Criminal Procedure Midterms Reviewer

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE MIDTERMS REVIEWER Prof. Ongkiko Pamaran’s Book By Paulyn Duman

Criminal Procedure Considerations

–

-

Preliminary -

Criminal Procedure defined: •

• •

is concerned with the procedural steps through which a criminal case passes, commencing with the initial investigation of a crime and concluding with the unconditional release of the offender. it is the procedural administration of criminal justice 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.

3. Mixed

-

-

Sources our criminal procedure: • • • • • • • • •

Rules of Court – January 1, 1964 Revised by he Rules of Court Revision Committee on November 22, 1984. Then it was amended on Oct. 1, 1988. Then on Oct. 3, 1000 in an en banc res it was revised and it took effect on December 1, 2000. Consti 1987 – Bill of Rights Various acts of the legislature – BP 129 Presidential Decrees Executive Orders Decisions of the Supreme Court

Criminal law procedure: •

distinguished

from

criminal

the former is substantive the latter is procedural. Former declares what acts are punishable the latter declares how they are to punished.

of the prosecuting officer and the court and it is characterized by secrecy. Presence before the magistrate is not a requirement.

2. Accusatorial System: requires all crimes to be prosecured by a public prosecutor EXCEPT the so-called private offenses which must be commenced by a complaint of the offended party.

system: it contemplates two contending parties before the court, which hears them impartially and renders judgment only after trial. the preliminary examiniation conducted by the judge before he issues the warrant of arrest is an aspect of the inquisitorial system the right to be present in any stage of the proceedings and defend himself in person, to be exempt from being a witness against himself during the trial are the features of the accusatorial system

Jurisdiction defined: Juris and dico: I speak by the law •

• •

power or the capacity given by the law to a court or tribunal to entertain, hear and determine certain controversies. It is the authority to hear and determine a cause. It is vested in the Court not in the judges. The court has no jurisdiction to punish contemptuous conduct committed against another court.

Distinguished from Venue: • •

Systems of Criminal Procedure:

1. Inquisitorial System: wholly in the hands

Page 1 the accused has the right to be present at any stage of the proceedings and to be heard personally or by counsel. Right to appeal is characteristic of this system (although the judgment of the trial court does not require imprimatur of the court of the last resort before it may attain finality). Essence – there must be a moral certainty of guilt to defeat the consti presumption of innocence.

• • •

the particular country, or geographical area in which a court with jurisdiction may hear and determine a case Venue deals with the locality, the place where the suit may be had, while jurisdiction treats of the power of the court to decide the case on the merits. Venue is procedural, jurisdiction is substantive. Civil cases: venue can be waived or be the subject of an agreement Criminal cases: venue cannot be so waived or stipulated upon because it is an element of jurisdiction.

Page 2 Where jurisdiction attaches: •

• •

it must be made to appear that the law has given the tribunal capacity to entertain the complaint against the person or thing sought to be charged or affected that such complaint has actually been preferred and that such person or thing has been properly brought before the tribunal to answer the charge therein contained.

Exercise of jurisdiction: •

•

•

1. 2. 3.

Jurisdiction should be distinguished from the exercise thereof. The authority to decide a case at all, and not the decision therein, is what makes up jurisdiction. Where there is jurisdiction over the person and subject matter, the decision of all other questions arising in the case is but an exercise of that jurisdiction. Jurisdiction does not depend either on the irregularity of the exercise of such power or on the correctness of the decision made, for the power to decide wrongly as well as rightly, subject to the qualification that a court can render only such judgment as does not transcend in extent or character the law which is applicable to that class of cases. A court may: Act without power or jurisdiction  the act of judgment of the court is wholly void having power or jurisdiction, may exercise it wrongfully  wrong and must be reversed upon error irregularly  irregular and must be corrected by motion.

