CRIMINAL PROCEDURE Pineda 2006 SEC.

1 Institution of Criminal Actions COMMENT: Institution of criminal actions (ICA) For purposes of ICA, the offenses are divided into 2 groups: 1. Those requiring preliminary investigation: Offenses punishable by a penalty of at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day of imprisonment

2. Those which do not require preliminary investigation: Offenses punishable by lesser penalty SECOND GROUP (Penalty imposable is lower than 4 years 2 months and 1 day imprisonment) Offenses shall be instituted by FILING THE COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION DIRECTLY with the Municipal Trial Courts (MTC), Municipal Circuit Trial Courts (MCTC), Office of the Prosecutors

FIRST GROUP Offenses shall be instituted by the FILING OF THE COMPLAINT with PROPER OFFICER for the purpose of conducting the requisite preliminary investigation. Proper officers: City and Provincial Prosecutors

In MANILA and other chartered cities, the COMPLAINT shall be FILED with the OFFICE OF THE CITY PROSECUTOR unless OTHERWISER PROVIDED IN THEIR CHARTERS. Under the OLD RULE:

Cases triable by Municipal Courts were not subject to preliminary investigation because the involved ONLY MINOR OFFENSES or MISDEMEANORS. The penalty then did not exceed 6 months imprisonment and/or fine of 200 (B.P. 129) (R.A. No. 7691) the jurisdiction of the lower courts was further expanded to include crimes punishable with imprisonment not exceeding 6 years regardless of the amount of fine. These cases are not minor cases, yet they were not then covered by the Rule on preliminary investigation.

Under the NEW RULE: Sec. 1 x x x (RULE 112 Rules of Criminal Procedure) Except as provided in section 7 of this rule, a preliminary investigation is required to be conducted before filing of

a complaint or information for an offense where the penalty prescribed by law is at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day without regard to the fine EXCEPTION to this Rule is SECTION 7, RULE 112 refers to the arrest of a person without warrant where only inquest is required.

Interruption of the Period Of Prescription Rule The institution of a criminal action whether before the Office of the Prosecutor or a Municipal Judge interrupts the running of the period of prescription. 19 SCRA 494

PEOPLE VS OLARTE Held: -

The issue of prescription discloses that there are 2 lines of decisions following differing criteria in determining whether prescription of crimes has been interrupted. ONE LINE OF PRECEDENTS holds that the filling of the complaint with justice of peace (or municipal judge) does not interrupt the course of the prescriptive term and cases cited therein. ANOTHER DECISIONS declares that to produce interruption the complaint or information must have been filed in the proper court that has jurisdiction to try the case on its merits. CONCLUSION that the TRUE DOCTRINE is, and should be, the one established by the decisions HOLDING that the FILING of the complaint in the Municipal Court, even if it be merely for purposes of preliminary examination or investigation should and does interrupt the period of prescription of criminal responsibility, even if the court where the complaint or information is filed cannot try the case on merits. REASONS buttress this conclusion: A. FIRST, the text of ART. 91 of the Revised Penal Code, in declaring that the period of prescription shall be interrupted by the filling of the complaint is filed in the court for preliminary examination or investigation merely or for action on the merits.

B. SECOND, even if the court where the complaint or information is filed may
only proceed to investigate the case, its actuations already represents the initial step of the proceedings against the offender. C. THIRD, it is unjust to deprive the injured party of the right to obtain vindication on account of delays that are not under his control. All that the victim of the offense may do on his part to initiate the prosecution is to file the requisite complaint. It is no argument that ART. 91 also expresses that the interrupted prescription shall commence to run again when such proceedings terminate without the accuses being convicted or acquitted

Exception To The Rule SPECIAL LAW provides that the offense shall not be terminated except upon the filing of a complaint or information in court, then the special law shall prevail. Under ACT NO. 3326 as amended by ACT NO. 3763, the period of prescription for violation of special laws and municipal ordinances is interrupted only upon filing of the complaint or information in court.

Section 2 of said acts reads Prescription shall begin to run from the day of the commission of the violation of the law and if the same be not known at the time from the discovery thereof and the institution of the judicial proceedings for its investigation and punishment. The prescription shall be interrupted when proceedings are instituted against the guilty person and shall begin to run again if the proceedings are dismissed for reasons not constituting the jeopardy. However, in People vs Ramos, 88 SCRA 486, it was held that ACT NO. 3326 is not applicable when the special law provides for its own prescriptive period.

