Crim Pro Reviewer - Jurisdiction of Courts, Rule 110

2S 2011-2012 with Anjo David s notes Criminal Procedure 1
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE COMMITTEE. Introduction and Rule 110 DAVID, Jose Angelo. Rule 111 PASICOLAN, Sheila. Rule 112 and 113 REY,
Floyd Ericson. Rule 114 ALIGA, Gwyneth and ARIATE, Eunice Carmela

I. INSTITUTION OF THE CRIMINAL ACTION
Introduction and Rule 110
A. In General

Criminal Procedure is the method prescribed by law
for the apprehension and prosecution of persons
accused of any criminal offense, and for their
punishment, in case of conviction.

Systems of Criminal Procedure
1. Inquisitorial system - the detection and
prosecution of crimes are left to the initiative of
officials and agents of the law. The procedure is
characterized by secrecy and the Judge is not
limited to the evidence brought before him but
could proceed with his own inquiry which is not
confrontative.
2. Accusatorial system - the accusation is
exercised by every citizen. The procedure is
confrontative and the trial is publicly held and
ends with the magistrate rendering the verdict.
3. Mixed System - It is a combination of the
inquisitorial and the accusatorial system. It
characterizes the criminal procedures observed
in the Philippines.

B. Jurisdiction in General

Criminal Jurisdiction is the authority to hear and try
a particular offense and impose the punishment for it

Venue refers to the particular country or geographical
area in which a court with jurisdiction may hear and
determine a case

Jurisdiction Venue
Substantive Procedural
The authority or power
to hear and decide
cases
The place of trial an
element of jurisdiction
in criminal offenses.
May not be stipulated
by the parties even in
civil cases.
May be stipulated by
the parties in a civil
case.

Relationship between Venue and Jurisdiction in
Criminal Cases

GENERAL RULE: Venue is jurisdictional (Rule 110,
Sec.15a), which means that the criminal action must
be instituted and tried in the court of the place where
the crime was committed

EXCEPTIONS:
1. Art. 2 of the RPC (MEMORIZE!) wherein the
court where the criminal action was first
instituted has jurisdiction
2. The Constitution gives the Supreme Court
power to allow the transfer of trial to another
venue if the lives of the witnesses will be
endangered or there is a risk in the
administration of justice
Example: Maguindanao massacre case
against the Ampatuans committed in
Maguindanao but being tried in Quezon City
RTC
NOTE: Trial is different from the institution of
action. Only the venue of trial is transferred
by the SC, NOT the place of institution of
action.

Requisites for a valid exercise of criminal
jurisdiction

1. Jurisdiction over the subject matter - The
offense, by virtue of the imposable penalty or its
nature, is one which the court is by law
authorized to take cognizance of.
- jurisdiction is determined by the law as of the
time when the action is filed, NOT when the
offense was committed EXCEPT where
jurisdiction is dependent on the nature of the
position of the accused at the time of the
commission of the offense

HYPOTHETICAL QUESTION/S:

Floyd was charged with an offense whose
penalty was below 6 years. The case was filed
with the MTC. After trial, the MTC convicted him
of an offense with a higher penalty. Floyd
questioned the conviction, claiming the MTC had

no jurisdiction over the offense since the penalty
prescribed for it was higher than 6 years. Is Floyd
correct?

Suggested Answer: Floyd is wrong. Jurisdiction
over the subject matter is determined by the
authority of the court to impose the penalty
imposable given the allegation in the information.
It is NOT determined by the penalty to be meted
out to the offender after trial.

2. Jurisdiction over the territory - The offense
must have been committed or any of its essential
ingredients took place within the territorial
jurisdiction of the court. It cannot be waived and
where the place of the commission was not
specifically charged, the place may be shown by
evidence.
- criminal action should be filed in the place
where the crime was committed, EXCEPT those
provided for in Article 2 of the RPC

3. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused -
The person charged with the offense must have
been brought to its presence for trial, forcibly by
warrant of arrest or upon his voluntary
submission to the court.

Waiver; jurisdiction over the person of the
accused
Unlike jurisdiction over the offense which is conferred
by law or the Constitution, jurisdiction over the person
of the accused may be waived. For example, any
objection to the procedure leading to the arrest must
be opportunely raised before the accused enters his
plea, or it is deemed waived.


X was charged in court with an offense. X filed a
motion to quash on the ground that the court had no
jurisdiction over his person because the arrest was
illegal and because the information was incomplete.
Can X invoke lack of jurisdiction of the court over his
person?

Suggested Answer: No, X cannot invoke the lack of
jurisdiction of the court. One who desires to object to
the jurisdiction of the court over his person must
appear in court for that purpose only, and if he raises
other questions, he waives the objection.

Who has jurisdiction over a complex crime?
- The court which has jurisdiction to impose the
maximum and more serious penalty on an offense
forming part of the complex crime.

Effect of Amendment/Repeal of Laws to
Subsisting Criminal Actions

GENERAL RULE: The courts jurisdiction to try a
criminal action is to be determined by the law at the
time of the institution of the action. Succeeding
legislation placing jurisdiction in another tribunal will
not affect jurisdiction obtained by a court.

EXCEPTION: Where the succeeding statute
expressly provides, or is construed that it is intended
to operate to actions pending before its enactment, in
which the case the court where the criminal action is
pending is ousted of jurisdiction and the pending
action will have to be transferred to the other tribunal,
which will continue the proceeding.

How to Determine Jurisdiction

Jurisdiction is determined by the allegations of the
complaint or information.

HOWEVER, it does not mean that the allegations in
the complaint or information confer jurisdiction
because it is only the LAW that confers jurisdiction.

When to Question Jurisdiction of the Court

GENERAL RULE: The question of jurisdiction may
be raised at any stage of the proceedings.

EXCEPTION: The question may not be raised for the
first time on appeal, where there has been estoppel
and laches on the party who raises the question.

C. Criminal Jurisdiction of Courts

1. Municipal Trial Courts

a. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses
punishable with imprisonment not exceeding 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. (Sec. 32, BP 129)

b. Exclusive original jurisdiction over all violations of
city/municipal ordinances committed within their
respective territorial jurisdiction. (Sec. 32, BP 129)

c. Cases classified under the Revised Rules on
Summary Procedure (SC Resolution, October
15, 1991):
i. Violations of traffic laws/rules/regulations;
ii. Violations of rental law;
iii. Violations of municipal or city ordinances;
iv. Violations of BP 22, otherwise known as
Bouncing Checks Law (A.M. No. 00-11-01-
SC, effective April 15, 2003);
v. Cases where the penalty prescribed by law
for the offense charged is imprisonment not,
exceeding 6 months, or a fine not exceeding
P1K, or both, irrespective of other imposable
penalties, accessory or otherwise, or of the
civil liability arising therefrom: Provided,
however, that in offenses involving damage
to property through criminal negligence, this
Rule shall govern where the imposable fine
does not exceed P10K.

d. If fine only: The amount does NOT exceed P4,000.


Sheila was driving beyond the 20kph limit near a
school zone. As she was driving, she hit the
signboard of the school. The cost of the signboard is
Php 5,000.00. A case for reckless imprudence
resulting in damage to property was filed against her
in the RTC because the amount of fine exceeds Php
4,000.00 (P5,000 for the signboard x 3 = P15,000 for
the maximum imposable amount of fine).

(a) Will the case prosper?

Suggested Answer: No, damage to property through
criminal negligence falls within the jurisdiction of the
MTC regardless of the amount.

(b) What if Sheila also hit a child while the child was
crossing the street, and the child died? Where should
a case for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide
and damage to property be filed?

Suggested Answer: Still MTC. Had it been intentional,
homicide would have constituted a grave felony and,
hence the maximum penalty imposable under the
RPC for reckless imprudence in such a case is
prision correccional in its medium period. Prision
correccional in its medium period does not exceed six
years. Hence, the MTC has jurisdiction over the case.

2. Regional Trial Courts

a. RTCs shall exercise exclusive original jurisdiction
in all criminal cases not within the exclusive
jurisdiction of any court/tribunal/body. (Sec. 20, BP
129)

Exception: Those now falling under the exclusive and
concurrent jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, which
shall hereafter be exclusively taken cognizance of by
the latter. (Sec. 20, BP 129)

b. Offenses the imposable penalty for which exceeds
6 years imprisonment, 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

c. Violations of the following laws although penalty
does not exceed 6 yrs. imprisonment:
i. Violations of the Intellectual Property Code
ii. Libel under the Revised Penal Code
iii. Violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act
iv. Violation of the Election Code
v. Violations of the DAR Law (RTC constitutes
itself as a Special Agrarian Court)

d. As a Family Court: Criminal cases where:
i. One or more of the accused is/are below
eighteen (18) years of age but not less than
nine (9) years of age; or

ii. Where one of the victims is a minor at the
time of the commission of the offense;
iii. Cases against minors cognizable under the
Dangerous Drug Act;
iv. Violations of RA 7610, otherwise known as
the Special Protection of Children Against
Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination
Act as amended by RA 7658; and
v. Cases of domestic violence against women
and children.

e. Appellate Jurisdiction: All cases decided by the
MTCs in their respective territorial jurisdiction.