Criminal jurisdiction: •

•

Requisites of criminal jurisdiction: 1. the offense is one which the court is by law authorized to take cognizance of 2. the offense must have been committed within its territorial jurisdiction 3. 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 • The court may have jurisdiction over the subject matter, over the territory, and over the person of the accused. Jurisdiction over the subject matter: •

•

•

Jurisdiction conferred by law: • •

jurisdiction is conferred only by the Constitution or the law. The jurisdiction of the court is determined by the law in force at the time of the institution of the action.

Jurisdiction a matter of substantive law: •

creates, defines and regulates rights or which regulates the rights and duties which give rise to a cause of action is substantive law, while that which prescribes the methods of enforcing rights or obtains redress for their invasion is remedial or procedural.

power of the tribunal to hear and try a particular offense and impose the punishment for it. It has no power to try and convict or acquit a person for a crime committed within its territory, unless a complaint or information has been filed with said court.

subject matter: means the power to hear and determine cases of the general class to which the proceedings in question belong and is conferred by the sovereign authority which organizes the court and defines its powers. It can be challenged at any stage of the proceedings and for lack of it, a court can dismiss a case ex mero motu (out of its own accord). The mere fact that after the trial and after the court has heard the evidence, it was found that the crime committed was lesser than that described in the complaint, the court CANNOT dismiss the case because the action should have been brought in a lower court. In other words, the courts jurisdiction in the first instance is determined by the facts alleged in the complaint and not by the qualification of the crime made in the title of the complaint, or by the result of proof after trial.

Jurisdiction over the territory: • •

Venue in criminal cases is jurisdictional. As regards territorial jurisdiction, criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of the municipality of province wherein the offense was committed or where any of its essential ingredients took place.

•

The principle seeks to preclude harassment of the defendant and to save him from the inconvenience and expense of depending himself somewhere else. Jurisdiction over the person of the accused: •

Taking into custody by the court of the person of the accused in order that he may be bound to answer for the commission of the offense (Rule 113).

Jurisdiction over continuing crimes: • •

• •

where any of the essential ingredients of the offense took place For it to exist: there should be plurality of acts performed separately during a period of time; unity of the penal of criminal intent or purpose, which means that the two or more violations of the same personal provision are united in one and the same intent leading to the perpetration of the same criminal purpose or aim. Based upon the ground that there is a new commission of the same offense in the jurisdiction where he is found. In such a case, the complaint should allege that the offense was committed within the jurisdiction of the court and not at the place where it was originally committed.

Territorial jurisdiction, how determined: •

•

determined by the allegations in the information as to the situs of the crime and this determines, in the first instance, whether said court has jurisdiction to try the case. Thus, even if the court subsequently dismisses the action upon proof that the offense was committed outside its territory, all proceedings prior thereto are valid.

Exceptions to territorial principle: a. Where the offense was committed under the exceptional circumstances provided for in Art. 2 of the RPC. - commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship - forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Phil Islands or obligations and securities issued by the govt - liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the preceding number

Page 3 while being public officers or employees, commit an offense in the exercise of their functions - commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations • all of these cases are triable in the Philippine courts notwithstanding the fact that it was committed outside of the Phil. b. In cases of piracy – hostes humani generic c. Where an offense is committed on a railroad train, in an aircraft, or any other public or private vehicle in the course of its tripwhere it passed during such trip, departure and arrival. d. Where an offense is committed on board a vessel in the course of its voyage—first port of entry or of any municipality or territory thru which the vessel passed during such voyage e. In those cases where the SC, in the interest of truth and impartial justice, transfers the place of trial from one place to another.  One of these incidental and inherent powers of the courts is that of transferring the trial of cases from one court to another of equal rank in a neighboring site, whenever the imperatives of securing a fair and impartial trial, or of preventing a miscarriage of justice so demand.  the power to transfer venue or palce of trial is expressly granted by the 1987 Consit to the SC, ART. VIII, Sec 5 (4), which provides that the Supreme Court has the power to order a change of venue or place of trial to avoid a miscarriage of justice. f. In case of written defamation: Libel under RA 4363: - criminal and civil actions for damages shall be filed simultaneously or separately with the CFI of the province or city where the libelous article is printed and first published or where any of the offended parties actually resides at the time of the commission of the offense. - Where one of the offended parties is a public officer whose office is in the City of Manila at the time of the commission of the offense, the action shall be filed in the CFI of the City of Manila or of the city or province where the libelous article is printed and first published, and in such case the public officer does not hold office in the City of Manila, the action shall be filed in the CGI of the province or city where he held office at the commission of the offense or where the libelous article is printed and first published and - in case one of the offended parties is a private individual, the action shall be filed -