Criminal Prosecutions, As A Rule, Not To Be Enjoined; Exceptions DOMONDON VS SANDIGANBAYAN Held: RULE: Criminal prosecutions may not be restrained either through a preliminary or final injunction or writ of prohibition EXCEPTIONS: A. To afford adequate protection to the constitutional rights of the accused B. When necessary to the orderly administration of justice or to avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions C. When there is a prejudicial question which is sub-judice D. When the acts of the officers are without or in excess of authority E. Where the prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation F. When double jeopardy is clearly apparent G. Where the court has no jurisdiction over the offense H. Where it is a case of persecution rather than prosecution I. J. Where the charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust or vengeance When there is clearly no prima facie case against the accused and a motion to quash on that ground has been denied 328 SCRA 292

K. Preliminary injunction has been issued by the SC to prevent the threatened unlawful arrest of petitioners Certiorari Not Allowed Certiorari is not a remedy to restrain prosecution of a case unless there is grave abuse of discretion

SEC. 2 THE COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION COMMENT: Form of Complaint Or Information In the filing of an Affidavit-Complaint in the Prosecutors Office, the complaining party is referred to as COMPLAINANT and the opposite party as the RESPONDENT. Once the case is filed in the court, the accusation is made in the form of an information. The plaintiff is now the People of the Philippines. The complainant is now merely referred to as complaining witness or party REASON for this is that when a crime is committed the offended party is the People of the Philippines. A crime, when committed, disturbs the peace of the entire community. COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION must be in writing An oral complaint cannot be filed in court If there are several respondents, the prosecutor must charge all who appear to be responsible for the commission of the offense involved. He (Prosecutor) has NO discretion to drop some respondents from the complaint or information who have participated in the commission of the crime except when one or more of them are taken and qualified as state witness for the State.

Effect If Action Is Not Commenced In The Name Of The People This insufficiency is just a defect in form and it may be cured at any staged of the trial

SEC. 3 COMPLAINT DEFINED - A sworn 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. It is an accusation in writing filed with the court by the prosecutor. It need not be sworn. A certain certification is needed.

Status of Complaint Not Under Oath In People vs Palabao it was held the court acquires no jurisdiction over the case In People vs Cayosa does not necessarily render it valid In People vs Historillo merely a defect of form which does not affect the substantial rights of the defendant on merits. On Dec 1, 2000, the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure clearly and definitely defines that a complaint is a sworn written statement, meaning, under oath. Thus, the rule returns as back to the Palabao ruling. On Jun 29, 2005, the Cayosa and Historillo cases were cited as authority that absence of an oath is merely a defect in form and not jurisdiction. The reason

advanced being that defect in form is not one of the grounds for a motion to quash under Sec. 3, Rule 117 Observation: The absence if the oath need not be mentioned specifically as among the grounds. It is already included in Sec. 3, b of Rule 117, That the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged or the person of the accused. The rule stating that a complaint is a SWORN WRITTEN STATEMENT is meant to be followed and should be disregard to prevent perjurious statements in complaints. The purpose of the rule would be frustrated if a complaint is not sworn. Harassment cases will proliferate SEC. 4 INFORMATION DEFINED An accusation in writing charging a person with an offense, subscribed bythe prosecutor and filed with the court. COMMENT: Distinction Between Complaint And Information While a complaint and information have similarities and common ends, that is, to prosecute the accused for the crime charged, they have some fine distinctions: Information It is an accusation in writing filed by the prosecutor in court. It need not be sworn It is subscribed only by the prosecutor

Complaint It is a sworn statement. If it is not under oath, court acquires no jurisdiction It is subscribed by A. The offended party B. Any peace officer or C. Other public officers charged with the enforcement of the law violated It can be filed in court or in the Office of the Prosecutor for preliminary investigation (Sec. 3, Rule 110)

It is always directly filed in court (Sec. 4, Rule 110)

