the initial hearing shall be granted except on the ground of illness on the part of the accused, or other grounds beyond the control of the accused
- Speedy Trial of Child Abuse cases
à The trial of child abuse cases shall take precedence over all other cases before our courts except election and habeas corpus cases
à The trial in these cases shall commence within 3 days from the date the accused is arraigned and no postponement of the initial hearing shall be granted except on account of the illness of the accused or other grounds beyond his control (Sec. 21, Rules and Regulations on the Reporting and Investigation of Child Abuse cases issued pursuant to Sec. 32 of R.A. No. 1610, The Child Abuse Act)
- Violations of the Dangerous Drugs Law
- Under Administrative Order No. 104-96
4. Trial once commenced
à Shall continue from day to day as far as practicable until terminated
à May be postponed for a reasonable period of time for good cause
5. After consultation with the prosecutor and defense counsel
à The court shall set the case for continuous trial on a weekly or other short term trial calendar at the earliest possible time so as to ensure speedy trial
6. In no case shall the entire trial period exceed 180 days from the first day of trial, except as otherwise authorized by the Supreme Court.
7. The time limitations provided under this section and the preceding section shall not apply where special laws or circulars of the Supreme Court provide for a shorter period of trial.
8. The following periods of delay shall be excluded in computing the time within which trial must commence:
a. Any period of delay resulting from other proceedings concerning the accused, including but not limited to the following:
- Delay resulting from an examination of the physical and mental condition of the accused;
- Delay resulting from proceedings with respect to other criminal charges against the accused;
- Delay resulting from extraordinary remedies against interlocutory orders;
- Delay resulting from pre-trial proceedings; provided, that the delay does not exceed 30 days;
- Delay resulting from order of inhibition, or proceedings relating to change of venue of cases or transfer from other courts;
- Delay resulting from a finding of the existence of a prejudicial question; and
- Delay reasonably attributable to any period, not to exceed 30 days, during which any proceeding concerning the accused is actually under advisement.
b. Any period of delay resulting from the absence or unavailability of an essential witness. (An essential witness shall be considered absent when his whereabouts are unknown or his whereabouts cannot be determined by due diligence. He shall be considered unavailable whenever his whereabouts are known but his presence for trial cannot be obtained by due diligence.)
- Any period of delay resulting from the mental incompetence or physical inability of the accused to stand trial.
- If the information is dismissed upon motion of the prosecution and thereafter a charge is filed against the accused for the same offense
à Any period of delay from the date the charge was dismissed to the date the time limitation would commence to run as to the subsequent charge had there been no previous charge
- A reasonable period of delay when the accused is joined for trial with a co-accused over whom the court has not acquired jurisdiction; or, as to whom the time for trial has not run and no motion for separate trial has been granted.
- Any period of delay resulting from a continuance granted by any court motu proprio, or on motion of either the accused or his counsel, or the prosecution, if the court granted the continuance on the basis of its findings set forth in the order that the ends of justice served by taking such action outweigh the best interest of the public and the accused in a speedy trial.
9. The following factors, among others, shall be considered by a court in determining whether to grant continuance under section 3(f) of this Rule.
- Whether or not the failure to grant a continuance in the proceeding would likely make a continuation of such proceeding impossible or result in a miscarriage of justice; and
- Whether or not the case taken as a whole is so novel, unusual and complex, due to the number of accused or the nature of the prosecution, or that it is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation within the periods of time established therein
10. No continuance under section 3(f) of this Rule shall be granted because of
- Congestion of the court’s calendar or
- Lack of diligent preparation or
- Failure to obtain available witnesses on the part of the prosecutor
11. The general rule is that motions for postponement are granted only upon meritorious grounds and no party has the right to assume that his motion will be granted. The grant or denial of a motion for postponement is addressed to the sound discretion of the court. Unless grave abuse of discretion is shown, such discretion will not be interfered with either by mandamus or appeal.
12. If the accused is to be tried again pursuant to an order for a new trial
à The trial shall commence within 30 days from notice of the order (provided that if the period becomes impractical due to unavailability of witnesses and other factors, the court may extend it but not to exceed 180 days from notice of said order for a new trial
13. Notwithstanding the provisions of section 1(g), Rule 116 and the preceding section 1, for the first twelve-calendar-month period following its effectivity on September 15, 1998
à The time limit with respect to the period from arraignment to trial imposed by said provision shall be 180 days. For the second twelve-month period, the time limit shall be 120 days, and for the third twelve-month period, the time limit shall be 80 days.
14. If the public attorney assigned to defend a person charged with a crime knows that the latter is preventively detained, either because he
- Is charged with a bailable crime but has no means to post bail, or
- Is charged with a non-bailable crime, or
- Is serving a term of imprisonment in any penal institution
à It shall be his duty to do the following:
- Shall promptly undertake to obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial or cause a notice to be served on the person having custody of the prisoner requiring such person to so advise the prisoner of his right to demand trial.