Apaya was convicted of less serious physical injuries
for the 6
th
time within a period of 10 years. The
penalty for less serious physical injuries is arresto
mayor. However, he was adjudged as a habitual
delinquent, and additional penalties were imposed
against him. In which court should the case be filed?

Suggested Answer: MTC, never mind the additional
penalty or civil liabilities.

3. Sandiganbayan

ANJO: The jurisdiction of Sandiganbayan is easy to
determine. For simplicity, just remember that there is
only one class of cases cognizable under the
Sandiganbayan public officer with SG 27 or higher
or listed in RA 8249 AND he commits a crime in
relation to his office. So, how to determine
jurisdiction?

First, look at the salary grade of the offender or see if
he is listed as one of the public officers listed in RA
8249 (Sandiganbayan Law).

Second, see if the crime was committed in relation to
his office. What is the test? The crime would not have
been committed had it not been for the office. So ano
ang implication nito? Memorize Title VII of the RPC,
RA 3019, and laws which penalize crimes committed
by public officers.

In fact, the crimes listed in RA 8249 are definitely,
without a doubt, unquestionably, certainly always
committed in relation to ones office, so you dont
have to determine further if say, violation of RA 3019
was committed in relation to public office because it
always is!

Thus, all you have to do is to memorize the persons
listed in RA 8249 and the crimes enumerated therein.

a. Original Jurisdiction

FIRST STEP:
The offender is a/an:

a. Executive
Officials of the executive branch, occupying salary
grade 27 and higher, specifically including:
i. Provincial governors, vice governors, members
of the sangguniang panlalawigan and
provincial treasurers, assessors, engineers and
other provincial department heads.
ii. City mayors, vice-mayors, members of the
sangguniang panlungsod, city treasurers,
assessors, engineers and other city department
heads.
iii. Officials of the diplomatic service occupying the
position of consul and higher.
iv. Philippine army and air force colonels, naval
captains, and all officers of higher rank.
v. Officers of the PNP, while occupying the
position of provincial director and those holding
the rank of senior superintendent or higher.
vi. City and provincial prosecutors and their
assistants, and officials and prosecutors in the
Office of the Ombudsman and special
prosecutors.
vii. Presidents/directors/trustees /managers of
GOCCs, state universities or educational
institutions/foundations.

b. Legislative
Members of Congress and officials thereof classified
as Grade 27 and up

c. Judiciary
Members of the Judiciary, without prejudice to
Constitutional provisions

d. Constitutional Commission

Chairmen and members of Constitutional
Commissions, without prejudice to Constitutional
provisions

SECOND STEP:
The offense committed is a violation of:

a. R.A. 3019 (Anti Graft and Corrupt Practices Act);
b. R.A. 1379 (Ill Gotten Wealth);
c. Chapter 2, Section 2, Title 7, Book 2 of the RPC
(Bribery, Indirect Bribery, Qualified Bribery and
Corruption of public officials);
d. E.O. Nos. 1, 2, 14, 14-A (Sequestration cases)
e. RA 6713 Code of Conduct and Ethical Standards
f. RA 7659 Heinous Crimes
g. RA 9160 Anti-Money Laundering Act
h. RA 7080 Plunder
i. PD 46 Gift-giving Decree
h. Any offense or felony whether simple or
complexed, as long as committed in relation to his
office

b. Appellate Jurisdiction

If all accused are occupying positions lower than
Salary Grade 27 or not covered by the enumeration,
and crime is committed in relation to public office or
one of the crimes listed herein and the case was filed
in the MTC or RTC, as the case may be.

By ordinary appeal:
- from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the
Regional Trial Courts in cases originally decided by
them, in their respective territorial jurisdictions.

By petition for review:
- for the judgments, resolutions or orders of the
Regional Trial Courts in the exercise of their appellate
jurisdiction over cases originally decided by the
Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and
Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in their respective
jurisdiction.

Rule when there are several accused involved in
the commission of the same offense BUT not all
are SG 27 or higher

For as long as one is salary grade 27, the case is
cognizable under the Sandiganbayan, regardless of
the degree of participation (Lacson vs. Exec. Sec.)

Rule when it comes to private individuals

Private individuals can be tried by the
Sandiganbayan, as long as he is charged as a co-
principal, accomplice or accessory of a public officer
or employee who has been charged with a crime w/in
the SBs jurisdiction. (Republic vs. CA)

Meaning of in relation to ones office

As long as the offense charged in the information is
intimately connected with the office and is alleged to
have been perpetrated while the accused was in the
performance though improper or irregular of his
official functions there being no personal motive to
commit the crime and had the accused not have
committed it had he not held the aforesaid office.
(Lacson vs. Executive Secretary)

In short, that without the office the crime would not
have been committed


1. A, Mayor of Balatsibuyas CIty, entered into a
contract with B, a private individual and proprietor of
a company, Baby Co. which was grossly
disadvantageous to the City, therefore in violation of
RA 3019. A and B are to be tried in the
Sandiganbayan. B contends that he should not be
tried in the Sandiganbayan because he is not a public
officer. Rule on his contention.

Suggested Answer: The case against B may be tried
jointly with that of A in the Sandiganbayan. The
reason for this is to avoid multiple suits and to avoid
conflicting decisions resulting to absurdity. Further, B
is considered as a principal to the commission of the
crime due to the presence of conspiracy and his
liability is therefore the same with that of A and vice
versa. (Balmadrid vs SB)

2. A, a COMELEC Registrar with salary grade 27,
allowed the registration of voters beyond the date
allowable under the Election Code. The same act

constitutes a penal violation of the Election Code. A
case was filed before him before the Sandiganbayan,
will the case prosper?

Suggested Answer: No, the case should be filed in
the RTC. The election code prevails because there is
a provision in the said law punishing such crimes.
(Corpuz vs. Tanodbayan)

3. A is the assistant manager in a private bank. He
was involved in the malversation of public funds by a
public officer, B, of the Central Bank who had custody
of such funds. B was tried in the Sandiganbayan
Second Division. During the pendency of such trial,
another information was filed, this time against A in
the Sandiganbayan, raffled to the Third Division but
afterwards consolidated with the case in the Second
Division. However, it turned out that a decision had
already been rendered in the case in the Second
Division. Should the case against A continue in the
Sandiganbayan?

Suggested Answer: Yes. The law requires that
private individuals be tried jointly with public officers if
accused before the SB. The only exception is when
attending circumstances have made it impossible or
impracticable to do so. (Bondoc vs. SB)

4. A is a private individual who was assigned by the
Bureau of Customs as a custodian of a car in a
pending civil case. A, instead of holding it for the
Bureau, sold it to another person. A case for
malversation was filed against him in the SB
considering that under the RPC law on malversation,
he is understood to be entrusted with the custody of a
property.

Suggested Answer: No, the SB does not have
jurisdiction over him. The law unequivocally specifies
that the only instance when a private individual may
be tried in the SB is when he is charged as a co-
principal, accomplice or accessory of a public officer
or employee who has been charged with a crime w/in
its jurisdiction.

5. A is the mayor of Limot City. He found B, the lady
secretary of the sanggunian, to be very attractive. A
told B that they will have a closed-door meeting
regarding one of the proposed legislations of the
sanggunian. B went to As office in that belief, but A
raped B instead while they were alone in the office. A
rape case was filed against the mayor in the SB.

(a) Will the case prosper?

Suggested Answer: No. The mayor only took
advantage of his position in committing the crime but
the same was not committed in relation to his office.
That a public officer took advantage of his position in
committing the crime is NOT the same as committing
the crime in relation to his office. Hence, the case
does not fall within the jurisdiction of the
Sandiganbayan. At best, such allegation would only
constitute an aggravating circumstance.

(b) Which court has jurisdiction over the case?

Suggested Answer: The maximum imposable penalty
for rape is reclusion perpetua, hence the crime falls
within the jurisdiction of the RTC.

(c) Assuming that the mayor was found guilty by the
RTC and imposed a penalty of reclusion perpetua.
Where should he file his appeal?

Suggested Answer: To the Supreme Court via a
Notice of Appeal. However, following Rule 122, Sec.
3, the case should first be appealed to the Court of
Appeals for intermediate review.

4. Court of Tax Appeals

Exclusive original jurisdiction over all criminal
offenses arising from violations of the National
Internal Revenue Code or Tariff and Customs Code
and other laws administered by the Bureau of Internal
Revenue or the Bureau of Customs.

Appellate jurisdiction

By appeal:
- from the judgments, resolutions or orders of the
Regional Trial Courts in tax cases originally decided
by them, in their respective territorial jurisdictions.

Regional Trial Courts in the exercise of their appellate

jurisdiction over tax cases originally decided by the
Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and
jurisdiction.

