Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
If he is authorized to do so in writing
2.
Concubinage
NOTE: these crimes shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the
offended spouse
RULE: PROSECUTOR CANNOT PROSECUTE THE CASE WHERE NO
COMPLAINT IS FILED BY THE OFFENDED SPOUSE
If the offended party has consented to the offense or has pardoned the
offenders (express/implied)
3.
Seduction
3.
Abduction
3.
Acts of lasciviousness
SAME RULE: cannot be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the:
1.
Offended party even if minor, still has the right to initiate
2.
Parents
3.
Grandparents or legal guardian
4.
State
6. Defamation
-- should be the imputation of the offenses of adultery, concubinage, seduction,
abduction, and acts of lasciviousness
SIMILAR RULE: filed by the offended party
V COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION
Complaint, defined.
Subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer, or other public officer
Thus they may not appeal the dismissal of a criminal case or the acquittal
ONLY the civil aspect
In so doing, the private offended party who appeals must prosecute in his
own personal capacity
So how then can a dismissal or acquittal of the criminal case be appealed?
Only the OSG can bring and/or defend actions on behalf of the
Republic or represent the people or the State in criminal proceedings pending in the
Supreme Court and the CA
Information, defined.
Accusation in writing
allegation of facts must be preferred over the defective information. Allegation in the
information, not the technical name given by the prosecutor.
Question: What happens if there is a mistake on the name of the accused?
Answer: A mistake in the name of the accused is not equivalent, and does not
necessarily amount to, a mistake in the identity of the accused especially when
sufficient evidence is adduced to show that the accused is pointed to as one of the
perpetrators of the crime. However, the identity must be proven.
In offenses against property it is enough that the property is described with such
particularity as to properly identify the offense charged.
Statement of the qualifying and aggravating circumstances:
Even if an aggravating circumstance had been proven, but was not alleged,
courts will not award exemplary damages!
Amendment is prohibited
Which does not charge another offense different or distinct from that
charged in the original one
if it appears at any time before judgment that a mistake has been made in
charging the proper offense
Accused shall not be discharged if there appears good cause to detain him.
After the proper information is filed, it shall dismiss the original case
in such a case, the court shall dismiss the original complaint or information
once the new one charging the proper offense is filed
substantial change
new information involves a different offense which does not include or is not
necessarily included in the original charge, hence, accused cannot claim double
jeopardy!
Amended information entails:
the rule on implied institution of the civil action does not apply before the
filing of the criminal action or information --- when there is no criminal case yet
against the respondents as when the Ombudsman is still in the process of finding
probable cause to prosecute the respondent
Civil liability arising from the crime the governing law is rules of Criminal
Procedure not rules of civil procedure!
Exception: civil action other than the one arising from the crime is not suspended
by the commencement of the criminal action because they may proceed
independently of the criminal proceedings.
Reservation of the civil action should be made before the prosecution starts
presenting its evidence!
Note: after the criminal action is commenced, the separate civil action arising
therefrom cannot be instituted until final judgment has been entered in the
criminal action!
If the civil action was commenced before the institution of the criminal
action, the civil action shall be suspended in whatever stage it may be found
before judgment on the merits, once the criminal action is filed. The suspension shall
last until final judgment is rendered in the criminal action
Exception: does not apply to independent civil action since they are distinct
and separate from the civil action arising from the offense committed
If the accused dies after arraignment and during the pendency of the
criminal action
the civil liability arising from the crime extinguished (but this does not preclude the
offended party from filing a separate civil action based on other sources of obligation
may be continued)
Dies before arraignment case dismissed but the offended party may file
the proper civil action
Death prior to final judgment terminates criminal liability and only civil
liability directly arising from and based solely on the offense committed (again, does
not bar for filing a separate civil action on other sources of obligation)
Provided, there is a fining in a final judgment in the criminal action that the
act or omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist!
Note: when the trial court acquits or dismisses the case on the ground of lack of
evidence to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, the civil action is not automatically
extinguished since liability on civil action can be determined based on mere
preponderance of evidence!
