RULE 110

PROSECUTION OF OFFENSES
&
RULE 127
PROVISIONAL REMEDIES IN
CRIMINAL CASES*

Pertinent Forms:
(1) Complaint
(2) Information
(3) Authority to Appear as Private Prosecutor

Pertinent Pleadings:
(1) Motion for Suspension of Criminal Action
(2) Reservation of Civil Action
(3) Entry of Appearance as Private Prosecutor

READ: RIANO p p . 62-140

I. Nature of liability arising from criminal act

A. Criminal
Revised Penal Code
Special Penal Laws

B. Civil
Rev. Pen. Code, arts. 100-113;
Civil Code, arts. 29, 32, 33, 34, 2176;
Secretary of Justice v. Lantion, 322 SCRA 160 (2000)

II. Institution of actions arising from crime

A. Criminal aspect
1. Generally
Sec. 1;
RJCL, sec. 11;
People v. Enriquez, G.R. No. 102955, March 22, 1993.
Rule 110, Sec. 16;
Tolling of prescriptive period:
People v. Pangilinan, G.R. No. 152662, June 13, 2012
Executive power to prosecute violators:
Ampatuan v. De Lima, G.R. No. 197291, April 3, 2013

*
Revised & Updated June 2017

-1-
 (Rule 110 & 127)

2. Venue and Jurisdiction

BP 129 (as amended), secs. 20, 32;
Rule 110, sec. 15;
RJCL, sec. 14;

a) MTC: (Metropolitan Trial Courts, the Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, the
Municipal Trial Courts, and the Municipal Circuit Trial Courts)
Sec. 32 (2), B.P. 129. (As amended by Sec. 2, R.A.
No. 7691)
Sec. 3 & 4, S.C. ADMINISTRATIVE CIRCULAR NO. 9-94

b) RTC
CASES:
People v. Lagon, 185 SCRA 442 (1990)
Malaloan v. CA, 232 SCRA 249 (1994)

3. The complaint/information; test of sufficiency

Art. III, Sec. 14 (1) & (2), 1987 Constitution
Purpose of Information:
Enrile v. People, G.R. No. 213455. August 11, 2015**T
Rule 110, Sec. 6
The Information as one whole:
People v. Villanueva, G.R. No. 138364, October 15, 2003**T
Quimvel v. People, G.R. No. 214497, April 16, 2017 (EB)
Malto v. People, 533 SCRA 643, September 21, 2007

Ultimate facts as distinguished from evidentiary facts, only need be alleged:

Enrile v. People, supra
Lazarte, Jr. vs. Sandiganbayan, 581 SCRA 431 (2009)**T
People v. Sandiganbayan & Castillo, G.R. NO. 160619, Sept. 9, 2015T

Allege elements of the offense & effect of failure

People v. Valdez, 663 SCRA 272 (Jan. 2012)

a) MTC:
(Metropolitan Trial Courts, the Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, the
Municipal Trial Courts, and the Municipal Circuit Trial Courts)
Sec. 11 & 12, 1991 Revised Rules on Summary Procedure

b) RTC:
Rule 110, secs. 2, 3, 4;
DOJ-NPS Manual, Part III, sec. 8;

4. Person prosecuting criminal action; intervention of offended party

-2-
 (Rule 110 & 127)

Rule 110, secs. 5, 16 (as amended by SC AM No. 02-2-07-SC, April 10,

2002),
No. 4, III (Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal
Cases [Sept.2017])
Who must prosecute:
Pinote v. Ayco, A.M. No. RTJ-05-1944, [December 13, 2005]
Intervention of offended party through private prosecutor:
Rodriguez v. Ponferrada, G.R. Nos. 155531-34. July 29, 2005.T
Goan v. Yatco, G.R. No. L-6286, December 29, 1953
Physical presence of fiscal or proceedings are void:
People v. Beriales, G.R. No. L-39962, April 7, 1976T
Private complainant’s standing to appeal acquittal:
Heirs of Delgado v. Gonzalez, GR No. 184337, 07 August 2009T
Merciales v. C.A., G.R. No. 124171, March 18, 2002**T
Fiscal’s consent to dismiss:
Republic v. Sunga, 162 SCRA 191 (1988)T
People v. Ilarde, G.R. No. 58595, October 10, 1983
People v. Tañada, G.R. No. L-32215, October 17, 1988
Role of private complainant:
People v. Madali, 349 SCRA 104 (2001)