5. Court of Appeals

By appeal:
- from the RTC in cases commenced therein, except
those appealable to the Supreme Court or
Sandiganbayan or Court of Tax Appeals

- from the Regional Trial Courts in cases appealed
thereto from the Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal
Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in their
respective jurisdiction except those appealable to the

6. Supreme Court

If RTC imposes reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment:
- Notice of Appeal filed with CA so that case will be
elevated to SC

If RTC imposes death penalty:
- Automatic review by CA first, no notice of appeal
necessary

If CA imposes death penalty:
CA does not make entry of judgment but elevates
entire record to SC for review

By petition for review on certiorari:
- Penalty imposed is lower than reclusion perpetua or
life imprisonment

If Sandiganbayan is involved:

SB in the exercise of its appellate or original
jurisdiction does NOT impose DLR, petition for review
on certiorari to the SC

SB in the exercise of its original jurisdiction imposes
LR, notice of appeal and elevated to SC

SB in the exercise of its original jurisdiction imposes
D, automatic review by SC

SB in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction imposes
DLR, SB does not make entry of judgment but
elevates entire record to SC for review unlike in CA
wherein only when D is imposed that case is elevated
to SC for review

Effect of wrong mode of appeal
A wrong mode of appeal will not vest, or give the
court appellate jurisdiction. (Rule 56, Sec.5F)

Illustrations
MTC decision appeal to RTC via notice of appeal
appeal to CA via petition for review (Rule 122)
SC by petition for review on certiorari (Rule 45)

RTC decision, lower than DLR appeal to CA via
notice of appeal SC by petition for review on
certiorari

RTC decision, imposes reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment SC by notice of appeal filed with the
CA so that case will be elevated to SC

RTC decision, death penalty automatic review by
CA (Rule 122), no notice of appeal necessary CA
imposes death penalty CA does not make entry of
judgment but elevates entire record to SC for review
(Rule 124)


Ariel is the principal, accused of murder. Bodjie is the
accomplice while Camille is the accessory. All of
them were found guilty. The imposable penalty for
murder is reclusion perpetua. Because of their
respective participation, the imposable penalty for
Bodjie and Camille is lower than that of Ariel. In which
court/s should their case/s be appealed?

Suggested Answer: All of them should appeal the
decision to the Supreme Court, although of different
penalties in order not to split jurisdiction.

D. Institution of Criminal Actions

WHAT IS FILED?

1. Complaint

- is a sworn written statement charging the person
with an offense subscribed by the offended party, any
peace officer, or public officer charged with the
enforcement of the law violated.

The complaint as defined under Section 3 is
different from the complaint filed with the
Prosecutors Office. The complaint mentioned in
this section refers to one filed in court for the
commencement of a criminal prosecution for
violation of a crime, usually cognizable by municipal
trial courts as well as to a complaint filed by an
offended party in private crimes or those which
cannot be prosecuted de officio.

Requisites of a Complaint:
1. It must be in writing and under oath;
2. It must be in the name of the People of the
Philippines;
3. It must charge a person with an offense; and
4. It must be subscribed by the offended party,
by any peace officer or public officer charged
with the enforcement of the law violated.

The COMPLAINT FILED WITH THE
PROSECUTORS OFFICE, from which the latter
may initiate a preliminary investigation, refers to:
1. Any written complaint;
2. Filed by an offended party or not;
3. Not necessarily under oath, except in 2
instances:
a. Complaint for commission of an offense
which cannot be prosecuted de officio or
is private in nature
b. 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.

Persons who can file a complaint:
1. Offended party;
2. Any peace officer;
3. Other public officer charged with the enforcement
of the law violated (e.g. Internal Revenue Officer
for violation of the NIRC, custom agents with
respect to violations of the Tariff and Customs
Code).

2. Information
- is an accusation in writing charging a person with an
offense, subscribed by the prosecutor and filed with
the court.

Requisites:
1. It must be in writing;
2. It must charge a person with an offense;
3. It must be subscribed by the fiscal; and
4. It must be filed in court.

Persons authorized to file information:
1. City or provincial prosecutor and their
assistants; and
2. Duly appointed special prosecutors.

Note: Prosecution in the RTC is always
commenced by information, except:
In certain crimes against chastity (concubinage,
adultery, seduction, abduction, acts of
lasciviousness); and

Defamations imputing any of the aforesaid
offenses wherein a sworn written complaint is
required in accordance with Section 5 of this
Rule.

In case of variance between the complaint filed
by the offended party and the information in
crimes against chastity, the complaint controls
(People vs. Oso, G.R. No. L-42571, October 10,
1935).

An information not properly signed cannot be
cured by silence, acquiescence or even by
express consent (Villa vs. Ibanez, G.R. No. L-
4313, March 20, 1951).

NOTE: What the prosecutor signs under oath is
certification that he has conducted the required
preliminary investigation (PI). Lack of certification
does not invalidate judgment. (People v. Bulaong)

Variance between complaint and information
Variance between the complaint filed by the offended
party and the information in crimes against chastity,
the complaint controls.


WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS OF A
COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION?

1. Name of the Accused (Rule 110, Sec. 7)

a. If NAME IS KNOWN, the name and surname of
the accused or any appellation or nickname by
which he has been or is known must be stated;
b. If NAME CANNOT BE ASCERTAINED, a
fictitious name with a statement that his true name
is unknown;
c. If true name thereafter ascertained, such name
shall be inserted in the complaint or information or
record;
d. While one or more persons, along with specified
and names accused, may be sued as John Does,
an information against all accused described as
John Does is void, and an arrest warrant against
them is also void.

2. Designation of the Offense (Rule 110, Sec.8)

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 of the
statute punishing it;
2. The statement of the acts or omissions
constituting the offense, in ordinary, concise and
particular words;
3. The specific qualifying and aggravating
circumstances must be stated in ordinary and
concise language.

Note: The qualifying and aggravating circumstances
cannot be appreciated even if proved UNLESS
alleged in the information (People vs. Perreras).

Allegations prevail over designation of the
offense in the information

It is not the designation of the offense in the
complaint or information that is controlling; the facts
alleged therein and not its title determine the nature
of the crime

An accused could not be convicted under one act
when he is charged with a violation of another if the
change from one statute to the other involves:
a. A change in the theory of the trial;
b. Requires of the defendant a different
defense; or
c. Surprises the accused in any way.


a. X was charged with homicide. Can he be
possibly be convicted of murder?

Suggested Answer: Yes. If the recitals in the
complaint or information of the acts and
omissions constituting the offense actually allege
murder, X can be convicted of murder. This is
because it is the recital of facts and not the
designation of the offense that is controlling.

b. X was charged with estafa, but the recital of facts
actually alleges theft. Can X be convicted of
theft?

Suggested Answer: Yes, because it is the recital,
not the designation of the offense that is
controlling.

c. X was charged with estafa, and the recital of
facts allege estafa. Can X be convicted of theft?

Suggested Answer: No. The two crimes have
elements that are different from each other. To
convict X of theft under an information that
alleges estafa would violate his right to be
informed of the nature and cause of the
accusation against him.

d. X was charged with rape committed through
force and intimidation. Can he be convicted of
rape where the woman is deprived of reason or is
otherwise unconscious?

Suggested Answer: No. Where the law
distinguishes between two cases of violation of
its provision, the complaint or information must
specify under which of the two cases the
defendant is being charged.

e. X was accused of illegal possession of firearms,
but the information did not allege that X did not

have any license to possess the firearm. Is the
information valid?

Suggested Answer: No. The absence of the
license is an essential element of the offense.
Therefore, it should be alleged in the complaint or
information.

f. X was charged with illegal possession of opium.
X contends that the information was invalid for
failure to allege that he did not have a
prescription from a physician. Is X correct?

Suggested Answer: No. The absence of the
prescription is not an essential element of the
offense and is only a matter of defense. It need
not be alleged in the information.

3. Acts or Omissions the Offense (Rule 110,
Sec.9)

It must be in ordinary or concise language, sufficient
to enable a person of common understanding to
know what offense is being charged. This must be
done both for the offense charged and the
circumstances involved in its commission.

Purpose:
1) To enable a person of common understanding to
know what offense is intended to be charged;
2) To enable the court to pronounce proper judgment.

The accused cannot be found guilty of an offense
which has not been alleged.

Where what is alleged in the information is a complex
crime and the evidence fails to support the charge as
to one of the component offenses, the defendant can
only be convicted of the offense proven.

4. Date of the Offense (Rule 110, Sec. 11)

GENERAL RULE: The precise date is not necessary.

EXCEPTION: When the date is a material ingredient
of the offense.
Example:
a. Infanticide
b. Election offenses
c. Abortion

As long as the alleged date is not so remote or far
removed from the actual date so as to surprise and
prejudice the accused, then the information is valid.
The determinative factor in the resolution of the
question involving a variance between allegation and
proof in respect of the date of the crime is the
element of surprise on the part of the accused and
his inability to defend himself properly


a. Sometime in the month of September 1989,
sufficient? Yes.

b. On or about January 1990, sufficient? Yes.

c. On or about 2000, sufficient? No.

d. A raped B on June 12, 1998, setting B free
from her virginity. In the information, the date
alleged was sometime in the month of June
1998. Is the date alleged sufficient? Yes, the
commission of rape does not have as one of
its elements the date of commission of the
crime.

e. A woman, W, gave birth to a child on May 1,
1990. X, her neighbor, killed the child the
following day. X was charged with infanticide.
The information alleged that X committed the
felony on or about May 1990. Is the
information sufficient? No, the date of the
commission of the offense is an element of
the crime of infanticide.