Hence, there is a requirement to state whether the prosecution absolutely failed to
prove his guilt or merely failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt in either case it
shall determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability might arise did not
exist
Example: may be acquitted but if his negligence is proved by mere preponderance of
evidence, he may still be civilly liable
Elementary rule: payment of civil liability does not extinguish criminal liability
PREJUDICIAL QUESTION, defined
which is similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the criminal case
resolution of which
the issue in the civil case needs to be resolved first before it is determined
whether or not the criminal case should proceed or whether or not there should be, in
the criminal case, a judgment of acquittal or conviction
the issue raised in the civil action is determinative of the guilt of the accused
in the criminal aspect
the issue in the civil case is determinative of the issue in the criminal case;
the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may
proceed
it follows that if the resolution of the issue in the civil action will not determine
the criminal responsibility of the accused in the criminal action based on the same
facts, the civil case does not involve a prejudicial question. Neither is there a
prejudicial question if the civil and the criminal action can proceed independently of
each other, that is, the criminal action can proceed without waiting for the resolution
of the issues in the civil case
Reason: to avoid two conflicting decisions
REQUISITES:
1.
civil case involves facts intimately related to those upon which the criminal
prosecution would be based;
2.
in the resolution of the issues raised in the civil case, the guilt or
innocence of the accused would necessarily be determined
3.
jurisdiction to try said questions must be lodged in another tribunal
Not a prejudicial question if:
1.
both cases are criminal
2.
both civil
3.
both cases are administrative
4.
one case is administrative and other civil
5.
one case is administrative and other criminal
6.
criminal case was instituted prior to the civil case!
Effect of the prejudicial question:
1.
suspension for the criminal action may be filed
2.
the criminal case may be suspended pending the final determination of the
issues in the civil case this is the exception on the general rule that if the civil action
was commenced before the institution of the criminal action, the civil action shall be
suspended in whatever stage it may be found before judgment on the merits, once
the criminal action is commenced the suspension shall last until final judgment is
rendered in the criminal action
3.
accords a civil case a preferential treatment and constitutes an exception to
the general rule that the civil action shall be suspended when the criminal action is
instituted
4.
however, suspension does not include dismissal therefore, double jeopardy
cannot be invoke
Where and when to file the petition for suspension
1.
does not need to wait for the criminal case to be filed in court, it is sufficient
that there be previously instituted civil case it may be filed in the stage of
preliminary investigation
2.
the petition for suspension should be filed in the criminal case not in the civil
case since what is
3.
suspended is the criminal case right?? Lol
4.
where? in the office of the prosecutor conducting the preliminary
investigation
5.
any time before the prosecution rests
Case illustrations:
Preliminary Investigation
Preliminary Examination
by the prosecutor
by the judge
purpose: whether the accused should be purpose: to determine probable cause for
held for trial or if he should be released the issuance of a warrant of arrest
Nature: executive, since it is part of the Nature: judicial
prosecutors job
Proper arrest
Case
Facts
Ruling
(People v. More than two days before the marijuana is inadmissible since it
Aminnudin) arrest, the officers received a tip was not incident to a lawful arrest.
that the accused was on board an The accused was not, at the
identified vessel and carrying moment of his arrest, committing a
marijuana;
acting
on
the crime nor was it shown that he was
information they waited for the about to do so or that he had just
accused and approached him as he done so. He was just descending the
descended the ship and arrested ship; no outward indication that
him.
called for his arrest. To all
appearances, he was like any other
passengers innocently disembarking
from the vessel. The officers could
have obtained a warrant since they
had reasonable time to apply
(People v. The accused were arrested while Invalid arrest made merely on the
Molina)
inside a pedicab despite the basis of reliable information that the
absence of any outward indications persons arrested were carrying
of a crime being committed.
marijuana
(Malacat v.
A warrantless arrest cannot be
CA).
justified where no crime is being
committed at the time of the arrest
because no crime may be inferred
from the fact that the eyes of the
person arrested were moving fast
and looking at every person passing
by
People v. There was a telephone call from an The requirements of a warrantless
Mengote.
alleged informer that suspicious arrest were not complied with. There
looking men were at a street was no offense which could have
corner. The operatives dispatched been suggested by the acts of
to the place, they saw three men Mengote of looking from side to side
who was looking from side to side while holding his abdomen. These
clutching his abdomen. The are obviously not sinister acts. He
operatives approached the men was not skulking in the shadows but
and introduce themselves as walking in the clear light of day. By
policemen. Two of them tried to run no stretch of the imagination could it
away but the attempt was foiled. have been inferred from these acts
The search yielded a revolver in the that an offense had just been
possession of Mengote and a fan committed, or was at least being
knife in the pocket of another.
attempted in their presence.