- Upon receipt of that notice, the custodian of the prisoner shall promptly advise the prisoner of the charge and of his right to demand trial. If at anytime thereafter the prisoner informs his custodian that he demands such trial, the latter shall cause notice to that effect to be sent promptly to the public attorney.
- Upon receipt of such notice, the public attorney shall promptly seek to obtain the presence of the prisoner for trial.
- When the custodian of the prisoner receives from the public attorney a properly supported request for the availability of the prisoner for purposes of trial, the prisoner shall be made available accordingly.
15. In any case in which private counsel for the accused, the public attorney, or the prosecutor:
- Knowingly allows the case to be set for trial without disclosing that a necessary witness would be unavailable for trial;
- Files a motion solely for delay which he knows is totally frivolous and without merit;
- Makes a statement for the purpose of obtaining continuance which he knows to be false and which is material tot he granting of a continuance; or
- Willfully fails to proceed to trial without justification consistent with the provisions hereof
à The court may punish such counsel, attorney, or prosecutor, as follows:
- By imposing on a counsel privately retained in connection with the defense of an accused, a fine not exceeding P20,000.
- By imposing on any appointed counsel de oficio, public attorney, or prosecutor a fine not exceeding P5,000; and
- By denying any defense counsel or prosecutor the right to practice before the court trying the case for a period not exceeding 30 days. The punishment provided for by this section shall be without prejudice to any appropriate criminal action or other sanction authorized under these Rules.
16. If the accused is not brought to trial within the time limit required by section 1(g), Rule 116 and section 1, as extended by section 6 of this Rule
àThe information may be dismissed on motion of the accused on the ground of denial of his right to speedy trial
17. The accused shall have the burden of proving the motion but the prosecution shall have the burden of going forward with the evidence to establish the exclusion of time under section 3 of this Rule.
18. The dismissal shall be subject to the rules on double jeopardy.
19. No provision of law on speedy trial and no rule implementing the same shall be interpreted as a bar to any charge of denial of the right to speedy trial guaranteed by section 14(2) , Article III, of the 1987 Constitution.
20. After the prosecution rests its case
à The court may dismiss the action on the ground of insufficiency of evidence
- On its own initiative after giving the prosecution the opportunity to be heard or
- Upon demurrer to evidence filed by the accused with or without leave of court
21. If the court denies the demurrer to evidence filed with leave of court
à The accused may adduce evidence in his defense
22. When the demurrer to evidence is filed without leave of court
à The accused waive the right to present evidence and submits the case for judgment on the basis of the evidence for the prosecution
23. The motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence
à Shall specifically state its grounds and shall be filed within a non-extendible period of 5 days after the prosecution rests its case
à Prosecution may oppose the motion within a non-extendible period of 5 days from its receipt
24. If leave of court is granted
à The accused shall file the demurrer to evidence within a non-extendible period of 10 days from notice
à Prosecution may oppose the demurrer to evidence within a similar period from its receipt
25. The order denying the motion for leave of court to file demurrer to evidence or the demurrer itself
à Shall not be reviewable by appeal or by certiorari before judgment
26. The present rule liberally deviates from the rigid structures of Rule 119 of the 1985 Rules on Criminal Procedure denying the accused the chance to present evidence by considering a defendant’s motion to dismiss a waiver of his right to present evidence.
27. The current rule allows the accused in a criminal case to present evidence even after a motion to dismiss provided the demurrer was made within the express consent of the court.
28. At any time before finality of the judgment of conviction
à The judge may, motu proprio or upon motion, with hearing in either case, reopen the proceedings to avoid a miscarriage of justice
à The proceedings shall be terminated within 30 days from the order granting it.
Rule 120 Judgment
à Adjudication by the court that the accused is guilty or not guilty of the offense charged and the imposition on him of the proper penalty and civil liability, if any
- Be written in the official language
- Personally and directly prepared by the judge and signed by him and
- Contain clearly and distinctly a statement of the facts and the law upon which it is based
2. If the judgment is of conviction
à It shall state
- The legal qualification of the offense constituted by the acts committed by the accused and the aggravating or mitigating circumstances which attended its commission
- The participation of the accused in the offense, whether as principal, accomplice, or accessory
- The penalty imposed upon the accused and
- The civil liability or damages caused by his wrongful act or omission to be recovered from the accused by the offended party, if there is any, unless the enforcement of the civil liability by a separate civil action has been reserved or waived
3. In case the judgment is of acquittal
à It shall state whether the evidence of the prosecution absolutely failed to prove the guilt of the accused or merely failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt ( in either case, the judgment shall determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability might arise did not exist)
4. The judgment is promulgated by reading it in the presence of the accused and any judge of the court in which it was rendered.