5. Place of the Commission of the Offense (Rule
110, Sec. 100

GENERAL RULE: A complaint or information is
sufficient if it appears from the allegations that the
offense was committed or some of its essential
ingredients occurred at some place, within the
jurisdiction of the court.

EXCEPTION: When the place of commission is an
essential element of the offense, the place of
commission must be alleged with particularity

Example:
a. Trespass to dwelling
b. destructive arson
c. robbery in an inhabited house
d. violation of domicile

6. Name of the Offended Party (Rule 110, Sec. 12)

GENERAL RULE: The offended party must be
designated by name and surname or any other
appellation or nickname by which he has been or is
known.

EXCEPTION: In crimes against property, if the name
of the offended party is unknown, the property must
be described with such particularity as to properly
identify the particular offense charged.

HOW IS THE CRIMINAL ACTION INSTITUTED?

1. If the crime was committed in Manila and other
chartered cities

GENERAL RULE:
Complaint shall be filed with the office of the
prosecutor

EXCEPTION:
a. When their charter provides otherwise
b. When there was warrantless arrest, inquest is
sufficient. If inquest prosecutor is unavailable, the
offended party or the arresting officer may file directly
to the court on the basis of an affidavit of the
offended party or arresting officer or individual.

2. If the crime was committed outside of Manila
and other chartered cities

NOTE: Distinguish first if PI is required or not

a. If Preliminary Investigation is required

GENERAL RULE: By filing the COMPLAINT
with the proper officer for the purpose of
conducting the requisite preliminary
investigation (Rule 110, Sec 1, a)

Preliminary investigation is REQUIRED for
offenses where the penalty prescribed by law
is at least 4 years, 2 months and 1 day without
regard to fine. (Rule 112, Sec. 1 Par.2)

EXCEPTION: When there was warrantless
arrest, inquest is sufficient. If inquest
prosecutor is unavailable, the offended party
or the arresting officer may file directly to the
court on the basis of an affidavit of the
offended party or arresting officer or individual

b. If Preliminary Investigation is NOT required

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

Meaning of Proper Officer
Refers to officers authorized to conduct the required
to conduct the requisite preliminary investigation:
1. provincial or city prosecutors and their
assistants
2. national and regional state prosecutors
3. other officers authorized by the courts.

Note: Their authority to conduct PI shall include all
crimes cognizable by the proper curt in their
respective jurisdiction

Effect of institution of the criminal action
The filing of a complaint for purposes of preliminary
investigation starts the prosecution process. Hence, it
interrupts the running of the period of prescription of
the offense charged unless otherwise provided by
special laws.

NOTE: But the question is: when will it be interrupted
from the filing of the complaint in the office of the
prosecutor or in the court?

a. For ordinary offenses, falling under the RPC
Filing before the Office of the Prosecutor tolls the
prescriptive period

b. For violation of special laws
Filing before the court tolls the prescriptive period
(Act 3326), following the case of Zaldivia vs.
Reyes, G.R. No. L-102342, July 3, 1992


SEC vs. INTERPORT (LANDMARK CASE)
The Court ruled that the nature and purpose of an
investigation conducted by the SEC on violation of
the Revised Securities Act another special law is
equivalent to the preliminary investigation conducted
by the DOJ in criminal cases. And thus, effectively
interrupts the prescriptive period. Why so? Because
the filing of a complaint for purposes of preliminary
investigation starts the prosecution process.

PANAGUITON vs. DOJ
BP 22, where the penalty is not less than 30 days or
not more than 1 year, because it is a special law, we
expect it to fall under Act 3326. This is the question
presented before the Court: Does it toll the
prescriptive period once the complaint was filed
before the Office of the Prosecutor? the SC said
YES! And the SC said: Petitioners filing of his
complaint-affidavit before the office of the city
prosecutor in 1995 signified the commencement of
the proceedings for the prosecution of the accused
and thus, effectively interrupted the prescriptive
period for the offenses they have been charged under
BP 22. If you follow the basic rule Act 3326, it should
be filing in court. But this case said that once it was
filed before the office of the prosecutor, it interrupted
the period.

Other cases with the same ruling:
Inco v. SB for violations of RA 3019
San Rio Company Ltd v. Lim for violations of the
Intellectual Property Code

Rules on Summary Procedure; How to Institute
Criminal Actions

(Sec. 11) How commenced. The filing of criminal
cases falling within the scope of this Rule shall be
either by complaint or by information: Provided,
however, that in Metropolitan Manila and in Chartered
Cities. such cases shall be commenced only by
information, except when the offense cannot be
prosecuted de oficio.

The complaint or information shall be accompanied
by the affidavits of the compliant and of his witnesses
in such number of copies as there are accused plus
two (2) copies for the court's files. If this requirement
is not complied with within five (5) days from date of
filing, the care may be dismissed.

(Sec. 12) Duty of court.

(a) If commenced by compliant. On the basis of
the compliant and the affidavits and other evidence
accompanying the same, the court may dismiss the
case outright for being patently without basis or merit
and order the release of the amused if in custody.

(b) If commenced by information. When the case
is commenced by information, or is not dismissed
pursuant to the next preceding paragraph, the court
shall issue an order which, together with copies of the
affidavits and other evidence submitted by the
prosecution, shall require the accused to submit his
counter-affidavit and the affidavits of his witnesses as
well as any evidence in his behalf, serving copies
thereof on the complainant or prosecutor not later
than ten (10) days from receipt of said order. The
prosecution may file reply affidavits within ten (10)
days after receipt of the counter-affidavits of the
defense.

WHO CAN INSTITUTE CRIMINAL ACTIONS?

Persons who can institute a criminal action
1. Offended Party
2. Peace Officer who arrested (if it can be prosecuted
de officio)
3. Person charged with the enforcement of the law (if
it can be prosecuted de officio)
4. Prosecutor

Crimes which cannot be prosecuted de officio
Concubinage, adultery, seduction, abduction, acts of
lasciviousness CANNOT be prosecuted de officio
(Art. 344, RPC)
It also includes defamation which consists in the
imputation of a crime which cannot be prosecuted de
officio.

Offended Parties who can file a complaint
1. In adultery and concubinage The offended
spouse. Both guilty parties should be
included if both are alive.
2. In seduction, abduction and acts of
lasciviousness

a. If the victim is of legal age and has
no incapacity - The victim alone has
exclusive right; parents or
grandparents are precluded from
filing the complaint
b. If victim is a minor, or of age but
suffers from incapacity She has
independent right but the parents,
grandparents or legal guardian may
file, even if the offended party does
not wish to file the complaint.
c. If the minor is incapacitated, and it
was the ascendant who violated the
child, the STATE can institute the
action for the minor.
3. In rape The minor has the right to initiate
the complaint independently of parents and
guardians, unless incompetent/incapable
upon grounds other than minority. If minor
initiates the complaint, the
father/guardian/grandfather cannot withdraw
complaint.

Complaint as condition precedent
Prosecutor cannot institute without the complaint of
the offended party.

The complaint starts the prosecutory proceeding; but
it does not vest jurisdiction, as jurisdiction is vested in
the court by the law.

The complaint is only a condition precedent for the
exercise by proper authorities of the power to
prosecute.

The failure to raise the issue as to WON there has
been a valid complaint filed by the offended party at
the trial court is a waiver of the issue.

Effect of death of offended party
After filing
Once a complaint is filed, the will of the offended
party is ascertained and the action proceeds. Death
after filing the complaint would NOT deprive the court
of the jurisdiction to try the case

Before filing
1. Adultery/Concubinage The death of the
offended spouse before the filing of the
complaint for adultery bars further prosecution
- the acquittal or death of one of the accused in
the crime of adultery does not bar the
prosecution of the other accused
2. Abduction, Seduction, Acts of Lasciouvsness
a. If offended party was of age when the crime
was committed, no more filing
b. If offended party was a minor when the crime
was committed, parents, grandparents or
legal guardian may still file
c. If the offended party dies or becomes
incapacitated before she was able to file the
complaint and she has no known parents,
grandparents or guardians, the state shall
initiate the action in her behalf, pursuant to
the doctrine of PARENS PATRIAE.

Effect of desistance by offended party
It does not bar the People of the Philippines from
prosecuting the criminal action, but it operates as a
waiver of the right to pursue civil indemnity.
An affidavit of desistance cannot justify dismissal of
the complaint if made after (and not before) the
institution of the criminal action. (Alonte vs.
Savellano, Jr.)

Who may extend pardon; Effect of Pardon by
offended party

GENERAL RULE: Pardon by the offended party does
not extinguish criminal liability. Only civil liability is
extinguished by express waiver of the offended party.

EXCEPTIONS:
1. In concubinage and adultery only the
offended spouse, not otherwise
incapacitated, can validly extend the pardon
or consent contemplated therein (liability
extinguished)

2. In rape, seduction, abduction and acts of
lasciviousness
a. If offended party was of age when the
crime was committed, only she can extend
a valid pardon which would absolve the
offender.

b. If offended party was a minor when the
crime was committed, the pardon will be
effective if given by both parents and the
offended party; if she has no parents or
where the accused is her own father and
her mother is dead, the offended minor, if
with sufficient discretion, can validly pardon
the accused

Note: The pardon refers to pardon BEFORE filing of
the criminal complaint in court. Pardon effected after
the filing of the complaint in court does NOT prohibit
the continuance of the prosecution of the offense
except in case of marriage between the offender and
the offended party.