People v Two men who were arrested told the facts and circumstances did not
Laguio.
the officers that they knew of a manifest any suspicious behavior on
scheduled delivery of shabu by the part of WW that would
their employer WW. The police reasonably invite the attention of the
operatives proceeded to the place police. He was merely walking from
and found WW who came out of the apartment and was about to
the apartment towards a parked enter a parked car when the police
car, the officers approached him, operatives arrested him, frisked and
introduced themselves and upon searched
his
person
and
hearing that he was WW, commanded him to open the
immediately he frisked him and compartment of the car. He was not
asked him to open the back committing any visible offense then.
compartment of the car. When Therefore, there can be no valid
frisked, an unlicensed pistol with warrantless arrest in flagrante
live ammunitions was found inside delicto. It is settled that reliable
his pocket. The operatives information alone, absent any overt
searched the car and found shabu, act indicative of a felonious
unlicensed pistol, etc
enterprise in the presence and within
the view of the arresting officers, is
not sufficient to constitute probable
cause that would justify an in
flagrante delicto arrest.
Case
Facts
Ruling
People v. The accused was carrying a woven
Anita
buri-like plastic bag which appeared
Claudio
to contain camote tops, boarded a
bus. Overt act: instead of placing
People v Two robbers divested the passengers The warrantless arrest of the
Acol.
of a jeepney of their belongings accused was sustained by the
including the jacket of one passenger. Court as well within the hot pursuit
The passengers immediately sought exception.
the help of police officers which formed
a team to track down the suspects.
One of the passengers, who went with
the police officers, saw one of the
robbers casually walking in the same
vicinity and wearing his jacket.
People v The police station received a report of
based on their knowledge
Gerente. a mauling incident, right away the of the circumstances of the death
officers went to the crime scene and of the victim and the report of an
found a piece of wood with blood eyewitness, in arresting the
stains, a hollow block and two pouches accused, the officers had personal
of marijuana. A witness told the police knowledge of facts leading them to
that the accused was one of those who believe that it was the accused
killed the victim. They proceeded to the who was one of the perpetrators of
house of the accused and arrested the crime.
him.
Case
Abelita III
v. Doria
WHAT:
shooting
incident
Facts
Judgment
A team was dispatched to investigate. The petitioners act of trying to get
The investigation disclosed that a away, coupled with the incident
victim was wounded and that the report which they investigated, is
witness tagged the petitioner as the enough to raise a reasonable
one involved and that he had just left suspicion on the part of the police
the scene of the crime. After tracking authorities.
down the petitioner, he was invited to
the police headquarters but the
petitioner sped off.
1.
Private respondent filed an action for frustrated parricide, then several
months after, she filed another action for the declaration of the nullity of their
marriage. The petitioner filed an urgent motion to suspend the proceedings. Ruling:
no prejudicial question since the criminal action was first filed before the civil case.
For a prejudicial question to exist, the civil action must be instituted first before the
filing of the criminal action. Moreover, the issue in the annulment of marriage is not
similar or intimately related to the issue in the criminal case for parricide.
2.
Respondent contracted his first marriage. Without said marriage having
been annulled, nullified, or terminated, the same respondent contracted a second
marriage with the petitioner. Based on petitioners complaint-affidavit, information for
bigamy was filed against respondent. Sometime thereafter, respondent initiated a civil
action for the judicial declaration of absolute nullity of his first marriage. Respondent
then filed a motion to suspend the proceedings in the criminal case for bigamy. Issue:
whether the subsequent filing of a civil action for declaration of nullity of a previous
marriage constitutes a prejudicial question to a criminal case for bigamy. Ruling: the
civil action for declaration of the nullity of the marriage was not determinative of the
issue in the bigamy case, the Court placed emphasis on Art40 of the Family Code
which requires a prior judicial declaration of nullity of a previous marriage before a
party may remarry. Without it, the first marriage is presumed to be subsisting. Thus,
any decision in the civil action for nullity would not erase the fact that respondent
entered into a second marriage during the subsistence of a first marriage. Therefore,
a decision in the civil case was not essential to the determination of the criminal
charge not a prejudicial question.
CHAPTER IV PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION
Is the respondent probably guilty and therefore, should go to trial?
