CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
and is retained even if the penalty for the offense is later
Rule 110 PROSECUTION of Offenses
1. General Rule: MTC and RTC courts gain jurisdiction
over the offense upon the filing of complaint by a
complainant or an information by the prosecuting officer
Court gains jurisdiction over the person of the
accused upon arrest or surrender; such jurisdiction once
gained cannot be lost even if accused escapes ( Gimenez
vs. Nazareno)
Jurisdiction of the court over the offense is
determined at the time of the institution of the action
Complaint
A sworn statement
Subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer or other
officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated
May be filed either with the court or in the fiscals office
generally to commence the preliminary investigation of the
charges made
4. Cases where civil courts of equal rank are vested
with concurrent jurisdiction:
1 Features stated in Art. 2, RPC
Cognizable by proper court in which charge is first
filed
1 Continuing crimes committed in different judicial
regions
2 Offenses wherein any of the essential elements were
committed in different territorial jurisdictions
3 Offenses committed aboard a train, vehicle, aircraft or
vessel (see R110, 15)
i. Railroad, train, aircraft
(1) Territory or municipality where vehicle passed
(2) Place of departure
(3) Place of arrival
ii. Vessel
(1) First port of entry
(2) Thru which it passed during voyage
e. Libel and written defamation
5. Remedies of offended party when fiscal
unreasonably refuses to file an information or include a
person therein as an accused
1 In case of grave abuse of discretion, action for
mandamus
2 Lodge a new complaint against the offenders
3 Take up matter with the Secretary of Justice
4 Institute administrative charges against the erring
fiscal
5 File criminal charges under Art. 208, RPC (prosecution
of offenses)
6 File civil action under Art. 27, NCC for damages (PO
lowered or raised (People vs. Lagon)
2. Complaint sworn written statement charging a
person with an offense, subscribed by the offended
party, any peace officer or other public official charged
with the enforcement of the law violated
Information accusation in writing charging a person
with an offense, subscribed by the fiscal and filed with
the court
3. Complaint and Information distinguished:
Information
Need not be sworn to
Subscribed to by the fiscal
Filed with the court
refuses or neglects to perform official duty)
7 Secure appointment of another fiscal
8 Institute another criminal action if no double jeopardy is
involved
6. Writs of injunction or prohibition to restrain a criminal
prosecution are not available, EXCEPT
1 To afford adequate protection to constitutional rights of
accused
2 Necessary for the orderly administration of justice or to
avoid oppression or multiplicity of actions
3 Pre-judicial question which is sub judice
4 Acts of the officer are without or in excess of authority
5 Prosecution is under an invalid law, ordinance or regulation
6 Double jeopardy is clearly apparent
7 Court has no jurisdiction over the case
8 Case of persecution rather than prosecution
9 Charges are manifestly false and motivated by lust for
vengeance
10 Clearly no prima facie case against the accused and MTQ on
that ground had been denied
7. Institution of Criminal Actions:
a. In RTC:
By filing a complaint with the appropriate officer for the
purpose of conducting requisite preliminary investigation
therein.
b. In Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts:
By filing the complaint or information directly with said
courts, or a complaint with the fiscals office
c. In Metropolitan Trial Courts
By filing the complaint ONLY with the office of the fiscal
In all 3 above cases, such institution shall interrupt the
period of prescription of the offense charged (Rule 110, 1)
d. Offenses subject to summary procedure
[i.e. (1) violation of traffic laws; (2) violation of rental laws; (3)
violation of municipal or city ordinances; and (4) criminal cases
where the penalty does not exceed 6
months or fine of P1000 or both, irrespective of other
imposable penalties and civil liabilities]
The complaint or information shall be filed directly in
court without need of a prior preliminary examination or
preliminary investigation.
Zaldivia vs. Reyes since a criminal case covered by
the Rules of Summary Procedure shall be deemed
commenced only when it is filed in court, then the
running of the prescriptive period shall be halted on the
date the case is actually filed in court and not on any
date before that.
Reodica vs. CA [clarifies Zaldivia above] Under Art.
91 of the RPC, the period of prescription shall be
interrupted by the filing of the complaint or
information. It does not distinguish whether the
complaint is filed for preliminary examination or
investigation only, or for an action on the merits. Thus,
the filing of the complaint even with the fiscals office
should suspend the running of the Statute of Limitations.
The ruling in Zaldivia is not applicable to all cases
subject to the Rules on Summary Procedure, since that
particular case involved a violation of an
ordinance. Therefore, the applicable law therein was
not Art. 91 of the RPC, but Act No. 3326 (An Act to
Establish Periods of Prescription for Violations Penalized
by Special Acts and Municipal Ordinances and to Provide
when Prescription Shall Begin to Run), 2 of which
provides that period of prescription is suspended only
when judicial proceedings are instituted against the
guilty party.
8. Contents of information
a. Name of the accused
Information may be amended as to the name of the
accused, but such amendment cannot be questioned for
the first time on appeal (People vs. Guevarra)
Error of name of the offended party: if material to the
case, it necessarily affects the identification of the act
charged. Conviction for robbery cannot be sustained if
there is a variance between the allegation and the proof
as to the ownership of the property stolen.
b. Designation of offense by statute (or of
section/subsection of statute violated)
Only one offense charged, EXCEPT where law
prescribes a single punishment for various offenses.
If facts do not completely allege all the elements of
the crime charged, the info may be quashed; however,
the prosecution is allowed to amend the info to include
the necessary facts (People vs. Purisima)