The pardon in cases of seduction, abduction, and
acts of lasciviousness must be express.

Effect of marriage of the offender with the
offended party in private crimes
It shall extinguish the criminal action or remit the
penalty already imposed. This applies even to co-
principals, accomplices, and accessories.

offended party in rape
It shall extinguish the criminal action or remit the
penalty already imposed.

offended party in multiple rape
Where multiple rape is committed, marriage of the
offended party with one defendant extinguishes the
latters liability and that of his accessories or
accomplices for a single crime of rape cannot extend
to the other acts of rape.

Marital Rape
Note: If the offender in rape is the legal husband of
the offended party the subsequent forgiveness by the
wife shall extinguish the criminal action or the
penalty. But the penalty shall not be abated if the
marriage is void ab initio.

Effect of marriage on private libel
In private libel, or the libelous imputation to the
complainant of the commission of the crimes of
concubinage, adultery, seduction, abduction, rape or
acts of lasciviousness, and in slander by deed

Pardon vs. Consent in Adultery and Concubinage

Pardon Consent
Refers to past acts of
adultery/concubinage.
Refers to future acts.
In order to absolve the
accused from liability
must be extended to both
offenders (Art. 344, RPC)
In order to absolve the
accused from liability, it is
sufficient even if granted
only to the offending
spouse.

Effect if crime composed of one which can be
prosecuted de officio, and one which cannot be
prosecuted de officio
Where one of the components is a private crime and
the other a public offense, the fiscal may initiate the
proceeding de officio.

Rationale: Since one of the component offenses is a
public crime, the latter should prevail, public interest
being always paramount to private interest.

NOTE: Refrain from using the term private crime,
theres no such thing. All crimes are public crimes.
Use the term crimes which cannot be prosecuted de
officio instead.


1. H and W are married. W has an illicit affair with
X. W and X were exiting a motel in Cubao when
H saw them. H wants to institute a criminal action
for adultery against W. He made a complaint
charging W with the crime of adultery and filed it
with the prosecutors office.

(a) W questioned the filing of the case. Will the
case of W prosper?

Suggested Answer: Yes. The complaint must
include both the spouse and the paramour, if
alive. In this case, since X, the paramour, is alive,
he should have also been included in the
complaint. Hence, W may question the same in
court.

(b) Assuming that when W got home, H had

sexual intercourse with W, despite H knowing
Ws misdeed. Can he file a case against W?

Suggested Answer: Still yes. Having sexual
intercourse with the offending spouse after the
commission of adultery/concubinage and with
knowledge of the commission is an act of
condonation only for purposes of the Family
Code in legal separation cases. Hence, there
was no pardon extended to W. (Bugayong vs.
Ginez)

(c) What if after having sexual intercourse with
W, H decides he wants to file against X. Can he
do so?

Suggested Answer: Still yes. Having sexual
intercourse with the offending spouse after the
commission of adultery/concubinage and with
knowledge of the commission is an act of
condonation only for purposes of the Family
Code in legal separation cases. Hence, there
was no pardon extended to W (Bugayong vs.
Ginez). Also, even assuming that W was validly
pardoned, X should have been pardoned as well
for the pardon to be effective.

(d) What if the marriage between H and W was
subsequently declared null and void and H wants
to file an action against W and X, will the case
prosper?

Suggested Answer: No, Rule 110 specifically
provides that the offending spouse must file the
action. They not being spouses anymore, H can
no longer institute an action.

(e) What if H secures legal separation after the
act and H wants to file an action against W and
X, will the case prosper?

Suggested Answer: Yes, because in legal
separation, the marriage ties are not severed.
Hence, they are still spouses.

(f) What if H and W were legally separated before
the act, can H file an action for adultery against
W and X?

Suggested Answer: Yes, because in legal
separation, the marriage ties are not severed.
Hence, they are still spouses.

2. L and M are sweethearts. However, L refuses to
have sex with boyfriend M. M rapes L while she
was sleeping at her dormitory. Subsequently, M
asks for forgiveness from L and the latter forgives
her boyfriend. With the persuasion of her parents,
L decides to file a rape case against M. Can L
validly do so despite the prior pardon she gave
M?

Suggested Answer: Yes, criminal liability is not
extinguished when pardon has been given except
for CA-ASAL. However, the civil liability of M is
extinguished.

3. If the offended party dies (e.g. homicide, murder,
etc.), who can file the complaint/information?
Generally, person against whom or against
whose property the crime was committed is
considered the offended party. It is personal to
him/her and is intransmissible to his/her heirs.
Exceptions to the rule are those provided

Variance between complaint and information
In case of variance between the complaint filed by the
offended party and the information in crimes against
chastity, the complaint controls (People vs. Oso, G.R.
No. L-42571, October 10, 1935).

Information not properly signed
An information not properly signed cannot be cured
by silence, acquiescence or even by express consent
(Villa vs. Ibanez, G.R. No. L-4313, March 20, 1951).

WHO MUST PROSECUTE CRIMINAL ACTIONS?

GENERAL RULE: The action must be prosecuted
under the direction and control of the prosecutor. The
public prosecutor is a quasi-judicial officer and a
representative of a sovereignty whose obligation to
govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to
govern at all

EXCEPTION: When there is lack of public
prosecutors or heavy workload, the private
prosecutor may be authorized in writing by the Chief

of the Prosecution Office or the Regional State
Prosecution to prosecute the case subject to the
courts approval. The authority will continue until
revoked or withdrawn.

Meaning of Control
The prosecutor can stop the private prosecutor at any
point in the conduct of the trial. He can intervene
because he is in control of the conduct of the criminal
case.

Duties of a Public Prosecutor
1. Conduct preliminary investigation for cases filed
before their office
2. Have control over the prosecution of the case
3. Conduct Inquest Proceedings if assigned and as
provided for by law

Limitations on the power of the public prosecutor
to exercise discretionary power
The rule is that the power of the public prosecutor to
exercise discretionary power is NOT absolute (Chua
vs. Padillo)

a. The decision of the provincial or the city
prosecutor, could be questioned before the DOJ via
petition for review DOJ within 15 days from receipt of
resolution or denial of a Motion for Reconsideration
(DOJ Circular 70)

b. The CA may review the decision of the DOJ on the
premise that it was tainted with grave abuse of
discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
(Rule 65).

c. The decision of the DOJ may be elevated to the
President if the penalty for the offense is Death, Life
Imprisonment or Reclusion Perpetua

Can a private prosecutor proceed with the trial of
the case even in the absence of a public
prosecutor?
No, if the public prosecutor is absent, reset or
reschedule. However, the private prosecutor could
obtain a certification from the Chief of the Prosecution
Office or the Regional State Prosecutor or the
Regional Prosecutor to allow the private prosecutor to
proceed even in the absence of a public prosecutor.

May a public prosecutor allow a private
prosecutor to actively handle the conduct of the
trial?
Yes, where the civil action arising from the crime is
deemed instituted in the criminal action.

Limitations upon the power of the private
prosecutor
1. Is not entitled to be served with copies of the
pleadings as a matter of right since a notice of the
court to the fiscal is a notice to the prosecutor (Sese
vs. Montesa). Note however that failure to serve
pleadings and orders upon government counsel
renders the court orders issued upon such such
petitions or motions of an accused as void.

2. Cannot make a stand inconsistent with the state.

3. Cannot appeal from an order dismissing the case
on motion of the fiscal.

4. May not continue to take part in the proceeding
after the death of the offended party since the latter is
the principal and the private prosecutor, merely an
agent.


a. While Mica was in SM Sta. Mesa, Jed, Micas ex-
boyfriend, suddenly came out of nowhere and
shouted invectives at her. Jed said Pokpok ka!
Puta kang babae ka! Kung kani-kanino ka
sumasama. Pokpok ka! Mica wishes to institute
an action for slander against Jed. Cognizant that
slander does not need preliminary investigation,
where would you file the complaint?

Suggested Answer: I would file the complaint for
slander against Jed in the Prosecutors Office in
the City of Manila. Although the crime committed
does not need preliminary investigation, Rule 110
specifically provides that offenses committed in
Manila and other chartered cities must be filed
with the Office of the Prosecutor.

b. Joy committed homicide while sojourning in the
Municipality of Paniqui in the Province of Tarlac.
Where would you institute the action against her?


Suggested Answer: I would file a complaint
against her with the prosecutors office.

c. Supposing, in the previous example, Joy
committed only slander by deed. Where could
you institute the action against her?

Suggested Answer: I could file a complaint
against her in the prosecutors office, or file a
complaint directly with the Municipal Court.

WHERE SHOULD A CRIMINAL ACTION BE
INSTITUTED?

Venue is Jurisdictional as the court has no
jurisdiction to try an offense committed outside its
territorial jurisdiction. It cannot be waived, or changed
by agreement of the parties, or by the consent of the
defendant.

