Hans Case Digest Repo
Hans Case Digest Repo — Study Smart, Pass the Bar
Home/Criminal Procedure
🚔

Criminal Procedure

Rules 110–127 — prosecution of offenses, preliminary investigation, arrest, bail, arraignment, trial, and judgment

Week 1· August 6, 2026

Week 1 - Introduction to Criminal Procedure

Major Divisions in LawSources of Remedial LawNature of Remedial LawScope of Remedial Law
→

Week 1 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 1 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1Queto vs. Catolico, G.R. Nos. L-25204 and L-25219 January 23, 2019VI.a — Systems of Criminal Procedure: Accusatorial or AdversarialANALOGOUS
2US vs. Samio, G.R. No. 1329, April 15, 1904VI.b — Systems of Criminal Procedure: InquisitorialREJECTED
3Cariaga vs. People, G.R. No. 180010, July 30, 2010VII — Construction of the RulesDIRECT
4PNB vs. Deang Marketing Corp., G.R. No. 177931, December 8, 2008VII — Construction of the RulesREJECTED

Recitation Map

One line per digested case — what it is assigned for, and how it came out.
CaseWhat it is forDisposition
Queto v. CatolicoVI.a — Systems of Criminal Procedure: Accusatorial or AdversarialPetition for prohibition GRANTED; preliminary injunction made permanent
US v. SamioVI.b — Systems of Criminal Procedure: InquisitorialSolicitor-General permitted to withdraw appeal; case remanded to trial court
Cariaga v. PeopleVII — Construction of the RulesCA Resolutions SET ASIDE; records FORWARDED to the Sandiganbayan
PNB v. Deang Marketing Corp.VII — Construction of the RulesPetition DENIED; PNB remains in default and its Answer expunged
Open full week page
Week 2· August 13, 2026

Week 2 - Jurisdiction

Criminal Jurisdiction DefinedClassification of JurisdictionElements of Criminal JurisdictionRequisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction
→

Week 2 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 2 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1People vs. Mariano, G.R. No. L-40527, June 30, 1976I — Criminal Jurisdiction DefinedDIRECT
2Guevara vs. Almodovar, G.R. No. 75256, January 26, 1989III.a — Elements of Criminal Jurisdiction: Penalty attachedDIRECT
3People vs. Buissan, G.R. No. L-54419, July 15, 1981III.a — Elements of Criminal Jurisdiction: Penalty attachedDIRECT
4Velunta vs. Chief of Phil. Constabulary, G.R. No. 71855, January 20, 1988IV.a — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over subject matterDIRECT
5De la Cruz vs. Moya, G.R. No. L-65192, April 27, 1988IV.a — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over subject matterDIRECT
6Bilag vs. Ay-Ay, G.R. No. 189950*, April 24, 2017IV.a — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over subject matterANALOGOUS
7Valdapeñas vs. People, G.R. No. L-20687, April 30, 1966IV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedDIRECT
8Antiporda vs. Garchitorena, G.R. No. 133289, December 23, 1999IV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedDIRECT
9Gomez vs. People, G.R. No. 216824, November 10, 2020IV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedDIRECT
10Jimenez vs. Sorongon, G.R. No. 178607, December 5, 2012IV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedDIRECT
11Miranda vs. Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763, March 31, 2006IV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedDIRECT
12Garcia vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 170122, October 12, 2009IV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedANALOGOUS
13Cojuangco Jr. vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 134307, December 21, 1998IV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedDIRECT
14Serana vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 162059, January 22, 2008V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanDIRECT
15Pactolin vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 161455, May 20, 2008V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanDIRECT
16People vs. Luis J. Morales, G.R. No. 166355, May 30, 2011V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanREJECTED
17Disini vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 169823-24, September 11, 2013V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanDIRECT
18PCGG vs. Dumayas, G.R. No. 209447, August 11, 2015V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanANALOGOUS
19Inding vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 143047, July 14, 2004V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanDIRECT
20Geduspan vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 158187, February 11, 2005V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanDIRECT
21People vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 169004, September 15, 2010V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanDIRECT
22Montilla vs. Hilario, G.R. No. L-4922, September 24, 1951V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanANALOGOUS
23Cunanan vs. Arceo, G.R. No. 116615, March 1, 1995V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanDIRECT
24Sanchez vs. Demetriou, G.R. Nos. 111771-77, November 9, 1993V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanREJECTED
25Esteban vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 146646-49, March 11, 2005V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanDIRECT
26Barriga vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 161784-86, April 26, 2005V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanDIRECT
27Alarilla vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 136806, August 22, 2000V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanDIRECT
28De Lima vs. Guerrero, G.R. No. 229781, October 10, 2017V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanREJECTED
29Uyboco vs. People, G.R. No. 211703, December 10, 2014V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanINCIDENTAL
30People vs. Go, G.R. No. 168539, March 25, 2014V.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanDIRECT

Recitation Map

One line per digested case — what it is assigned for, and how it came out.
CaseWhat it is forDisposition
People v. MarianoI — Criminal Jurisdiction DefinedOrder of March 14, 1975 SET ASIDE; respondent Judge directed to proceed with the trial of Criminal Case No. SM-649 without further delay
Guevara v. AlmodovarIII.a — Elements of Criminal Jurisdiction: Penalty attachedPetition DISMISSED for lack of merit; Temporary Restraining Order effective 17 September 1986 LIFTED; case REMANDED to the lower court for trial on the merits; no costs
People v. BuissanIII.a — Elements of Criminal Jurisdiction: Penalty attachedPetition for certiorari, prohibition and mandamus GRANTED; case ordered returned from the City Court of Dapitan to the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga del Norte for trial on the merits
Velunta v. Chief of Phil. ConstabularyIV.a — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over subject matterPetition for prohibition DISMISSED for lack of merit
De la Cruz v. MoyaIV.a — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over subject matterPetition GRANTED; proceedings in Criminal Case No. 40080 declared null and void, without prejudice to the filing of another action in the proper forum
Bilag v. Ay-AyIV.a — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over subject matterPetition GRANTED; CA Decision and Resolution REVERSED and SET ASIDE; Civil Case No. 5881-R DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction on the part of the RTC of Baguio City, Branch 61
Valdapeñas v. PeopleIV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedDecision of the Court of Appeals AFFIRMED, with costs against petitioner
Antiporda v. GarchitorenaIV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedPetition for certiorari and prohibition DISMISSED
Gomez v. PeopleIV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedPetition for Review on Certiorari DENIED; October 9, 2014 CA Decision in CA-G.R. SP No. 130290 AFFIRMED; RTC of Makati City, Branch 57 ORDERED to resume proceedings
Jimenez v. SorongonIV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedAppeal DENIED; CA Resolutions dated November 23, 2006 and June 28, 2007 in CA-G.R. SP No. 96584 AFFIRMED; costs against petitioner
Miranda v. TuliaoIV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedPetition DENIED; CA Decision and Resolution AFFIRMED with modification transferring Criminal Cases Nos. 36-3523 and 36-3524 to the RTC of the City of Manila; Judge Anghad directed to issue warrants of arrest; TRO of 4 August 2003 LIFTED; costs against petitioners
Garcia v. SandiganbayanIV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedPetitions for certiorari and mandamus PARTIALLY GRANTED; the Sandiganbayan, Fourth Division has not acquired jurisdiction over petitioner and her three children; proceedings in Civil Case Nos. 0193 and 0196 as to them declared VOID for lack of jurisdiction over their persons; no costs
Cojuangco Jr. v. SandiganbayanIV.c — Requisites for Valid Exercise of Jurisdiction: Jurisdiction over the person of the accusedPetition DISMISSED insofar as the dismissal of Criminal Case No. 22018 is concerned; Sandiganbayan ordered to resolve pending motions with utmost dispatch; the February 20, 1995 travel ban LIFTED for three (3) months from finality; no costs
Serana v. SandiganbayanV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition for certiorari DENIED for lack of merit
Pactolin v. SandiganbayanV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition DENIED; Sandiganbayan Decision of November 12, 2003 in Criminal Case No. 25665 and Resolution of January 7, 2004 AFFIRMED in their entirety; Decision treated as an administrative complaint under Rule 139-B and referred to the IBP; costs against petitioner
People v. Luis J. MoralesV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition for review on certiorari DISMISSED for lack of merit; Sandiganbayan Resolution of June 15, 2004 in Criminal Case No. 27431 AFFIRMED; no costs
Disini v. SandiganbayanV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition for certiorari DISMISSED; Sandiganbayan (First Division) Resolutions of January 17, 2005 and August 10, 2005 in Criminal Case Nos. 28001 and 28002 AFFIRMED; petitioner directed to pay the costs of suit
PCGG v. DumayasV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetitions GRANTED; RTC Makati City Branch 59 Orders of April 29, 2013 and June 28, 2013 in Civil Case No. 12-1251, Omnibus Order of May 15, 2013 and Order of December 4, 2013 ANNULLED and SET ASIDE; the petitions for declaratory relief in Civil Case Nos. 12-1251 and 12-1252 DISMISSED; no costs
Inding v. SandiganbayanV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition for certiorari DISMISSED; Sandiganbayan Resolutions dated September 23, 1999 and April 25, 2000 AFFIRMED; no costs
Geduspan v. SandiganbayanV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition for certiorari DISMISSED for lack of merit; costs against petitioner
People v. SandiganbayanV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition GRANTED; Sandiganbayan (Third Division) Resolution of July 20, 2005 NULLIFIED and SET ASIDE; case REMANDED to the Sandiganbayan for further proceedings
Montilla v. HilarioV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition for certiorari DENIED, without costs
Cunanan v. ArceoV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition for Certiorari DISMISSED for lack of merit; Orders of the respondent RTC Judges dated 23 May, 14 July and 18 August 1994 AFFIRMED
Sanchez v. DemetriouV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition DISMISSED; respondent judge DIRECTED to continue with the trial of Criminal Cases Nos. 101141 to 101147 and to decide them with deliberate dispatch
Esteban v. SandiganbayanV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition for certiorari DISMISSED; Sandiganbayan Resolution of December 18, 2000 and Order of January 11, 2001 in Criminal Cases Nos. 24703-04 AFFIRMED; costs against petitioner
Barriga v. SandiganbayanV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition for certiorari DENIED for lack of merit; costs against petitioner
Alarilla v. SandiganbayanV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition for certiorari DISMISSED
De Lima v. GuerreroV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition for prohibition and certiorari DISMISSED for lack of merit; the Regional Trial Court of Muntinlupa City, Branch 204 ordered to proceed with dispatch with Criminal Case No. 17-165
Uyboco v. PeopleV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition DENIED; Sandiganbayan Decision of January 9, 2014 and Resolution of March 14, 2014 in Criminal Case No. 24461 AFFIRMED
People v. GoV.d — Criminal Jurisdiction of the Different Courts: SandiganbayanPetition GRANTED; Sandiganbayan Resolution of June 2, 2005 granting the Motion to Quash REVERSED and SET ASIDE; Sandiganbayan DIRECTED to proceed with deliberate dispatch in Criminal Case No. 28090
Open full week page
Week 3· August 20, 2026