c. Acts or omissions complained of constituting the
offense
Information need only allege facts, not include all the
evidence which may be used to prove such facts
(Balitaan vs. CFI)
d. Name of offended party
e. Approximate time of commission
Approximation of time is sufficient; amendment as to
time is only a formal amendment; no need to dismiss
case (People vs. Molero)
A significant discrepancy in the time alleged cannot be
sustained since such would allow the prosecution to
prove an offense distantly removed from the alleged
date, thus substantially impairing the rights of the
accused to be informed of the charges against him
(People vs. Reyes)
f. Place of commission
Conviction may be had even if it appears that the
crime was committed not at the place alleged, provided
that the place of actual commission was within the
courts jurisdiction and accused was not surprised by the
variance between the proof and the information
Qualifying and inherent aggravating circumstances
need to be alleged as they are integral parts of the
crime. If proved, but not alleged, become only generic
aggravating circumstances.
9. Amendment of information and Substitution of
information, distinguished
Amendment Su
Involves either formal or substantial changes Ne
Without leave of court if before plea Ne
dis
Where only as to form, there is no need for another An
preliminary investigation and retaking of plea of accused to
Refers to the same offense charged or which necessarily Re
includes or is necessarily included in original charges, hence, off
substantial amendments to info after plea taken cannot be or
made over objections of accused for if original info is jeo
withdrawn, accused could invoke double jeopardy
10. After plea, amendment only as to matters of form,
provided
1 Leave of court is obtained; and
2 Amendment is not prejudicial to rights of accused
11. When amendment is only as to form
1 Neither affects or alters nature of offense charged
2 Charge does not deprive accused of a fair opportunity
to present his defense
3 Does not involve a change in basic theory of
prosecution
12. Exceptions to rule on venue
1 Felonies in Art. 2, RPC (cognizable by proper court in
which charge is first filed)
2 Continuing offenses
3 Piracy which is triable anywhere
4 Libel (residence; or where first published)
5 In exceptional cases, to ensure fair trial and impartial
inquiry
13. Special cases (who may prosecute)
a. Adultery and concubinage
Only offended spouse can be complainant
Both guilty parties must be included in complaint
b. Crimes against chastity
With consent of the offended party, offended spouse,
grandparents, guardian, or state as parens patriae, in
that order
Offended party, even if minor, has right to initiate the
prosecution of the case independently of parents,
grandparents or guardian, unless she is
incompetent/incapable on grounds other than minority.
If offended party who is a minor fails to file the
complaint, her parents, grandparents or guardian may
do so.
In crimes against chastity, the consent of the victim is
a jurisdictional requirementretraction renders the
information void (People vs. Ocapan)
If complexed with a public crime, the provincial fiscal
may sign the complaint on his own
c. Defamation (consisting of imputation of offenses in
[a] or [b])
Complainant must be offended party
The offended party may intervene in the prosecution
of the criminal case because of her interest in it (Banal
vs. Tadeo)
14. Procedure
1 Complaint filed in MTC or info filed in RTC where an
essential ingredient of the crime took place
(territorial jurisdiction)
1 Amendment as a matter of right before plea
2 Amendment upon discretion of the court after
plea
Inclusion of other accused is only a formal
amendment which would not be prejudicial to the
accused and should be allowed (People vs. CA)
d. After plea and before judgment, if it appears there
was a mistake in charging proper offense, court shall
dismiss original info upon the filing of a corrected one,
provided that the accused will not be placed in double
jeopardy (substitution)
Fiscal determines direction of prosecution;
complainant must ask fiscal if he wants to dismiss the
case; the motion to dismiss must be addressed to the
court which has discretion over the disposition of the
case (Republic vs. Sunga)
Objection to the amendment of an information or
complaint must be raised at the time the amendment is
made; otherwise, deemed to have consented thereto.
15. Remedies
a. Motion to quash
May be filed after arraignment but before plea on the
grounds provided by the rules (generally, a flaw in the
info)
If duplicity of offense charged is not raised in trial
through a motion to quash info, the right to question it
is waived (People vs. Ocapan)
b. Motion to dismiss
May be filed after plea but before judgment on most
of grounds for motion to quash
16. Duplicity of Offense (in information or complaint)
Defined as the joinder of separate and distinct
offenses in one and the same information/complaint
Remedy: file a motion to quash; failure is equivalent
to a waiver
Exception: when existing laws prescribe a single
punishment (complex crimes)
Rule 111 Prosecution of Civil Action
1. General Rule: The injured party may file a civil
action independent of the criminal proceeding to recover
damages from the offender.
Article 32 is a valid cause of a civil action for damages
against public officers who impair the Constitutional
rights of citizens (Aberca vs. Ver)
Even if the private prosecutor participates in the
prosecution, if he is not given the chance to prove
damages, the offended party is not barred from filing a
separate civil action
2. Civil action for recovery of civil liability impliedly
instituted, EXCEPT
1 Waiver
2 Reservation of right to institute separate action
3 Institution of civil action prior to criminal action
NOTE: Under SC Circular 57-97, all criminal actions
for violations of BP Blg. 22 shall be deemed to
necessarily include the corresponding civil action, and no
reservation to file such civil action separately shall be
allowed or recognized.
San Ildefonso Lines vs. CA past pronouncements of
the SC that the requirement in Rule 111 that a
reservation be made prior to the institution of an
independent civil action is an unauthorized
amendment to substantive law is now no longer
controlling. Far from altering substantive rights, the
primary purpose of the reservation requirement is to