Rules to observe in determining jurisdiction
a. In the court of the municipality or territory where
the offense was committed or where any of its
essential ingredients occurred (Rule 110, Sec.15)
(Exception: Sandiganbayan cases)

b. If committed in a train, aircraft, or other public or
private vehicle: in the court of any municipality or
territory where the vehicle passed during its trip,
including the place of departure or arrival (Rule 110,
Sec.15)

c. If committed on board a vessel in the course of its
voyage: in the court of the first port of entry or of any
municipality or territory where the vessel passed
during the voyage, subject to the generally accepted
principles of international law (Rule 110, Sec.15)

d. Crimes committed outside the Phil but punishable
under Article 2 of the RPC: any court where the
action is first filed. (Rule 110, Sec.15)

e. Libel The action may be instituted at the election
of the offended or suing party in the province or city

f. 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 (Section 5[4], Article VIII, 1987
Constitution);

g. In cases filed under B.P. 22 The criminal action
shall be filed in the place where the check was
dishonored or issued. In case of crossed-check,
place of depositary or collecting bank.

Article 2, Revised Penal Code
Except as provided in the treaties and laws of
preferential application, the provisions of this Code
shall be enforced not only within the Philippine
Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior
waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its
jurisdiction, against those who:

1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine
ship or airship

2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency
note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and
securities issued by the Government of the Philippine
Islands;

3. Should be liable for acts connected with the
introduction into these islands of the obligations and
securities mentioned in the presiding number;

4. While being public officers or employees, should
commit an offense in the exercise of their functions;

5. Should commit any of the crimes against national
security and the law of nations, defined in Title One of
Book Two of this Code.

Crimes against national security and the law of
nations
a. Treason
b. Conspiracy and proposal to commit treason
c. Misprision of treason
d. Espionage
e. Inciting to war or giving motives for reprisals
f. Violation of neutrality
g. Correspondence with hostile country
h. Flight to enemy country
i. Piracy in general and mutiny on the high
seas
j. Qualified piracy


Continuing or transitory offense Defined
Transitory offenses are crimes where some acts
material and essential to the crimes and requisite to
their commission occur in one municipality or territory
and some in another. Continuing offenses are
consummated in one place, yet by the nature of the
offense, the violation of the law is deemed continuing.
Examples: estafa, abduction, malversation, libel,
kidnapping, violation of BP22.

Jurisdiction over a continuing crime
The courts of the territories where the essential
ingredients of the crime took place have concurrent
jurisdiction. But the court which first acquires
jurisdiction excludes the other courts.

Rules on venue in libel cases
a. The criminal action for libel may be filed in the RTC
of the province or the city where the libelous article is
printed and first published.

b. If the offended party is a private individual, the
criminal action may also be filed in the RTC of the
province where he actually resided at the time of the
commission of the offense.

c. If the offended party is a public officer whose office
is in Manila at the time of the commission of the
offense, the criminal action may be filed in the RTC of
Manila.

d. If the offended party is a public officer whose office
is outside Manila, the action may be filed in the RTC
of the province or city where he held office at the time
of the commission of the offense.

Crimes committed aboard merchant vessels
1) The RPC is applied to Philippine vessels if the
crime is committed while the ship is treading:
a) Philippine waters (intraterritorial application)
b) The High Seas i.e. waters NOT under the
jurisdiction of any State (extraterritorial
application)

2) While in the territorial waters of another country
(i.e. a foreign vessel treading Philippine waters OR
Philippine vessels treading waters under the
jurisdiction of another state):

a) FRENCH RULE: It is the FLAG/Nationality of the
vessel which determines jurisdiction UNLESS the
crime violates the peace and order of the host
country.

b) ENGLISH RULE: the location or situs of the crime
determines jurisdiction UNLESS the crime merely
relates to internal affairs of the vessel.

NOTE: Philippines adheres to ENGLISH RULE.

NOTE: These rules are NOT applicable if the vessel
is on the high seas when the crime was committed, in
these cases, the laws of the nationality of the ship will
always apply.

3. When the crime is committed in a war vessel of a
foreign country, the NATIONALITY of the vessel will
ALWAYS determine jurisdiction because war vessels
are part of the sovereignty of the country to whose
navel force they belong.

The country of registry determines the nationality of
the vessel, NOT ITS OWNERSHIP. A Filipino-owned
vessel registered in China must fly the Chinese flag.

4. Three International Theories on Aerial Jurisdiction
a. Free Zone Theory
The atmosphere over the country is free and not
subject to the jurisdiction of the subjacent state,
except for the protection of its national security
and public order.

b. Relative Theory
The subjacent state exercises jurisdiction over
the atmosphere only to the extent that it can
effectively exercise control thereof.

c. Absolute Theory
i. The subjacent state has complete jurisdiction
over the atmosphere above it subject only to the
innocent passage by aircraft of a foreign country.
NOTE: The Philippines adopts this theory.

ii. Under this theory, if the crime is committed in
an aircraft, no matter how high, as long as it can
be established that it is within the Philippine
atmosphere, Philippine criminal law will govern.



a. A killed B in Manila. Wanting to conceal the
commission of the crime, he drove through Pasay
City, Paranaque City and Tagaytay City and finally
buried the corpse of B in a far-flung area in Tagaytay.
Where could an action for homicide against A be
filed?

Suggested Answer: An action may be filed only in the
City of Manila, specifically with the prosecutors
office. The crime of homicide is consummated upon
the death of the victim.

b. X, a Filipino seafarer aboard a Swedish ship
docked in Manila North Harbor got into a fistfight with
Y, a Japanese seafarer. The fistfight resulted in slight
physical injuries to X. X files a complaint in the
Prosecutors Office in Manila. Will the case prosper?

Suggested Answer: No, it is Swedish Law which will
apply. Following the English Rule, if the crime merely
relates to internal affairs of the vessel, the flag state
has jurisdiction.

c. X, a Filipino seafarer aboard a Swedish ship
docked in Manila North Harbor got into a fistfight with
Y, a Japanese seafarer. The fistfight was due to a
dispute over the ownership of several hundred grams
of shabu. The fistfight resulted in serious physical
injuries to X. X files a complaint in the Prosecutors
Office in Manila. Will the case prosper?

Suggested Answer: Yes, Philippine Laws must apply
because importation of illegal substances is a
violation of public peace and order.

d. SS Barko, a merchant vessel registered in the
Philippines, was traversing the South China Sea
when a Filipino passenger X was slapped in public by
another passenger Y, causing X grave
embarrassment. X filed a case for slander by deed in
the MTC of Rizal against Y. Will the case prosper?

Suggested Answer: Yes. The South China Sea forms
part of the High Seas, hence Art. 2 of the RPC states
that Philippine law applies.

e. SS Sirena, a Philippine ship docked in Batangas is
bound to deliver goods and passengers to Davao. On
its way to Davao, the ship passes through the
provinces of Romblon and Cebu. While the ship was
on sea, M stole the watch of N at gunpoint. N wishes
to file a robbery case against M. Where could N file
the case?

Suggested Answer: Any of the Regional Trial Courts
of Batangas, Davao, Romblon or Cebu. Apply Rule
110, Sec. 15c. SS Sirena is a Philippine ship, crime
was committed inside Philippine waters.

f. A Philippine plane is travelling from Manila to Cebu.
While in-flight, a passenger was killed. Where could a
complaint for homicide be filed by the offended party?

Suggested Answer: In the court of any municipality or
Sec.15)

g. A foreign-registered plane is travelling from Manila
to Cebu. While in-flight, a passenger was killed.
Where could a complaint for homicide be filed by the
offended party?

Suggested Answer: In the court of any municipality or
Sec.15b)

h. A Philippine plane is travelling from Cebu to Hong
Kong, goes through Borneo, Malaysia and Singapore.
While in-flight within the territorial jurisdiction of the
City of Manila, a passenger was killed. Where could a

Suggested Answer: Any court in the Philippines
where the case is first filed. Apply Art. 2 in relation to
Rule 110, Sec. 15d.

i. A Philippine plane is travelling from Manila to Spain.
While in-flight and within the territory of India, the
plane was hijacked. Where to file the case? Where
could a complaint for hijacking be filed by the
offended party?


Suggested Answer: Any court in the Philippines
where the case is first filed. Apply Art. 2 in relation to
Rule 110, Sec. 15d.

i. A Philippine ship is travelling from Tawi-Tawi to
Malaysia to Singapore. While within the high seas, A
killed B. Where could a complaint for homicide be
filed by the offended party?

Suggested Answer: Philippine Laws apply (Art. 2 in
relation to Rule 110, Sec. 15). Therefore, in any court
where the case is first filed.

j. A Philippine ship is travelling from Tawi-Tawi to
Malaysia to Singapore. While within the territorial
waters of Malaysia, A killed B. Where could a

Suggested Answer: Depends on which rule Malaysia
has in force English Rule or French Rule. But
actually, theyre conversely related to each other.
Thus, in this example, the case can be filed only in
Malaysia.

k. An unregistered ship is travelling from Tawi-Tawi to
Malaysia to Singapore. While within the international
waters, the passengers of the unregistered ship fired
at the passengers of a Philippine ship. Where could a

Suggested Answer: Philippines has jurisdiction,
piracy is a crime committed against humanity and the
law of nations. As such, it can be tried in any country.

l. An unregistered ship is travelling from Tawi-Tawi to
Malaysia to Singapore. While within high seas, a
Chinese citizen killed a Filipino. Where could a

Suggested Answer: Nowhere. Its an unregistered
vessel. Some authors note that an unregistered
vessel is necessarily a private vessel, hence it could
be tried in the Philippines.