Page 4

-

-

in the CFI of the province where he actually resides at the time of the commission of the offense of where the libelous matter is printed and first published. The civil action shall be filed in the same court where the crim action is filed and vice versa. That the court where the criminal or civil action for damages is first filed shall acquire jurisdiction to the exclusion of other courts. Preliminary investigation of criminal actions for written defamations as provided in this chapter shall be conducted by the provincial or city fiscal of the province or city, or by the municipal court of the city or capital of the province where such actions may be instituted in accordance with the provisions of this article.

Jurisdiction over the person of accused: • is acquired either upon his: 1. apprehension with or without warrant 2. his voluntary submission to the jurisdiction of the court which may be effected by: - posting bail or - by filing a motion to quash or - by appearing at the arraignment or - entering trial • the voluntary appearance of the accused, through counsel, at the pre-suspension hearing held in connection with an antigraft charge, is considered to be submission to the jurisdiction of the court over his person, even if no warrant has been issued for his arrest. • Jurisdiction over the person of the accused my be waived (as opposed to subject matter). • If he fails to make a seasonable objection thereto, he is deemed to have waived it. • He must go to the court for that purpose only, if he raises other questions, he waives the objection. Criminal jurisdiction, how determined: • •

jurisdiction is determined by the fine and imprisonment prescribed by law. Once jurisdiction is acquired by the court in which the information is filed, it is there retained, regardless of whether the evidence proves a lesser offense than that charged in the information or the subsequent happening of events, although of a character which would have prevented jurisdiction from attaching in the first instance.

Definition and apportionment of jurisdiction, legislative function: •

extent of jurisdiction is ascertained principally from two sources: a. conferred by express or implied provisions of a statue b. Constitution

Criminal Jurisdictions of courts: a. Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts - exclusive original jurisdiction over all violations of city or municipal ordinances committed within their respective territorial jurisdiction - exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with imprisonment of 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. - Offense involving damage to property through criminal negligence, they shall have exclusive original jurisdiction thereof. • However, under RA 7691, fine no longer a factor to determine jurisdiction because of the phrase that the lower court shall have “exclusive original jurisdiction over all offenses punishable with imprisonment not exceeding 6 years irrespective of the amount of fine, regardless of all other impossible accessory or other penalties”. • In seduction by the insertion of the phrase “regardless of other impossible accessory or other penalties including the civil liability arising from such offenses or predicated thereon, “ the offense of simple seduction is now within the exclusive original jurisdiction or metropolitan trial courts, municipal trial courts and municipal circuit trial courts”. • “other impossible accessory or other penalties in the present law, difficulties arising from the question of whether or not the penalty for habitual delinquency should be considered in the determination of jurisdiction, passed away into legal history. • Under PD 1606 amended by RA 8249: Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts now have jurisdiction over cases involving government officials and employees where the imposable penalty is not more than 6 years and the officers charged do not fall

•

under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, meaning those below salary grade of “27 and not among those enumerated in Section 4, PD 1606. No warrant of arrest shall be issued by the Judge in connection with any criminal complaint filed with him for preliminary investigation, unless an examination in writing and under oath or affirmation of the complainant and his witnesses, he finds that a probable cause exists. Any warrant of arrest issued may be served anywhere in the Phil.