Nature: INQUIRY PROCEEDING / Judicial Proceeding
Purpose: TO DETERMINE whether there is SUFFICIENT GROUND to engender a
well-founded belief that a crime has been committed and the respondent is probably
guilty thereof, and should be held for trial
Function: executive not a judicial function
does not pronounce guilt (only the probability of guilt which would lead the
accused to stand trial)
The determination lies within the discretion of the prosecuting officers after
conducting a preliminary investigation.
to effect release, he may apply for bail since he is not yet charged in court
After plea has been entered/after arraignment:
-deemed to have waived the absence of preliminary investigation
Remand to the prosecutor:
if the accused wants a preliminary investigation, the court will not dismiss,
BUT remand the case to the prosecutor so that investigation may be conducted
without warrant
WHERE:
from the time the Inquest Officer receives the complaint and referral
documents
- after filing, within 5 days from the time he learns of its filing
Duty of the Inquest Prosecutor:
1.
to determine if the detained person has been arrested lawfully in accordance
with Rule 113, Sec 5 (a) and (b)
a.
he may examine the arresting officers on the arrest
2.
should it be found that it was not in accordance with Rule113, inquest
prosecutor shall not proceed with the inquest proceedings. And recommend the
release of the detainee
** see the table at the back/below
Inquest must pertain to the offense for which the arrest was made
Case: Beltran v. People
Facts: Beltran was arrested without a warrant for inciting to sedition based on a
speech he gave. Second inquest was based on rebellion.
Ruling: Inquest proceedings are proper only when the accused has been lawfully
arrested without a warrant. The officers arrested Beltran for inciting to sedition and
not for rebellion, therefore the prosecutor could only have conducted an inquest for
inciting to sedition and no other! Second inquest invalid
STEPS ON PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION:
*initial step: filing of the complaint with the prosecutor
(an affidavit of complaint)
Contains:
1.
address of the respondent
2.
affidavits of his witnesses
3.
other supporting documents
within 10days from receipt of subpoena, he is required to submit his counteraffidavit with other documents
*reply-affidavit from complainant; rejoinder-affidavit from respondent
no right to cross-examine
dispensable
the Ombudsman may file the information or he may direct another assistant
prosecutor
aggrieved party may file within 15 days from receipt of the resolution
Appeal
verified comment may be filed by the adverse party, 15 days from receipt of
appeal
aggrieved party may file a motion for suspension of arraignment; Rule 116,
11(c) arraignment shall be suspended if a petition for review of the resolution of the
prosecutor is pending
IF an information has been filed and accused has already been arraigned
before the filing of the appeal, the appeal shall not be given due course
IF, accused has been arraigned after the filing of the petition, any
arraignment shall not bar the Secretary of Justice to review
Courts are not empowered to substitute their own judgment, only that of the
investigating prosecutor and ultimately that of the Secretary of Justice
a.
Fails to establish probable cause
(Judge may dismiss)
b.
Establishes probable cause
(Judge shall issue warrant of arrest)
(If lawfully arrested issue a commitment order)
c.
Engenders a doubt as to the existence of probable cause
(Order to submit additional evidence)
When warrant of arrest is not necessary:
1.
Accused is under detention pursuant to a lawful warrantless arrest, and a
complaint or information has already been filed
2.
Offense is punishable by fine
3.
Case is subject to the Rules on Summary Procedure (inquest?)
BAR Question: Whether the TRIAL COURT may refuse to grant the motion filed
by the Provincial Fiscal (upon instructions of the Sec of Justice) and insist on
the arraignment and trial on the merits.
Answer: YES, the court may deny the motion and require that the trial on the
merits proceed for the proper determination of the case. Once a criminal
complaint or information is filed in court, any disposition of the case or dismissal or
acquittal or conviction of the accused rests within the exclusive jurisdiction of the trial
court. The fiscal or even the Secretary of Justice cannot impose his opinion on the
trial court since it is the best and sole judge on what to do with the case before it. The
judge of the trial court is not bound to rely solely on the resolution of the fiscal; he
must make a personal evaluation of the case, and satisfy himself that there is indeed
a probable cause to issue a warrant of arrest or a commitment order. Further, judge is
required to positively state that the evidence presented was insufficient for a prima
facie case. It must include the discussion of the merits and state the reasons for
granting the motion to withdraw.
Chapter V. ARREST, SEARCH, AND SEIZURE
How made
Conduct investigations
Make arrests
Perform searches and seizures of persons and their belongings
Must be exercised within the boundaries of the law
accused
PROBABLE CAUSE on ARREST
1.
Personal knowledge by the arresting officer
2.
of facts and circumstances
3.
that the arrestee is indeed the perpetrator of the criminal act
QUESTION: What if the act of the officer does not amount to an arrest; will the
requirements on probable cause and personal knowledge stay?
ANSWER: No. It will not be pre-requisites to the legality of the said arrest.