WHEN MAY OFFENDED PARTY INTERVENE?

When the civil action is instituted together with the
criminal action according to Rule 111, then the
offended part may intervene by counsel in the
prosecution of the offense.

Party includes not only the government but other
persons as well, such as the complainant who may
be affected by the judgment rendered in the criminal
proceedings. [People v. Madali (2001)]

When private Prosecutor is Allowed to Intervene
GENERAL RULE: An offended party has the right to
intervene in the prosecution of a crime.

EXCEPTIONS:
1) Where, from the nature of the crime and the law
defining and punishing it, no civil liability arises in
favor of a private offended party.

2) Where, from the nature of the offense, the private
offended party is entitled to civil indemnity arising
therefrom but he has waived the same or has
expressly reserved his right to institute a separate
civil action or he has already instituted such action.

Any move on the part of the complainant or offended
party to dismiss the criminal case, even if without
objection of the accused, should first be referred to
the prosecuting fiscal for his own view on the matter.
He controls the prosecution of the case and may
have reasons why the case should not be dismissed.
[Republic v. Sunga]

WHAT ARE THE REMEDIES AGAINST
DEFECTIVE COMPLAINT OR INFORMATION?

1. Motion to Quash
Formerly called a demurrer, it is a special pleading,
filed by the accused, which hypothetically admits the
truth of the facts spelled out in the
complaint/information and sets up a matter, which, if
duly proved, would preclude further proceedings.

GENERAL RULE: At any time before entering his
plea. [Rule 117, Sec. 1] It can be filed even before
jurisdiction over his person has been acquired and
during PI.

EXCEPTION:
1) If the accusatory pleadings do not charge an
offense;

2) If the court has no jurisdiction over the case;
3) If the offense or penalty has already been
extinguished;
4) If further prosecution would put him in double
jeopardy.

a. Complaint/Information does not conform
substantially to the prescribed form

The formal and substantial requirements are provided
for in Rule 110, Sec. 6-12.

GENERAL RULE Lack of substantial compliance
renders the accusatory pleading quashable.

EXCEPTION: Mere defects in matters of form may be
cured by amendment. Objections not raised are
deemed waived, and the accused cannot seek
affirmative relief on such ground nor raise it for the
first time on appeal.

Vague or broad allegations are generally not
grounds for a MTQ. The correct remedy for this is a
bill of particulars.

b. Duplicitous Information

Duplicity of Offense in information or complaint
means the joinder of 2 or more SEPARATE and
DISTINCT or DIFFERENT offenses in one and the
same information or complaint.

GENERAL RULE: Complaint/information must
charge only one offense. (Rule 110, Sec. 13)

EXCEPTION: Cases in which existing laws prescribe
a single punishment for various offenses.
a. Complex crimes;
b. Special Complex crimes;
c. Continuous crimes or delicto continuado;
d. Crimes susceptible of being committed in
various modes;
e. Crimes of which another offense is an
ingredient.

Waiver
It is waivable. The accused may be convicted of all
the offenses alleged and proved if accused goes to
trial without objecting to the inclusion of 2 or more
separate offenses in the same information.

c. Facts charged do not constitute an offense
In all criminal cases, the accused should be informed
of the nature and the cause of the accusation against
him. An information which does not charge an
offense or does not allege all the elements of a crime,
is void.

Test: WON the facts alleged, if hypothetically
admitted, would meet the essential elements of
the offense, as defined by law.

Effect of missing element if proved in trial
That the missing element may be proved during the
trial or that prosecution has presented evidence to
establish the same cannot have the effect of
validating the void information or proving an offense
which does not exist.

The defect is not cured by failure to move to quash or
by plea of guilty. The failure does not imply a waiver
of the defects that go to the jurisdiction of the offense
or to lack in some of the essential elements of the
offense charged.

What to do if MTQ is granted
Instead of dismissing, the court should give
prosecution an opportunity to amend the information.
[Rule 117, Sec. 4] If given the opportunity, and still no
amendment, the court may dismiss the case.

When the court dismisses the case, the prosecutor
should file a valid information, not a petition for review
for certiorari.


X fired his gun once, but the bullet killed two persons.
He was charged with two counts of homicide in one
information. Can he be convicted under that
information?
Suggested Answer: Yes. It falls under the exception
to the rule. This is a compound crime in which one
act results in two or more grave or less grave
felonies. The law provides only one penalty for the
two offenses.

X was charged with both robbery and estafa in one
information. Can he be convicted of both offenses?

Suggested Answer: It depends. If he objects to the
duplicitous information before arraignment, he cannot
be convicted under the information. But if he fails to
object before arraignment, he can be convicted of as
many offenses as there are in the information.

X was speeding on a highway when his car collided
with another car. The other car was totally wrecked
and the driver of the other car suffered serious
physical injuries. How many informations or
complaints should be filed against X?

Suggested Answer: Only one information should be
filed for serious physical injuries and damage to
property through reckless imprudence. The
information against X cannot be split into two
because there was only one negligent act resulting in
serious physical injuries and damage to property.

Same case, but the injuries suffered by the driver
were only slight physical injuries. How many
informations should be filed?

Suggested Answer: Two informations one for the
slight physical injuries and the other for damage to
property. Light felonies cannot be complexed.

2. Amendment or Substitution (Rule 110, Sec. 14)

When available
Section 14 applies only to original cases and not to
appealed cased.

Kinds of amendment:

1. Before the plea

General rule: any amendment, formal or
substantial, before the accused enters his plea may
be done without leave of court.

Exception: Any amendment before plea which:
a. downgrades the nature of the offense
charged in
b. excludes any accused from the complaint or
information
c. is any charge favorable to the accused

In these cases, amendment can be done only:
1. Upon motion by the prosecutor;
2. With notice to the offended party; and
3. With LEAVE OF COURT.

2. After the plea covers only formal amendment
provided:
a. Leave of court is obtained;
b. Such amendment is not prejudicial to the
rights of the accused.

Except: 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 as to substance may be made but there
is a need for another arraignment of the accused
under the amended information (Doctrine of
Supervening Event)

If the supervening event which changes the nature of
the crime to a more serious one occurred after the
accused has been convicted, which makes the
amendment of the information no longer the remedy
of the prosecution, the prosecution can and should
charge the accused for such more serious crime,
without placing the accused in double jeopardy, there
being no identity of the offense charged in the first
information and in the second one.

Why is this the rule for amendments after plea?
Because if substantial amendments were allowed
after plea, this might constitute double jeopardy.

Test for propriety of amendment after plea:
The test as to whether a defendant is prejudiced by
the amendment of an information has been said to
be:
1. when a defense under the complaint or
information, as it originally stood, would no
longer be available after the amendment is
made; and,
2. when any evidence the accused might have,
would be inapplicable to the complaint or
information as amended

An amendment is only in form:
a. Where it neither affects nor alters the nature
of the offense charged; OR

b. Where the charge does not deprive the
accused of a fair opportunity to present his
defense; OR
c. Where it does not involve a change in the
basic theory of the prosecution; OR
d. Where it necessarily includes or is
necessarily included or is the same offense
as the one to be amended.

AN AMENDMENT IS AN AMENDMENT IN
SUBSTANCE where it covers matters involving the
recital of facts constituting the offense charged and
determinative of the jurisdiction of the court.

Is an additional allegation of habitual delinquency
and recidivism a substantial amendment?
No. These allegations only relate to the range of the
imposable penalty but not the nature of the offense.

Is an additional allegation of conspiracy a
substantial amendment?
Yes because it changes the theory of the defense. It
makes the accused liable not only for his own acts
but also for those of his coconspirators.
(Old J. Sabio answer)

The new answer is: No, it is not a substantial
amendment in the following example: X is charged
with murder as principal. Later, the complaint is
amended to include two other persons who allegedly
conspired with X. Can X invoke double jeopardy on
the ground that the amendment is substantial? No.
The amendment is merely a formal amendment
because it does not prejudice the rights of X, who
was charged as a principal to begin with.

Is a change in the items stolen by the accused a
substantial amendment?
Yes because it affects the essence of the imputed
crime and would deprive the accused of the
opportunity to meet all the allegations in preparation
of his defense.

When Amendments to Information may be
allowed:
1. It does not deprive the accused of the right to
invoke prescription;
2. It does not affect or alter the nature of the
offense originally charged;
3. It does not involve a change in the basic
theory of the prosecution so as to require the
accused to undergo any material charge or
modification in his defense;
4. It does not expose the accused to a charge
which would call for a higher penalty;
5. It does not cause surprise or deprive the
accused of an opportunity to meet the new
averment.

Substitution
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.

When the prosecution is convinced that it would not
be able to convict or to cause the conviction of the
accused, the prosecution can cause the substitution
of information.

No double jeopardy in substitution
In substitution, there is absolutely no double jeopardy
because it involves a different offense.