Week 3 - Rule 110 - Prosecution of Offenses

How Criminal Actions are InstitutedPrescription in Criminal ActionWho Must ProsecuteComplaint or Information
→

Week 3 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 3 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1BPI vs. Hontanosas, G.R. No. 157163, June 25, 2014I — How Criminal Actions are InstitutedDIRECT
2Heirs of Delgado vs. Gonzalez, G.R. No. 184337, August 7, 2009I — How Criminal Actions are InstitutedDIRECT
3Lim vs. Mejica, A.C. No. 11121, September 13, 2016I — How Criminal Actions are InstitutedDIRECT
4Llenes vs. Dicdican, G.R. No. 122274, July 31, 1996II — Prescription in Criminal ActionDIRECT
5Zaldivia vs. Reyes, Jr., G.R. No. 102342, July 3, 1992II — Prescription in Criminal ActionDIRECT
6People vs. Pangilinan, G.R. No. 152662, June 13, 2012II — Prescription in Criminal ActionDIRECT
7Arambulo vs. Laqui, G.R. No. 138596, October 12, 2000II — Prescription in Criminal ActionDIRECT
8Corpus, Jr. vs. People, G.R. No. 255740, August 16, 2023II — Prescription in Criminal ActionDIRECT
9People vs. Consebido, G.R. No. 258563, April 2, 2025II — Prescription in Criminal ActionDIRECT
10Worldwide Web Corp. vs. People, G.R. Nos. 161106 & 161266, January 13, 2013III.a — Who Must Prosecute: Private CrimesDIRECT
11Busuego vs. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 196842, October 9, 2013III.a — Who Must Prosecute: Private CrimesDIRECT
12People vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 160619, September 9, 2015IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
13Lazarte, Jr. vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 180122, March 13, 2009IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
14Quimel vs. People, G.R. No. 214497, April 18, 2017IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
15People vs. Quitlong, G.R. No. 121562, July 10, 1998IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
16People vs. Venus, G.R. No. 45141, September 15, 1936IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
17Avecilla vs. People, G.R. No. 46370, June 12, 1992IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
18People vs. Lucas, G.R. No. 50450, March 16, 1984IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
19Zapanta vs. People, G.R. No. 170863, March 20, 2013IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
20Bacasmas vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 189343, July 10, 2013IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
21People vs. Cristobal, G.R. No. 159450, March 30, 2011IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
22People vs. Gerola, G.R. No. 217973, July 19, 2017IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
23People vs. Prodenciado, G.R. No. 192232, December 10, 2014IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
24People vs. Buca, G.R. No. 209587, September 23, 2015IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
25People vs. Quiapo, G.R. No. 218804, August 6, 2018IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
26People vs. Delfin, G.R. No. 201572, July 9, 2014IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
27Rocaberte vs. People, G.R. No. 72994, January 23, 1991IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
28People vs. Pareja, G.R. No. 202122, January 15, 2014IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
29Garcia vs. CA, G.R. No. 119063, January 27, 1997IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
30Lee Pue Liong vs. Cua Pue Chin Lee, G.R. No. 181658, August 7, 2013IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
31Senador vs. People, G.R. No. 201620, March 6, 2013IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
32People vs. Quemeggen, G.R. No. 178205, July 27, 2009IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
33People vs. Delos Santos, G.R. No. 131588, March 27, 2001IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