Cf. Crespo v. Mogul, 151 SCRA 462 (1987)T

Roberts v. CA, 254 SCRA 307 (1996)

5. Form & Substance: Requirements of Complaint or Information

1) Procedural
a. Name of accused and offended party
(i) Name of the accused:
Secs. 7, Rule 110
“John Doe” Informations
DOJ Department Circular No. 50, Oct. 29,1990
Substitution of private offended party:
Ricarze v. C.A., G.R. No. 160451, February 9, 2007 supra
(ii) Name of offended party in crimes against property:
Sec. 12, Rule 110
(1) When offended party unknown
(2) When true name disclosed
(3) Offended party is a juridical person
Effect of wrong designation of offended party in an information:
Senador v. People, G.R. No. 201620. March 6, 2013T

b. Designation of offense
Rule 110, secs. 8;

-3-
 (Rule 110 & 127)

DOJ-NPS Manual, Part III, sec. 40;

Cabrera v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 162314-17,
[October 25, 2004] EBT
People v. Purisima, 86 SCRA 542 (1978)

“Sexual Abuse” not element of Rape:

People v. Flores, G.R. No. 128823-24. December 27, 2002T
Generic & Qualifying Circumstances must be alleged:
People v. Buayaban, 400 SCRA 48 (2003)
People v. Delim, G.R. No. 142773, January 28, 2003**
People v. Lizada, G.R. No. 143468, January 24, 3003 (EB)
People v. Fernandez, 414 SCRA 84 (2003)
People v. Masapol, 417 SCRA 371 (2003)
Consequence of failure to allege
People v. Valdez, 663 SCRA 272 (Jan. 2012) supraT

c. Formal amendment
Effect of failure to object:
People v. Degamo, 402 SCRA 133 (2003);
Villaflor v. Viver, 349 SCRA 194 (2001);
Albert v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 164015, February 26, 2009

2) Substantive
a. Single offense
Rule 110, sec. 13; Rule 117, Sec. 3 (f): Rule 120, Sec. 3
People v. Fernandez, 183 SCRA 511 (1990);
People v. Lopez, 312 SCRA 684 (1999);

b. Not title; Allegations in the Information determine offense

People v. Resayaga, G.R. No. L-49536. March 30, 1988T
Malto v. People, 533 SCRA 643 (2007)

c. Cause of accusation
Rule 110, sec. 9;
Quimvel v. People, G.R. No. 214497, April 16, 2017 (EB)
Must contain all essential elements of crime charged:
Balitaan v. CFI-Batangas, 115 SCRA 729 (1982);
“Simple theft in relation to P.D. 133" insufficient:
Matilde v. Jabson, 68 SCRA 456 (1975);
Libel information must state defamatory words verbatim and as published:
Vasquez v. CA, G.R. 314 SCRA 460 (1999);
Qualifying circumstance of relationship must be alleged specifically:
People v. Llanto, G.R. No. 146458, January 20, 2003;
Exceptions in statute need not be alleged:

-4-
 (Rule 110 & 127)

People v. Chan Toco, 12 Phil. 262 (1908)

Evidentiary Facts & Ultimate Facts

Socrates v. Sandiganbayan, supra;
Enrile v. People, G.R. No. 213455, supra

d. Date, place and time of commission

Rule 110, secs. 10, 11;
Precise date only when element of offense:
People v. Buca, G.R. No. 209587, Sept. 23, 2015T
Remedy when time of commission not
definite - “from 1977 to December 1983":
Rocaberte v. People, 193 SCRA 152 (1991);T
Variance not invalidate information; Supplanted by evidence during trial:
People v. Delfin, G.R. No. 201572, July 9, 2014T
Timely object and show prejudice; remedy of prosecution:
People v. Rivera, G.R. No. L-27825, June 30, 1970**T
U.S. v. Bungaoil, G.R. No. L-11505, August 25, 1916
“On or about . . .”:
People v. Lizada, G.R. Nos. 143468-71, January 24, 2003T
“On or about the year 1982":
People v. Ladrillo, 320 SCRA 61 (1999);
Other cases:
People v. Losano, G.R. No. 127122, July 20, 1999;
U.S. v. Javier Dichao, 27 Phil. 421 (1914);
People v. Molero, 144 SCRA 397 (1986);
People v. Lualhati, 171 SCRA 277 (1989);