Amendment
Substitution Of
Information Or
Complaint
May involve either formal or
substantial changes.
Involves substantial
change from the original
charge.
Amendment before the plea has
been entered can be effected
without leave of court.
Substitution of
information must be with
leave of court as the
original information has
to be dismissed.
Amendment is only as to form, there
is NO need for another preliminary
investigation and the retaking of the
plea of the accused.
Another preliminary
investigation is entailed
and the accused has to
plead anew to the new
information.
An amended information refers to
the same offense charged in the
original information or to an offense
which necessarily includes or is
necessarily included in the original
charge, hence substantial
amendments to the information after
the plea has been taken cannot be
made over the objection of the
accused, for if the original
Requires or
presupposes that the
new information
involves a different
offense which does not
include or is not
necessarily included in
the original charge;
hence the accused
cannot claim double

information would be withdrawn, the
accused could invoke double
jeopardy.
jeopardy.

Variance of Judgment

GENERAL RULE: The defendant can be convicted
only of the crime with which he is charged.

Rationale: He has the right to be informed of the
nature of the offense with which he is charged before
he is put on trial.

However, minor variance between the information
and the evidence
1. Does not alter the nature of the
2. offense;
3. Does not determine or qualify the crime or
penalty;
4. Cannot be ground for acquittal.

EXCEPTION: He can be convicted of an offense
proved provided it is included in the charge, or of an
offense charged which is included in that which is
proved. [Rule 120, Sec. 4]

Exception to the exception: Where there are facts
that supervened after the filing of the information
which change the nature of the offense.

Effect of Variance of Judgment

1. When the offense proved is less serious than,
and is necessarily included in, the offense
charged, in which case the defendant shall be
convicted of the offense proved;
2. When the offense proved is more serious than
and includes the offense charged, in which case
the defendant shall be convicted of the offense
charged;

NOTE: In variance of judgment, just look at which
between the offense charged and the offense proved
is more favorable to the accused. He/she shall be
convicted of the one which is more favorable.

The right to be informed of the charges has not been
violated because where an accused is charged with a
specific crime, he is duly informed also of lesser
crimes/offenses included therein.

The accused can be convicted of an offense only
when it is both charged and proven.

The mere fact that the evidence presented would
indicate that a lesser offense outside the courts
jurisdiction was committed does not deprive the court
of its jurisdiction, which had vested in it under the
allegations in the information. (following the Principle
of Adherence)

When the offense as charged is included in or
necessarily includes the offense (Rule 120, Sec.
5)
The offense charged necessarily includes the offense
proved when some of the essential
elements/ingredients of the former, as alleged in the
complaint/information, constitute the latter.

An offense charged is necessarily included in the
offense proved when the essential ingredients of the
former constitute or form part of those constituting the
latter.

Rule for Complex Crimes
Where a complex crime is charged and the evidence
fails to support the charge as to one of the
component offenses, the accused can be convicted
of the other.

The accused should move to quash on the ground of
duplicity to prevent him from being convicted of as
many component offenses as may be proved.


COURT ORIGINAL JURISDICTION APPELATE JURISDICTION
Metropolitan,
Municipal and
Municipal Circuit
Trial Courts

If imprisonment and/or fine:
- 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
If fine only:
- If the amount does NOT exceed P4,000
Cases falling under Summary Procedure:
a. Violations of traffic laws, rules and
regulations;
b. Violations of the rental law;
c. Violations of municipal or city ordinances;
d. Violations of BP 22, otherwise known as
Bouncing Checks Law (A.M. No. 00-11-01-
SC, effective April 15, 2003);
e. All other criminal cases where the
penalty is imprisonment NOT exceeding 6
months and/or P 1,000 fine irrespective of
other penalties or civil liabilities arising
therefrom and
f. offenses involving damage to property
through criminal negligence where the
imposable fine is not exceeding P10,000.
Damage to Property through Criminal
Negligence
NONE
Regional Trial
Courts

If imprisonment and/or fine:
- Offenses the imposable penalty for which
exceeds 6 years imprisonment
- 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
All cases decided by the MTCs in their
respective territorial jurisdiction.
If fine only:
- If amount EXCEEDS P4,000

General Jurisdiction:
- Offenses not within the exclusive
jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body

Those cases which are not punishable by
imprisonment for more than 6 years:
- Violations of the Intellectual Property
Code
- Libel
- Violations of the Dangerous Drugs Act
- Violation of the Election Code
- Violation of DAR Law


As Family Court:
Criminal cases where:
a. One or more of the accused is/are below
eighteen (18) years of age but not less than
nine (9) years of age; or
b. Where one of the victims is a minor at
the time of the commission of the offense;
c. Cases against minors cognizable under
the Dangerous Drug Act;
d. Violations of RA 7610, otherwise known
as the Special Protection of Children
Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and
Discrimination Act as amended by RA
7658; and
e. Cases of domestic violence against
women and children.

Sandiganbayan Sec. 4 of RA 8249:

1. The offender is:
a. Executive
Officials of the executive branch, occupying
salary grade 27 and higher, specifically
including:
Provincial governors, vice governors,
members of the sangguniang
panlalawigan and provincial
treasurers, assessors, engineers and
other provincial department heads.
City mayors, vice-mayors, members
of the sangguniang panlungsod, city
treasurers, assessors, engineers and
other city department heads.
Officials of the diplomatic service
occupying the position of consul and
higher.
Philippine army and air force
colonels, naval captains, and all
officers of higher rank.
Officers of the PNP, while occupying
the position of provincial director and
those holding the rank of senior
superintendent or higher.
City and provincial prosecutors and
their assistants, and officials and
prosecutors in the Office of the
Ombudsman and special
prosecutors.
Presidents/directors/trustees
/managers of GOCCs, state
universities or educational
institutions/foundations.
b. Legislative
Members of Congress and officials thereof
By ordinary appeal:
- from the judgments, resolutions or orders of
the Regional Trial Courts in cases originally
decided by them, in their respective territorial
jurisdictions.

Regional Trial Courts in the exercise of their
appellate jurisdiction over cases originally
decided by the Metropolitan Trial Courts,
Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit
Trial Courts in their respective jurisdiction.

(If all accused are occupying positions lower
than Salary Grade 27 or not covered by the
enumeration, and crime is committed in relation
to public office or one of the crimes listed
herein)

classified as Grade 27 and up;
c. Judiciary
Members of the Judiciary, without prejudice
to Constitutional provisions.
d. Constitutional Commission
Chairmen and members of Constitutional
Commissions, without prejudice to
Constitutional provisions.

2. The offense committed is a violation of:
a. R.A. 3019 (Anti Graft and Corrupt
Practices Act);
b. R.A. 1379 (Ill Gotten Wealth);
c. Chapter 2, Section 2, Title 7, Book 2 of
the RPC (Bribery, Indirect Bribery, Qualified
Bribery and Corruption of public officials);
d. E.O. Nos. 1, 2, 14, 14-A (Sequestration
cases)
Public Officer, In relation to his office:
1. Offender is anyone of those listed above
2. Any offense or felony whether simple or
complexed
3. Committed in relation to their office

NOTE: Any case at all, as long as in
relation to his office. According to Lacson
vs. Executive Secretary, a crime is
committed in relation to ones office when
the crime would not have been committed
had it not been for the office of the public
officer or employee.

Other Cases:
1. Accused has salary grade 27 or higher
2. The crime committed is in violation of:
a. RA 6713 Code of Conduct and Ethical
Standards
b. RA 7659 Heinous Crimes
c. RA 9160 Anti-Money Laundering
d. RA 7080 Plunder
e. PD 46 Gift-giving Decree

Court of Tax
Appeals
Exclusive original jurisdiction over all
criminal offenses arising from violations of
the National Internal Revenue Code or
Tariff and Customs
Code and other laws administered by the
By appeal:
- from the judgments, resolutions or orders of
the Regional Trial Courts in tax cases originally
decided by them, in their respective territorial
jurisdictions.

Bureau of Internal Revenue or the Bureau
of Customs.
Regional Trial Courts in the exercise of their
appellate jurisdiction over
tax cases originally decided by the Metropolitan
Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and
jurisdiction.
By appeal:
- from the RTC in cases commenced therein,
except those appealable to the Supreme Court
or Sandiganbayan or Court of Tax Appeals
Court of Appeals
- from the Regional Trial Courts in cases
appealed thereto from the Metropolitan Trial
Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal
Circuit Trial Courts in their respective
jurisdiction except those appealable to the
If RTC imposes reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment:
- Notice of Appeal filed with CA so that case will
be elevated to SC

If RTC imposes death penalty:
- Automatic review by CA first, no notice of
appeal necessary

If CA also imposes death penalty:
CA does not make entry of judgment but
elevates entire record to SC for review
Supreme Court
By petition for review on certiorari:
- Penalty imposed is lower than reclusion
perpetua or life imprisonment

Crim Pro Reviewer - Jurisdiction of Courts, Rule 110

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Исходное описание:

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Crim Pro Reviewer - Jurisdiction of Courts, Rule 110

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

2S 2011-2012 with Anjo David s notes Criminal Procedure 1

Вам также может понравиться