34People vs. Jugueta, G.R. No. 202124, April 5, 2016IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
35Loney vs. People, G.R. No. 152644, February 10, 2006IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
36People vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 183652, February 25, 2015IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
37People vs. Conte, G.R. Nos. 113513-14, August 23, 1995IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
38Sanchez vs. Demetrious, G.R. Nos. 111771-77, November 9, 1993IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
39People vs. Domingo, G.R. No. 225743, June 7, 2017IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
40People vs. Guillen, G.R. No. L-1477, January 18, 1950IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
41People vs. Madali, G.R. Nos. L-67803-04, July 30, 1990IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
42People vs. Silvallana, G.R. No. 43120, July 27, 1935IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
43People vs. Barbas, G.R. Nos. 41265 & 41266, July 27, 1934IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
44Gallego vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. L-57841, July 30, 1982IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
45People vs. Tabaco, G.R. Nos. 100382-100385, March 19, 1997IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
46People vs. Lucena, G.R. No. 190632, February 26, 2014IV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDIRECT
47People vs. Degamo, G.R. No. 121211, April 30, 2003IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
48People vs. Jaralba, G.R. No. 96766, September 20, 1993IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
49Pangilinan vs. CA, G.R. No. 129319, January 30, 2002IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
50Banal III vs. Panganiban, G.R. No. 167474, November 15, 2005IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
51Kummer vs. People, G.R. No. 174461, September 11, 2013IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
52Gabionza vs. CA, G.R. No. 140311, March 30, 2001IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
53People vs. Reyes, G.R. No. 72994, January 23, 1991IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
54Pacoy vs. Cajigal, G.R. No. 157472, September 28, 2007IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
55Fronda-Baggao vs. People, G.R. No. 151785, December 10, 2007IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
56Mendez vs. People, G.R. No. 179962, June 11, 2014IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
57Buhat vs. CA, G.R. No. 119601, December 17, 1996IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
58People vs. Montenegro, G.R. No. L-45772, March 25, 1988IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
59People vs. Sandoval, G.R. Nos. 132625-31, December 18, 2000IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
60Galvez vs. CA, G.R. No. 114046, October 24, 1994IV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionDIRECT
61Union Bank vs. People, G.R. No. 192565, February 28, 2012V — VenueDIRECT
62Macasaet vs. People, G.R. No. 156747, February 23, 2005V — VenueDIRECT
63People vs. Grospe, G.R. Nos. L-74053-54, January 20, 1988V — VenueDIRECT
64People vs. Guzman, G.R. No. 77368, October 5, 1993V — VenueDIRECT
65Barrameda vs. CA, G.R. No. 96428, September 2, 1999V — VenueDIRECT
66People vs. Panlilio, G.R. Nos. 113519-20, March 29, 1996V — VenueDIRECT
67Calme vs. CA, G.R. No. 116688, August 30, 1996V — VenueDIRECT
68Agustin vs. Pamintuan, G.R. No. 164938, August 22, 2005V — VenueDIRECT
69Foz Jr. vs. People, G.R. No. 167764, October 9, 2009V — VenueDIRECT
70Yalong vs. People, G.R. No. 187174, August 28, 2013V — VenueDIRECT
71Sto. Tomas vs. Salac, G.R. No. 152642, November 13, 2012V — VenueDIRECT
72AAA vs. BBB, G.R. No. 212448, January 11, 2018V — VenueDIRECT