b. Regional Trial Courts: All criminal cases

•

•

•

•

not within the exclusive original jurisdiction of any court, tribunal or body. Penalty higher than 6 years. Includes government officers and employees wherein the accused is not one of those falling under the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan, meaning to say, that he is below salary grade “27” and not among those enumerated in Sec. 4, PD 1606 as amended. Criminal cases, concurrent original jurisdiction over the subject matter may now be said to exist only between the Supreme Court and Regional Trial Court in cases affecting ambassadors, public ministers, and consuls. In the matter of territorial jurisdiction, concurrent jurisdiction between courts of equal rank may result in continuing crimes; crimes committed on a railroad train, aircraft or in any public or private vehicle while in the course of its trip, crimes committed on board a vessel in the course of its voyage; other crimes committed outside of the Phil but punishable therein under Article 2 of the RPC and written defamation. On the appellate level, RTC exercise appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by MetroTC, MuniTC, and MCTC, in their respective territorial jurisdiction.

-

d. Court of Appeals •

Exercises: 1. original jurisdiction to issue writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, and quo warranto, and auxiliary writs or processes, whether or not in aid of its appellate jurisdiction 2. exclusive original jurisdiction over the annulment of judgments of Regional Trial Courts 3. exclusive appellate jurisdiction over all final judgments, decisions, resolutions, orders, or awards of Regional Trial Courts and quasi-judicial agencies, instrumentalities, boards, or commissions, EXCEPT those falling within the appellate jurisdiction of the SC in accordance with the Consti ( automatic review in capital punishment cases * but there is a case where the SC gave power to IAC). • The CA shall have the power to receive evidence and perform any and all acts necessary to resolve factual issues raised in a) cases falling within its original jurisdiction such as actions for annulment of judgments of regional trial court provided in number 2 above b) cases falling within its appellate jurisdiction wherein a motion for new trial based only on the ground of newly covered evidence granted by it. e. Sandiganbayan •

c. Family

Courts: exclusive original jurisdictions to hear and decide the following cases:

-

-

Criminal cases where one or more of the accused is below 18 but not less than 9 OR when one or more of the victims is a minor at the time of the commission of the offense. Cases against minors cognizable under the Dangerous Drugs Act

Page 5 Violation of RA 7610 – Special Protection of Children Against Child Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act Cases of domestic violence Children – all forms of abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation, violence and discrimantion.

•

-

the 1973 Constitution provided for, but did not create a special court, the SB, with jurisdiction over criminal and civil cases involving graft and corrupt practices and such other offenses committed by public officers and employees, including those in GOCC in relation to their office as may be determined by law. Exclusive jurisdiction over: Violation of RA 3019 (Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act, RA 1379 and Chapter II, Section 2, Title VII, Book II of the RPC, where one or more of the accused are officials occupying the ff position in the govt whether permanent, acting or interim capacity at the time of the commission of the offense:

1. Officials of the executive branch, grade 27 or higher (see list on page 29) 2. Members of the Congress 3. Members of the judiciary 4. Chairmen and members of the Constitutional Commission 5. All other national and local officials classified as salary grade 27 and higher -

• •

•

•

•

•

Other offenses or felonies whether simple or complexed with other crimes committed by the public officials and employees in relation to their office Civil and criminal cases filed pursuant to and in connection with EO No. 1, 2, 14, and 14-A (law which created the PCGG). When not mentioned, the jurisdiction is in the RTC, METTC, MUNTC, MCTC as provided by BP 129. The SB shall exercise exclusive appellate jurisdiction over final judgments, resolutions or orders or regional trial courts whether in the exercise of their own original jurisdiction or of their appellate jurisdiction as herein provided. The SB shall exercise exclusive orig jurisdiction over petitions for the issuance of the writs of mandamus, prohibition, certiorari, habeas corpus, injunction and other ancillary writs and processes in aid of its appellate jurisdiction and over petitions of similar nature, including quo warranto, arising or that may arise in cases field which may be filed under the PCGG. In case private individuals are charged as co-principals, accomplices, or accessories with the public officers or employees, they shall be tried jointly with said public officers and employees in the proper courts which shall exercise exclusive jurisdiction over them. The criminal action and the corresponding civil action for the recovery of civil liability shall at all times be simultaneously instituted with, and jointly determined in, the same proceeding by the SB or the appropriate courts, the filing of the criminal action being deemed to necessarily carry with it the filing of the civil action, and no right to reserve the filing of such civil action separately from the criminal action shall be recognized. When the criminal case was filed at the SB, and the civil action was filed separately but has not reached judgment yet, it shall be transferred to the SB or the appropriate court fro the consolidation and joint determination with crim action,