In case of variance between the complaint filed by the offended party and the information in crimes against chastity, the complaint controls Certificate of Non-forum Shopping In Criminal Cases A certificate of non-forum shopping is required only in CIVIL COMPLAINTS under Section 5, Rule 7 of the Revised Ruled of Civil Procedure such certificate is not necessary in criminal cases and distinct causes of action. May Mandamus Lie Against A Prosecutor To Compel Him To File An Information? Yes GEN. RULE in Sanchez vs Demetriou, It is a matter of discretion, hence he (prosecutor) cannot be compelled by the mandamus

EXCEPTION in Tam Wing Tak vs Makasiar, mandamus will lie to compel the prosecutor to file an information when he refused to do so in spite of the prima facie evidence of guilt against the respondent. SEC. 5 WHO MUST PROSECUTE CRIMINAL ACTIONS COMMENT: Officer In Control of the Prosecution Of Criminal Actions - All criminal actions commenced by a complaint or information shall be prosecuted under the direction and control of the prosecutor. - The prosecutor when PRESENT and AVAILABLE, may delegate to a competent private prosecutor the conduct of the prosecution of the case where there is a civil liablity arising from the court but subject to his control and supervision. PEOPLE VS BERIALES Held: In the present case, although the private prosecutor had previously been authorized by the special counsel to present the evidence for the prosecution, nevertheless, in view of the absence of the City Fiscal at the hearing, it cannot be said that the prosecution of the case was uder control of the City Fiscal. It follows that the evidence presented by the private prosecutor at said hearing could not be considered as evidence for the plaintiff, the People of the Philippines. There was, therefore, no evidence at all to speak of which could have been the basis of the decision of the trial court. As aptly observed by the SolGen, to permit such prosecution of a criminal case by the private prosecutor with the fiscal in absentia can set an obnoxious precedent that can be taken advantage of by some indolent members of the prosecuting arm of the government as well as those who are oblivious of their bounden duty to see to it not only that the guilty should be convicted but that the innocent should be acquitted In the Bravo Case, The Beriales Case Was Not Applied BRAVO VS CA Held: Petitioner contends that there was no fiscal who was physically present during the proceedings of the libel case since the entire evidence for the prosecution was presented by a private prosecutor who had no express authority from the fiscal to represent the State. There by rendering the entire trial invali as enunciated in the case of Bariales. Petitioner is in error. The case of Bariales is not applicable to the case at bar because in said case, the city fiscal did not appear in all of the trial courts proceedings. In the case at bar, it cannot be said that the trial fiscal never appeared during the trial of the said case. Sec. 5 of Rule 110, Rules of Court, requires that all criminal actions shall be prosecuted under the direction and control of the prosecutor. 208 SCRA 531 70 SCRA 361

RATIONALE: To prevent malicious or unforced prosecutions by private persons

Exception To The Rule That Public Prosecutor Must be Present In case of A. Heavy work schedule of the public prosecutor or B. In the event of lack of public prosecutors, the private prosecutor, may be authorized in writing by the Chief of the Prosecutor Office or the Regional State Prosecutor to prosecute the case subject to the approval of the court. The new amendment must be distinguished for the provision of Sec. 7, Rule 112 (Preliminary Investigation) where 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. Sec. 7, Rule 112 refers to the FILING OF THE COMPLAINT while Sec. 5, Rule 110 (1st paragraph) refers to the prosecution of the case by a private prosecutor. The public prosecutor may turn over the actual prosecution of the criminal case, in the exercise of his discretion but he may at any time take over the actual conduct of the trial.

Prosecution Of The Crimes of Adultery and Concubinage Adultery and Concubinage are PRIVATE CRIMES, meaning, the prosecutor cannot on his own initiate, prosecute these crimes. Unless the offended has filed a complaint of purpose. REASON: The offended party may choose to suffer the outrage in silence. He or she may not want to be scandalized by the public revelation of the infidelity of his/her spouse that is bound to arise and explode as a consequence of the public trial. In recent cases, the signing of the complaint by the offended spouse is no longer jurisdictional In People vs Mandia, substantial compliance is sufficient If there is no sufficient compliance, the court acquires no jurisdiction over the person of the parties nor over the subject matter. 106 PHIL 1008

PEOPLE VS ARANDA Pg. 17-18

Offended Party In Adultery Case Must Be a Lawful Husband of the Accused The supposed offended party must have the status, capacity or legal representation to do so at the time of the filling of the criminal action. Marital relationship must still be subsisting If it does not exsit anymore as when the foreign husband has divorced the Filipino wife abroad, the complaining party could not be considered as an offended spouse. Hence, the complaint filed must be dismissed.