Recitation Map

One line per digested case — what it is assigned for, and how it came out.
CaseWhat it is forDisposition
BPI v. HontanosasI — How Criminal Actions are Instituted—
Heirs of Delgado v. GonzalezI — How Criminal Actions are InstitutedWHEREFORE, we DENY the petition. We AFFIRM the 29 August 2008 Amended Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 101196. No pronouncement as to costs. > > SO ORDERED…
Lim v. MejicaI — How Criminal Actions are Instituted—
Llenes v. DicdicanII — Prescription in Criminal ActionWHEREFORE, the instant petition is DISMISSED for want of merit. No pronouncement as to costs. > > SO ORDERED…
Zaldivia v. Reyes, Jr.II — Prescription in Criminal ActionWHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED, and the challenged Order dated October 2, 1991 is SET ASIDE. Criminal Case No. 90-089 in the Municipal Trial Court of Rodriguez, Rizal, is hereby DISMISSED on the ground of prescription. It is so ordered…
People v. PangilinanII — Prescription in Criminal Action—
Arambulo v. LaquiII — Prescription in Criminal Action—
Corpus, Jr. v. PeopleII — Prescription in Criminal ActionACCORDINGLY, the Petition is hereby GRANTED. The Decision and the Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 43154 are REVERSED. Pastor Corpus, Jr. y Belmoro is ACQUITTED of the crime of Slight Physical Injuries on the ground of prescription.
People v. ConsebidoII — Prescription in Criminal ActionWHEREFORE, the Petition is DENIED. Accordingly, the Decision dated January 6, 2021, and the Resolution dated January 5, 2022, of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. SP. No. 104075 are hereby AFFIRMED. So ordered…
Worldwide Web Corp. v. PeopleIII.a — Who Must Prosecute: Private CrimesWHEREFORE, the petitions are DENIED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 26190 dated 20 August 2003 and its Resolution dated 27 November 2003 are AFFIRMED. > > SO ORDERED…
Busuego v. Office of the OmbudsmanIII.a — Who Must Prosecute: Private CrimesWHEREFORE the petition is DISMISSED The Resolutions of the Ombudsman dated 17 April 2009 and 11 October 2010 are AFFIRMED.' > > 'SO ORDERED…
People v. SandiganbayanIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, and in view of the foregoing, the petition is hereby GRANTED. The Sandiganbayan's Resolutions dated January 9, 2002 and November 3, 2003 are REVERSED and the Information charging Castillo and the Arciagas with violation of Section 3(e) of RA No. 3019 is ordered REINSTATED.
Lazarte, Jr. v. SandiganbayanIV.b — Complaint or Information: Sufficiency—
Quimel v. PeopleIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, the instant petition is hereby DENIED. The Court of Appeals Decision in CA-G.R. CR No. 35509 finding petitioner Eduardo Quimvel y Braga also known as Eduardo/Edward Quimuel y Braga guilty beyond reasonable doubt of acts of lasciviousness is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION as follows:…
People v. QuitlongIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyRonnie Quitlong found guilty of murder and sentenced to reclusion perpetua; Salvador Quitlong and Emilio Senoto, Jr. found guilty only as ACCOMPLICES and sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of 9 years and 4 months of prision mayor minimum to 13 years, 9 months and 10 days of reclusion temporal minimum, solidarily liable for damages; costs against appellants.
People v. VenusIV.b — Complaint or Information: Sufficiency—
Avecilla v. PeopleIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyThe modification by the Court of Appeals convicting the accused of qualified theft rather than simple theft being in order, the imposition of the penalty prescribed by the Indeterminate Sentence Law is CORRECT. Costs against the appellant.
People v. LucasIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyThe challenged Decision of 28 October 1992 of Branch 104 of the RTC of Quezon City in Criminal Cases Nos. Q-91-18465 and Q-91-18466 AFFIRMED subject to modifications: in Q-91-18465 the accused is sentenced to 34 years, 4 months and 1 day of reclusion perpetua and to pay P50,000.00 civil indemnity; in Q-91-18466 he is found GUILTY of ATTEMPTED RAPE only and sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of 4 years, 2 months and 1 day of prision correccional maximum to 10 years and 1 day of prision mayor maximum, and to pay P30,000.00 civil indemnity. Costs against the accused-appellant.
Zapanta v. PeopleIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyAppeal DENIED. The June 27, 2005 decision and the November 24, 2005 resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 28369 AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION; petitioner Engr. Anthony V. Zapanta sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. Costs against the petitioner.
Bacasmas v. SandiganbayanIV.b — Complaint or Information: Sufficiency—