REQUISITES FOR ISSUANCE OF A WARRANT OF ARREST; judges duties
(While on preliminary investigation, it was more on the prosecutors duty)
1.
it shall be issued upon finding of probable cause
Case: Soliven v. Makasiar this provision does not mandatorily require the judge to
personally examine the complainant and her witnesses. He may opt to:
1.
personally evaluate the report and supporting documents submitted by the
prosecutor; or
2.
disregard the prosecutors report and require the submission of supporting
affidavits of witnesses
but such personal examination is not mandatory and indispensable in
the determination of probable cause; the necessity arises only when there is an
utter failure of the evidence to show the existence of probable cause;
otherwise, the judge may rely on the report of the investigating prosecutor
that would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that a
crime has been committed or it was likely to be committed
however, the Court found that the judges finding of lack of probable
cause was premised only on the complainants and her witnesses absence during
the hearing scheduled by the judge for the judicial determination of the probable
cause
Only when there is utter failure to show the existence of probable cause
He should not rely solely on the report of the investigating prosecutor but
must also evaluate the documentary evidence and affidavits, and stenographic notes
The officer also has the duty to deliver the person arrested to the nearest police
station or jail without necessary delay.
When the person to be arrested is INSIDE a BUILDING
1.
The officer is authorized
2.
To break into any building or enclosure
3.
In case he is refused admittance
4.
After announcing his authority and purpose
5.
If necessary, he may break out from said place to liberate himself
LAWFUL WARRANTLESS ARREST*
1.
in flagrante delicto in his presence, the person to be arrested, is actually
committing or is attempting to commit an offense
a.
citizens arrest is allowed
2.
hot pursuit an offense has just been committed, and he has probable
cause to believe based on personal knowledge of facts/circumstances that the
person to be arrested has committed it
3.
escapee when the person to be arrested is a prisoner who has escaped
*the exception to the general rule that a warrant of arrest is required before an arrest
is made
WHAT is CITIZENS ARREST?
d.
Note: a warrantless arrest made, one year after the offense was allegedly committed
is an illegal arrest!
Does not require the officers to personally witness the commission of the
offense; PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE must be based on PROBABLE CAUSE
actual belief or reasonable grounds of suspicion.
Reasonable ground:
1.
Based on actual facts
a.
Supported by circumstances sufficiently strong in themselves to create
probable cause of guilt
b.
Probable cause with good faith
Method of arrest WITHOUT a WARRANT
1.
Arrest by an officer; he shall inform:
a.
Of his authority
b.
Cause of his arrest
Summon assistance
Legality of the arrest affects only the jurisdiction of the court over the
person
2.
determine if the act or omission from which the civil liability might arise did
not exist
Note: verdict of acquittal is immediately final!
Rule on duplicitous complaint or information; two or more offenses in a single
information or complaint 2-in-1
Waiver
May be convicted for as many offenses as are charged and proved, and
impose penalty for each offense!
Valid!
given by the clerk of court personally to the accused or thru his bondsman or
warden and counsel
Entry of judgment
Promulgation of Judgment
1.
by reading in the presence of the accused and any judge
2.
for light offense in the presence of counsel or representative
3.
may be promulgated by the clerk of court if the judge is absent or outside the
province or city
4.
if the accused is confined or detained in another province or city, may be
promulgated by the executive judge of the RTC having jurisdiction over the place of
confinement or detention
c.
1.
2.
3.
4.
i.
ii.
iii.
process
Any party
Runs the risk of being sentenced to a penalty higher than that imposed by
the trial court
Who may institute proceedings before the CA or SC?
reverse the trial courts decision on grounds other than those that the parties
raised as errors
EFFECT of appeal on civil case:
2.
nor raise in the appellate court any question of law or of fact that was not
raised in the court below
3.
or which was not within the issue raised in their pleading
WHERE and HOW to appeal?
a.
RTC cases decided by MTC
1.
Notice of appeal served to the RTC
2.
filed with the court which rendered the judgment
3.
serve a copy upon the adverse party (personal service)
Except: judgment is favorable to others; this time it will bind the others who
did not appeal
the civil action must be one arising from the offense charged and which is
instituted in the said criminal action
IF, civil action has been waived, reserved, or instituted separately the
provisional remedy may not be availed of. Instead, it may be applied for in the
separate civil action
Who may avail? offended party
What are these provisional remedies?
1.
Preliminary attachment
2.
Preliminary injunction
3.
Receivership
4.
Replevin
5.
Support pendente lite
When preliminary attachment is available