The guilty Parties If Alive Must be Both Prosecuted The offended party must include in the compliant not only his/her spouse but also the concubine or paramour of his/her spouse. He/she cannot pardon one of the guilty partners and prosecute only the other. Either he/ she pardons all or pardons none.

If the offended party consented to the act committed by his/her spouse, the crime cannot also be prosecuted

PEOPLE VS SCHNECKENBURGER 73 phil 413 Pg. 19-20 Prosecution Of Cases of Seduction, Abduction And Acts of Lasciviousness These 3 crimes are considered PRIVATE CRIMES They cannot be prosecuted except upon the complaint by the following in the order they are enumerated: A. Offended party who is a woman B. Her parents C. Her grandparents or D. Guardian The offenses cannot also be prosecuted if the offender has been pardoned by any of the above persons, as the case may be. BASIS of 3rd paragraph of Rule 110: Article 344 of the RPC except that rape should now be deleted as it was reclassified as a crime against perosns. (RA No. 8353: Anti Rape Law of 1997) The complaint required in said Art. 344 is merely a condition precedent to the exercise by the proper authorities of the power to prosecute the guilty parties. Such condition has been imposed out of consideration for the oiffended women and her family who might prefer to suffer the outrage in silence rather than go through the scandal of public trial.

Affidavit of Dessitance, Not a Ground For Dismissal

An affidavit of desistance is not a ground for the dismissal of an action, once it has been instituted in court. A private complainant loses the right or absolute privilege to decide whether the rape charge should proceed, because the case was already filed and must therefore continue to be heard by the trial court.

Effect of Death or Incapacity of Offended Part; State may file Complaint; Condition If the offended party died or becomes incapacitated before she could file the complaint and she had no known parents, grandparents, or guardians, the State shall initiate the criminal action

Can An offended Party Who Is a Minor Initiate The Case of Seduction, Abduction or Acts of Lasciviousness? YES, unless she is at the same time incompetent or incapacitated to do so. A minor is a person below 18 years (RA No. 8353 or Anti-Rape Law of 1997)

Effect, If Minor Fails To File Complaint Her parents, grandparents, or guardian may file the complaint. Their right to file the complaint in their own behalves shall be EXCLUSIVE of all other persons, that is, no other relatives or persons can exercise right. Exercised by representatives shall be in the order enumerated, except that if they are not all available, the State itself shall be the one to file the complaint

Effect, If Offended Party is of Legal Age At least 18 years, the parents, grandparents, guardian has no authority to file the complaint. However, even though she is of legal age, if she is incapacitated by reason of insanity or physical incapacity the complaint file by her father is considered valid.

Complaint Referred To In The Rule; Information Need Not Be Signed And Verified By complainant If the offended party or her parents, grandparents or guardian fails to file the complaint, the information filed by the p[ublic prosecutor is sufficient. It need not be signed by them. The complaint signed by the offended party and her mother which was adopted by the Fiscal after the investigation is sufficient The complaint need not be presented as an exhibit if it is part if the record. The court can take judicial notice

Rule If Different In Criminal Actions For Adultery And Concubinage The offended himself/herself has the EXCLUSIVE right to determine whetehrt or not to expose the infidelity of his/her spouse. Reputatiion may be considered as more important than the pains caused by the outrage The Principle of Parens Patriae found in the 3rd paragraph of Sec. 5 Rule 110, applies only to seduction, abduction, and acts of lasciviousness and not to adultery and concubinage

Criminal Action For Defamation Based On the Imputation of Any of the Abovementioned Offenses -

They cannot be prosecuted de oficio But if the offenses imputed are different offenses, the crime is public crime and the same may prosecuted de oficio by the public prosecutor The death of the offended party in a libel or defamation case does not extinguish the accuseds criminal liability

Prosecution Of Violations of Special Laws With respect to special laws complaints for their violation shall be determined by their provisions