People v. CristobalIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, the Demurer to Evidence filed by the accused is hereby denied for lack of merit. Reviewing further the records of this case, there is evidence and proof that the Demurrer to Evidence filed by the accused Cristobal is without express leave of court hence, under Section 15 par.
People v. GerolaIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Appeal is DISMISSED for lack of merit and the Decision dated September 25, 2014 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR. HC. No. 01277 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION.
People v. ProdenciadoIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, the February 4, 2010 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 02861 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS in that appellant Jose Estalin Prodenciado is: (1) hereby found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of one count of STATUTORY RAPE and three counts of QUALIFIED RAPE; (2) sentenced t…
People v. BucaIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, in light of all the foregoing, the appeal is hereby DISMISSED. The Decision dated June 17, 2013 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No.
People v. QuiapoIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, the appeal is DISMISSED. The assailed April 24, 2015 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 00669-MIN is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS: > > 1. In Criminal Case Nos.
People v. DelfinIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, premises considered, the Decision dated 29 August 2012 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 04160 is hereby AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS: (1) that the amount of civil indemnity is increased from ₱50,000.00 to ₱75,000.00; (2) that the amount of moral damages is incre…
Rocaberte v. PeopleIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED, and the writ of certiorari prayed for is ISSUED, ANNULLING AND SETTING ASIDE the challenged Orders of respondent Judge dated August 12, 1985 and September 10, 1985 in Criminal Case No.
People v. ParejaIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, premises considered, the Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR.-H.C. No. 03794 is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION.
Garcia v. CAIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, the instant petition is DENIED for lack of merit and the challenged decision of 13 February 1995 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 14324 is AFFIRMED. Costs against the petitioner. > > SO ORDERED…
Lee Pue Liong v. Cua Pue Chin LeeIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED for lack of merit. The Decision dated May 31, 2007 and Resolution dated January 31, 2008 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 81510 are hereby AFFIRMED. With costs against petitioner.' --- ## VI. RATIO DECIDENDI AND DOCTRINES ### A. Ratio Decidendi 1.
Senador v. PeopleIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, the Decision dated May 17, 2011 and Resolution dated March 30, 2012 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 00952, finding Ramoncita Senador guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of ESTAFA under par. 1 (b), Art.
People v. QuemeggenIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, premises considered, the appeal is DISMISSED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals dated December 28, 2006 in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 01498, is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Janito de Luna is further ordered to pay the heirs of police officer Emelito Suing ₱50,000.00 as civil indemnity.
People v. Delos SantosIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, the decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 38, Cagayan de Oro City, is hereby SET ASIDE, and another one is rendered holding herein accused-appellant GLENN DE LOS SANTOS guilty beyond reasonable doubt of (1) the complex crime of reckless imprudence resulting in multiple homicide wit…
People v. JuguetaIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, the instant appeal is DISMISSED. The Decision of the Court of Appeals dated January 30, 2012 in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 03252 is AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS: > > (1) In Criminal Case No.
Loney v. PeopleIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, we DENY the petition. We AFFIRM the Decision dated 5 November 2001 and the Resolution dated 14 March 2002 of the Court of Appeals. > > SO ORDERED…
People v. Court of AppealsIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the petition is GRANTED. The assailed Decision dated June 6, 2008 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 00422-MIN is REVERSED AND SET ASIDE.