5. If the conviction is for a light offense
à The judgment may be pronounced in the presence of his counsel or representative
6. When the judge is absent or outside the province or city
à The judgment may be promulgated by the clerk of court
7. If the accused is confined or detained in another province or city
à The judgment may be promulgated by the executive judge of the Regional Trial Court having jurisdiction over the place of confinement or detention upon request of the court which rendered the judgment
8. The court promulgating the judgment shall have authority to accept the notice of appeal and to approve the bail bond pending appeal; provided, that if the decision of the trial court convicting the accused changed the nature of the offense from non-bailable to bailable, the application for bail can only be filed and resolved by the appellate court.
9. The proper clerk of court shall give notice to the accused personally or through his bondsman or warden and counsel, requiring him to be present at the promulgation of the decision.
10. If the accused was tried in absentia because he
- Jumped bail or
- Escaped from prison
à The notice to him shall be served at his last known address.
11. In case the accused fails to appear at the scheduled date of promulgation of judgment despite notice
à The promulgation shall be made by recording the judgment in the criminal docket and serving him a copy thereof at his last known address or thru his counsel
12. If the judgment is for conviction and the failure of the accused to appear was without justifiable cause, he shall
- Lose the remedies available in these Rules against the judgment and
- The court shall order his arrest
13. However, within 15 days from promulgation of judgment
à The accused may surrender and file a motion for leave of court to avail of these remedies
à He shall state the reasons for his absence at the scheduled promulgation and if he proves that his absence was for a justifiable cause, he shall be allowed to avail of said remedies within 15 days from notice
14. Under the former rule, even if the accused fails to appear without justifiable cause, he shall be allowed to appeal within 15 days from notice of the decision to him or his counsel.
15. Under the new rule, if the judgment is of conviction and the failure of the accused to appear was without justifiable cause, he shall lose not only his right to appeal but also other legal remedies against the judgment as well and the court shall order his arrest.
Rule 124 Procedure in the Court of Appeals
1. The provisions of Rules 42, 44 to 46 and 48 to 56 relating to procedure in the Court of Appeals and in the Supreme Court in original and appealed cases
à Shall be applied to criminal cases insofar as they are applicable and not inconsistent with the provisions of this Rule
2. The provisions of Rule 47 of the Rules of Court (Annulment of Judgments of Final Judgment and Resolutions) are no longer applicable in criminal cases. The appropriate remedy for lack of jurisdiction or extrinsic fraud being either:
- Certiorari under Rule 65 or
- Habeas corpus under Rule 102
Rule 126 Search and Seizure
1. An application for search warrant shall be filed with the following:
- Any court within whose territorial jurisdiction a crime was committed.
- For compelling reasons stated in the application, any court within the judicial region where the crime was committed if the place of the commission of the crime is known, or any court within the judicial region where the warrant shall be enforced.
2. If the criminal action has already been filed
à The application shall only be made in the court where the criminal action is pending
3. Section 2, Rule 126 is new. It fixes the venue in the filing of applications for the issuance of a search warrant.
à Section 2 modifies the Malaloan guidelines (Malaloan vs. CA) which allow any judge to issue a search warrant prior to the filing of a criminal action, and even if one had already been filed, any judge for compelling reasons may still issue a search warrant.
4. The officer must forthwith deliver the property seized to the judge who issued the warrant, together with a true inventory thereof duly verified under oath.
5. 10 days after issuance of the search warrant
à The issuing judge shall ascertain if the return has been made, and if none, shall summon the person to whom the warrant was issued and require him to explain why no return was made
6. If the return has been made
à The judge shall
- Ascertain whether section 11 of this Rule has been complied with and
- Require that the property seized be delivered to him
7. The return on the search warrant shall be filed and kept by the custodian of the log book on search warrants who shall enter therein the date of the return, the result, and other actions of the judge.
à A violation of this section shall constitute contempt of court.
8. A motion to quash a search warrant and/or to suppress evidence obtained thereby
à May be filed in and acted upon only by the court where the action has been instituted
9. If no criminal action has been instituted
à The motion may be filed in and resolved by the court that issued the search warrant (if such court failed to resolve the motion and a criminal case is subsequently filed in another court, the motion shall be resolved by the latter court
10. Section 14 is intended to resolve what is perceived as conflicting decisions on where to file a motion to quash a search warrant or to suppress evidence seized by virtue thereof.
* The following pages are culled from Justice Oscar Herrera’s book on the relevant amendments in the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure and from Justice Jose Feria’s article in the Lawyer’s Review (February, 2001) on the Notable Amendments in Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
** An Act To Establish Periods of Prescription for Violations Penalized By Special Laws and Municipal Ordinances and to Provide When Prescription Shall Begin To Run.
Remedial Law (Criminal Procedure)
Memory Aid – Annex A
Ateneo Central Bar Operations 2001