Page 6 OTHERWISE, separate civil action shall be deemed abandoned. When offense considered committed in relation to office: • •

offense was committed in relation to the office must be alleged in the information taking advantage of their respective position vs. offenses committed in relation to the office – it must be the latter and not the former bec if the former is considered, it shall only be an aggravating circumstance and not as one that qualifies the crime.

What a public office is: •

Public office: one created by law to discharge a sovereign function and the salarty is a mere incident and forms no part of it. If there is no salary or fee annexed, it is a naked of honorary office as opposed to a lucrative office or an office or profit.

f.

Supreme Court

• •

Sec. 5, Article VIII of the 1987 Constitution Sec 17 of the Judiciary Act of 1948

g. Katarungang Pambarangay • -

Under the LGC of 1991, Lupong Tagapamayapa shall be composed of: Punong Barangay as Chairman and 10 to 20 members

1. Authority of the Lupon: parties actually

a. b. c. d. e.

f.

residing in the same city or municipality for amicable settlement of ALL disputes. EXCEPT: One party is the govt or any subdivision or instrumentality thereof One party is a public officer or employee and the dispute relates to the performance of his official functions Offenses punishable by imprisonment of 1 year or a fine exceeding P5,000. Offenses where there is no private offended party The dispute involves real properties located in different cities or municipalities unless the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an appropriate Lupon. Dispute involving parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or municipalities, except where such barangay units adjoin each other and the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to

amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon g. Such other classes of disputes which the President may determine in the interest of justice or upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice. •

Sc held that the law does not make distinction whatsoever with respect to the classes of civil disputes that should be compromised at the barangay level

2. Venue of Settlement a. Disputes bet persons actually residing in the same barangay b. Those involving actual residents of different barangays within the same city or municipality barangay where the respondent or any of the respondents actually resides, at the election of the complainant c. Disputes involving real property or any interest therein shall be brought in the barangay where the real property or the larger portion thereof is situated d. Those arising at the workplace where the contending parties are employed or at the institution where such parties are enrolled for study shall be brought where such workplace or institution is located. •

Objection to venue: shall be raised in the mediation proceedings before the punong barangay; otherwise, the same shall be deemed waived.

3. Confrontation between the parties before the Lupon a pre-condition before filing of case; exceptions. - if it’s within the jurisdiction of the Lupon, it shall not be filed or instituted directly in court or any other government office for adjudication unless there has been a confrontation between the parties before the lupon chairman or the pangkat, and that no conciliation or settlement has been reached as certified by the lupon secretary or pangkat secretary as attested to by the lupon chairman or pangkat chairman or unless settlement has been repudiated by the parties thereto. • Instances where the parties may go directly to the court: - accused is under detention - person has been deprived of personal liberty calling for habeas corpus proceedings

-

-

Page 7 actions are coupled with provisional remedies such as a) preliminary injunction b) attachment c) delivery of personal property, d) support pendente lite e)**replevin where actions may be barred by the statute of limitations (sec. 412(b))

4. Confrontation or conciliation process not jurisdictional but only a condition precedent •

•

•

Conciliation process at the barangay level is a condition precedent for the filing of action in those instances where said law applies, and that the failure to avail of the conciliation process does not warrant jurisdictional objections for it merely renders the complaint vulnerable to a timely motion to dismiss. Failure to observe the conciliation process is not jurisdictional. Non-compliance with that condition precedent could affect the sufficiency of plaintiffs cause of action and make his complaint vulnerable to dismissal on the ground of lack of cause of action or prematurity. The condition is analogous to the failure of the party to exhaust administrative remedies, or lack or earnest efforts to compromise suits between close members of the family, lacking which the case can be dismissed.

Page 8