People v. ConteIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, subject to the above modification on the award of civil indemnity, the appealed decision of Branch 52 of the Regional Trial Court of Palawan (Puerto Princesa City) in Criminal Case No.
Sanchez v. DemetriousIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED. The respondent judge is DIRECTED to continue with the trial of Criminal Cases Nos. 101141, 101142, 101143, 101144, 101145, 101146 and 101147 and to decide them with deliberate dispatch. > > SO ORDERED…
People v. DomingoIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyDecision promulgated on September 24, 2015 AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION: accused SANDY DOMINGO y LABIS DECLARED GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT of SIMPLE RAPE under Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code and penalized with reclusion perpetua; ORDERED TO PAY AAA P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages, plus 6% interest per annum from finality until fully paid; costs of suit against the accused.
People v. GuillenIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyThe judgment of the Court of First Instance of Manila is AFFIRMED by a unanimous vote; the accused is guilty of the complex crime of murder and multiple attempted murder and is sentenced to death. The death sentence shall be executed in accordance with article 81 of the Revised Penal Code, under authority of the Director of Prisons, on such working day as the trial court may fix within 30 days from the date the record shall have been remanded.
People v. MadaliIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, except as hereinabove modified, the decision of the lower court is hereby affirmed. Costs against the appellants. > > SO ORDERED…
People v. SilvallanaIV.b — Complaint or Information: Sufficiency—
People v. BarbasIV.b — Complaint or Information: Sufficiency—
Gallego v. SandiganbayanIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE' clause. However, the Court En Banc held that: 'Modified as hereinabove stated as to the penalty, the decision appealed from is affirmed, with the costs against the appellant' is NOT applicable to this case as that belongs to Silvallana.
People v. TabacoIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, no reversible error having been committed by the trial court in finding accused-appellant guilty of four (4) counts of Murder and one (1) count of Homicide with Frustrated Homicide, the judgment appealed from should be, as it is, hereby AFFIRMED, with the MODIFICATION that four sentences…
People v. LucenaIV.b — Complaint or Information: SufficiencyWHEREFORE, premises considered, the Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03371 dated 24 August 2009 finding herein appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of three counts of rape is hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATIONS that: (1) the exemplary damages in the amount of ₱30,000.00…
People v. DegamoIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, the judgment of the lower court convicting appellant Roneto Degamo alias 'Roy' of qualified rape and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of DEATH is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that appellant is ordered to pay complainant Ellen Vertudazo the amounts of Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75…
People v. JaralbaIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, the appealed judgment is hereby AFFIRMED, with the modification as to the indemnity which is hereby increased from P30,000.00 to P50,000.00. Costs against appellants. > > SO ORDERED…
Pangilinan v. CAIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, the assailed Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals are AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioner. > > SO ORDERED…
Banal III v. PanganibanIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The October 15, 2004 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 73017 and its March 17, 2005 Resolution, are AFFIRMED.' --- ## VI. RATIO DECIDENDI AND DOCTRINES ### A. Ratio Decidendi 1.
Kummer v. PeopleIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, premises considered, the appealed decision dated April 28, 2006, convicting the petitioner of the crime of homicide, is hereby AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioner Leticia I. Kummer. SO ORDERED…
Gabionza v. CAIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The assailed DECISION of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. No. 49098-SP affirming that of the trial court which allowed the amendment of the Information charging petitioner with violation of RA No. 1161, as amended, is AFFIRMED.
People v. ReyesIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED, and the writ of certiorari prayed for is ISSUED, ANNULLING AND SET SETTING ASIDE the challenged Orders of respondent Judge dated August 12, 1985 and September 10, 1985 in Criminal Case No.