Bill of Particulars purpose and availability:

Enrile v. People, G.R. No. 213455, supraT
Under old criminal procedure:
People v. Abad Santos, G.R. No. L-447, June 17, 1946**
As remedy when time of commission not definite:
Rocaberte v. People, 193 SCRA 152 (1991);T
Cf. Need not be alleged
People v. Perez, 417 SCRA 449 (2003);

6. Suspension of criminal action by reason of prejudicial question

Rule 111, secs. 6, 7;
DOJ-NPS Manual, Part III, secs. 23-24;
SEC nullification case prejudicial to estafa:
People v. Arambulo, G.R. No. 186597, June 17, 2015T
Gaditano v. San Miguel Corp., G.R. No. 188767, July 24, 2013
Annulment not prejudicial to parricide:

-5-
 (Rule 110 & 127)

Pimentel v. Pimentel, G.R. No. 172060, September 13, 2010

People v. Consing Jr., 395 SCRA 366 (2003);
Magestrado vs. People, 527 SCRA 125 (2007)
Trinidad v. Office of the Ombudsman, 539 SCRA 415 (2007)**
Administrative case as prejudicial issue:
San Miguel Properties, Inc. v., Perez, G.R. No. 166836, Sept. 4, 2013
Independent action for fraud, not prejudicial:
Consing, Jr. v. People, G.R. No. 161075, July 15, 2013

III. Remedies available

A. Amendment/Downgrading & Substitution of Information
Re ad : Rian o , p p . 128-140
Rule 110, sec. 14;
DOJ-NPS Manual, Part III, sec. 4;
i. (c) Meritorious Motions, II, (Revised Guidelines for Continuous Trial of Criminal
Cases [Sept. 2017])
Teehankee v. Madayag, 140 SCRA 425 (1985)**T
Corpus, Jr. v. Pamular, G.R. No. 186403, [September 5, 2018]
Matalam v. Sandiganbayan, 455 SCRA 736 (2005)T
Draculan v. Donato, 140 SCRA 425 (1985);
Almeda v. Villaluz, 66 SCRA 38 (1975);
People v. CA, 121 SCRA 733 (1983)
Galvez v. C.A., G.R. No. 114046, Oct. 24, 1994
People v. Tubongbanua, 500 SCRA 727 (2006)
Excluding an accused by amendment:
Soberano v. People, G.R. No. 154629, [October 5, 2005], 509 PHIL 118-136)T
Substitution:
Pacoy v. Cajigal, G.R. No. 157472, Sept. 28, 2007
People v. Mogol, G.R. No. L-37837, Aug. 24, 1984T
People v. Caoili, G.R. Nos. 196342 & 196848, [August 8, 2017]EB T
Substitution of a private complainant:
Ricarze v. C.A., G.R. No. 160451, February 9, 2007T
When another preliminary investigation is required:
Matalam v. Sandiganbayan, supraT
Amendment as to date:
People v. Rivera, G.R. No. L-27825, June 30, 1970** supra
B. Motion to Withdraw & Motion to Dismiss:
Distinguished:
Torres, Jr. v. Spouses Torres-Aguinaldo, G.R. No. 164268,
[ June 28, 2005]
C. Motion to Quash
Rule 117; Cf. Rule 119, sec. 19;
Cruz v. CA, 194 SCRA 145 (1991);

-6-
 (Rule 110 & 127)

D. Bill of Particulars
Rule 116, sec. 9;
See: B ill o f Partic u lars in Crim in al Cas e s by Ambrosio R. Blanco,
202 SCRA 739
Enrile v. People, G.R. No. 213455. August 11, 2015**T
Rocaberte v. People, 193 SCRA 152 (1991)

D. Provisional Remedies in Criminal Cases

Re ad : Rian o p p . 527-529
Revilla, Jr. v. Ssndiganbayan, G.R. No. 218232/G.R. No. 218235/G.R.
No. 218266/G.R. No. 218903/G.R. No. 219062. July 24, 2018.
See ruling Re G.R. No. 219062, pp. 28-34
a) Available provisional remedies
Sec. 1, Rule 127
Rules 57, 58, 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure;
b) Attachment:
Sec. 2, Rule 127
1) Civil action instituted with criminal action;
2) Property attached as security for judgement;
3) Grounds for attachment

-7-