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 and is
retained even if the penalty for the offense is later 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:

Complaint Information

A sworn statement Need not be sworn to

Subscribed by the offended party, any peace

officer or other officer charged with the
enforcement of the law violated Subscribed to by the fiscal

May be filed either with the court or in the fiscals

office generally to commence the preliminary
investigation of the charges made Filed with the court

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 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

Substitution
Amendment

Involves either formal or substantial

changes Necessarily involves a substantial change

Needs leave of court as original information has to be

Without leave of court if before plea dismissed

Where only as to form, there is no need for

another preliminary investigation and Another preliminary investigation is entailed and
retaking of plea of accused accused has to plead anew

Refers to the same offense charged or

which necessarily includes or is necessarily
included in original charges, hence,
substantial amendments to info after plea
taken cannot be made over objections of
accused for if original info is withdrawn,
accused could invoke double jeopardy
Requires or presupposes that new info involves a
different offense which does not include or is not
included in the original charge, hence, accused cannot
claim 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 finds that probable cause exists and that there is a
need to place the accused under custody, then he may issue a warrant of arrest
 Flores vs. Sumaling What differentiates the present rule from the previous one is that while before, it
was mandatory for the investigating judge to issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused if he found
probable cause, the rule now is that the investigating judges power to order the arrest of the accused is
limited to instances in which there is a necessity for placing him in custody in order not to frustrate the ends
of justice. It is therefore error for the investigating judge to order the issuance of 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 frustration of justice.
1. Investigating officer forwards records to the city fiscal or chief state prosecutor
1. City fiscal or state prosecutor either dismisses the complaint or files the information in court

Decision prevails over decision of the MTC judge

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

(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
b. Motion for preliminary investigation

Filed within 5 days after accused learns an information against him has been filed without a preliminary
investigation

c. Motion for re-investigation

d. Appeal to DOJ

Filed upon denial of his motion for a preliminary investigation, on the ground that his rights to due process
of law were violated, ousting the court of jurisdiction

e. Petition for prohibition

Filed with appellate court to stop the criminal proceedings

Ordinarily, injunction will not lie but may be granted in certain cases

When prohibition proper to restrain criminal proceedings:

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)
5. When multiplicity of suits will be avoided (Guingona vs. City Fiscal)