avoid multiplicity of suits, to prevent delays, to clear
congested dockets, to simplify the work of the trial
court, and in short, the attainment of justice with the
least expense and vexation to parties-litigants.
3. Civil action suspended when criminal action filed,
EXCEPT
1 Independent civil action (Arts. 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of
NCC)
2 Prejudicial civil action
3 Civil case consolidated with criminal action
4 Civil action not one intended to enforce civil liability
arising from the offense (e.g., action for legal
 separation against a spouse who committed
concubinage)
4. Prejudicial question arises when
1 The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately
related to the issue raised in the criminal action
2 The resolution of such issue will determine whether
the criminal action will proceed or not
Requisites for a prejudicial question:
1 The civil action involves an issue similar or intimately
related to the issue raised in the criminal action:
and
2 The resolution of such issue determines whether or
not the criminal action may proceed
Petition for suspension of criminal action is to be filed
at any time before prosecution rests.
5. Remedies
a. Reservation of right to institute separate civil
proceedings to recover civil liability arising from crime
Must be made before prosecution presents evidence
Action instituted only after final judgment in criminal
action
b. Petition to suspend the criminal action
May be filed upon existence of a prejudicial question
in a pending civil action
Filed at any time before the prosecution rests
6. Extinction of penal action does not carry with it
extinction of the civil unless the extinction proceeds from
a declaration in a final judgment that the fact from
which the civil might arise did not exist.
Final judgment in civil absolving defendant from civil
liability not a bar to criminal action
7. Filing fees:
1 Actual or compensatory damages filing fees not
required
2 Moral, temperate and exemplary filing fees required
1 If alleged, fees must be paid by offended party upon
filing of complaint or information
1 If not alleged, filing fees considered a first
lien on the judgment
Rule 112 Preliminary Investigation
1. Preliminary investigation inquiry or proceeding to
determine if there is sufficient ground to engender a
well-founded belief that a crime cognizable by the RTC
has been committed, and that the respondent is
probably guilty thereof, and should be held for trial
A preliminary investigation is only necessary for an
information to be filed with the RTC; complaints may be
filed with the MTC without need of an information, which
is merely recommendatory (Tandoc vs. Resultan)
Absence of a preliminary investigation is NOT a
ground for a motion to quash the information; an
information filed without a preliminary investigation is
defective but not fatal; in its absence, the accused may
ask for one; it is the fiscals refusal to conduct a
preliminary investigation when the accused demands
one which is a violation of the rights of the accused
(Doromal vs. Sandiganbayan). Court should not dismiss
the info, but hold the case in abeyance and either: (1)
conduct its own investigation; or (2) require the fiscal to
hold a reinvestigation.
2. GENERAL RULE: The fiscal conducts the preliminary
investigation before filing an information with the RTC,
EXCEPT where the accused is lawfully arrested without a
warrant and an inquest is conducted.
3. Right to Preliminary Investigation
A personal right and may be waived
Waived by failure to invoke the right prior to or at
least at the time of the plea
4. Who conducts Preliminary Investigation
1 Provincial or city fiscals and their assistants
2 Judges of MTC and MCTC
3 National and regional state prosecutors
4 Such other officers as may be authorized by law
5 Duly authorized legal officers of COMELEC
1 The Ombudsman
2 The PCGG, in cases of ill-gotten wealth
5. Procedure
a. If conducted prior to arrest
i. Complainant files complaint with
(a) Provincial or city fiscal
(b) Regional or state prosecutor
(c) MTC or MCTC judge, excluding MTC judge of Metro
Manila or chartered cities
(d) Other offices authorized by law
1 Investigating officer either dismisses complaint or
asks by subpoena complainant and respondent
to submit affidavits and counter-affidavits
1 If the investigating officer finds prima facie
evidence, he prepares an information
and a resolution
i.e., if fiscal finds reasonable ground to believe that a
crime has been committed and accused is probably
guilty thereof
Prima facie evidence is that evidence which, standing
alone, unexplained and uncontradicted, would be
enough to merit a conviction of the accused
iv. Otherwise, he recommends the dismissal of the
complaint
 If the investigating officer is an MTC judge, and he b. Motion for preliminary investigation
finds that probable cause exists and that there is a need
to place the accused under custody, then he may issue a Filed within 5 days after accused learns an
warrant of arrest information against him has been filed without a
preliminary investigation
Flores vs. Sumaling What differentiates the present
rule from the previous one is that while before, it was c. Motion for re-investigation
mandatory for the investigating judge to issue a warrant
for the arrest of the accused if he found probable cause, d. Appeal to DOJ
the rule now is that the investigating judges power to
order the arrest of the accused is limited to instances in
Filed upon denial of his motion for a preliminary
which there is a necessity for placing him in custody in
investigation, on the ground that his rights to due
order not to frustrate the ends of justice. It is therefore
process of law were violated, ousting the court of
error for the investigating judge to order the issuance of
jurisdiction
a warrant of arrest solely on his finding of probable
cause, without making any finding of a necessity to
place the accused in immediate custody to prevent a e. Petition for prohibition
frustration of justice.
Filed with appellate court to stop the criminal
1 Investigating officer forwards records to the city fiscal proceedings
or chief state prosecutor
1 City fiscal or state prosecutor either dismisses Ordinarily, injunction will not lie but may be granted
the complaint or files the information in in certain cases
court
When prohibition proper to restrain criminal
Decision prevails over decision of the MTC judge proceedings:

vii. Records will not form records of the case proper
Court on its own or on motion may order production
of record
b. If conducted after warrantless arrest
1 If accused waives Art. 125, RPC and asks for a
preliminary investigation, with the assistance of
counsel, then the procedure for one prior to
arrest is followed
1 Inquest conducted as follows
1 When strong-arm tactics are used for vindictive
purposes (Salonga vs. Cruz-Pano)
2 When the accused is deprived of his rights
3 When the statute on which the charge is based is null
and void
4 When it will aid the administration of justice (Tatad
vs. Sandiganbayan)
When multiplicity of suits will be avoided (Guingona vs.
City Fiscal)

(a) Fiscal determines the validity of the arrest

(b) Fiscal determines existence of prima facie evidence

based on the statements of the complainant, arresting
officer and witnesses

(c) Fiscal either dismisses the complaint and orders the

immediate release of the accused, OR prepares and files
an information

While fiscal has quasi-judicial discretion whether or

not to file an information, once it is filed with the court,
the court acquires jurisdiction giving it discretion over
the disposition of the case and the Sec. of Justice should
refrain from entertaining petitions for review or appeals
from the decision of fiscal (Crespo vs. Mogul; Velasquez
vs. Undersecretary of Justice)

NOTE: Information may be filed by offended party,

peace officer or fiscal without preliminary investigation.

6. Remedies

a. Motion for preliminary investigation

Filed when accused is arrested without warrant

Must be with assistance of counsel and after waiving

Art. 125, RPC