Pacoy v. CajigalIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DISMISSED. The Regional Trial Court, Branch 68, Camiling, Tarlac is DIRECTED to proceed with the trial of petitioner under the Information for Homicide in Criminal Case No. 02-42. > > SO ORDERED…
Fronda-Baggao v. PeopleIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, we DENY the petition. The challenged Decision and Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 58270 are AFFIRMED. Costs against petitioner. > > SO ORDERED…
Mendez v. PeopleIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, premises considered, we DISMISS the petition for lack of merit, with costs against the petitioner. > > SO ORDERED…
Buhat v. CAIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED for lack of merit. The City Prosecutor of Roxas City is HEREBY ORDERED to file the correct Amended Information fully in accordance with the findings of fact set forth in the Resolution of the Secretary of Justice, dated February 3, 1994, and in disregard of the f…
People v. MontenegroIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED. The orders of the respondent court, dated 10 February 1977 and 22 February 1977 are AFFIRMED. The temporary restraining order issued on 21 March 1977 is LIFTED. This decision is immediately executory. > > SO ORDERED…
People v. SandovalIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Dagupan, Pangasinan, Branch 42, is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that accused-appellant Noel Sandoval is found guilty of four (4) counts of simple rape committed against Teresa Micu and two (2) counts of simple rape committed against Victoria '…
Galvez v. CAIV.c — Complaint or Information: Amendment or SubstitutionWHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered DISMISSING the petition for certiorari and mandamus together with the petition for habeas corpus; DENYING, for lack of merit, the motion to cite respondent judge and prosecutor for contempt and to annul proceedings; and ORDERING the withdrawal and invalidation…
Union Bank v. PeopleV — VenueWHEREFORE, premises considered, we hereby DENY the petition for lack of merit. Costs against the petitioners. > > SO ORDERED…
Macasaet v. PeopleV — VenueWHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Decision dated 22 March 2002 and Resolution dated 6 January 2003 of the Court of Appeals are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE and the 24 November 1997 Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 93, Quezon City, dismissing Criminal Case No.
People v. GrospeV — VenueWHEREFORE, the Decision of Respondent Judge of February 17, 1986 is hereby set aside and he is hereby ordered to reassume jurisdiction over Criminal Cases Nos.
People v. GuzmanV — VenueWHEREFORE, the instant petition for certiorari and mandamus is DISMISSED, and the orders appealed from are hereby AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED…
Barrameda v. CAV — VenueWHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DENIED and the decisions of the trial court and Court of Appeals are hereby AFFIRMED with the modification that the petitioner is sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of two (2) years and four (4) months of prision correccional, as minimum, to ten (10…
People v. PanlilioV — VenueWHEREFORE, the decision finding the accused-appellant Danilo Panlilio guilty of kidnapping in Crim. Case No. 2351-V-93 and imposing upon him a prison term of reclusion perpetua, and to pay the costs, is AFFIRMED. As regards Crim. Case No.
Calme v. CAV — Venue—
Agustin v. PamintuanV — VenuePetition GRANTED. The assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 70629 SET ASIDE. The Regional Trial Court of Baguio City, Branch 3, DIRECTED TO QUASH the Informations and DISMISS the cases against petitioner Victor C. Agustin in Criminal Case Nos. 17892-R to 17895-R.
Foz Jr. v. PeopleV — VenueWHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED. The Decision dated November 24, 2004 and the Resolution dated April 8, 2005 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 22522 are SET ASIDE on the ground of lack of jurisdiction on the part of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 23, Iloilo City. Criminal Case No.
Yalong v. PeopleV — VenueWHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. Accordingly, the Resolutions dated August 1, 2008 and March 10, 2009 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP. No. 104075 are hereby AFFIRMED. > > SO ORDERED…
Sto. Tomas v. SalacV — VenueWHEREFORE, in G.R. 152642 and 152710, the Court DISMISSES the petitions for having become moot and academic. > > In G.R. 167590, the Court SETS ASIDE the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Manila dated December 8, 2004 and DECLARES Sections 6, 7, and 9 of Republic Act 8042 valid and constitutio…
AAA v. BBBV — VenueAccordingly, the Information filed in Criminal Case No. 146468 is ordered REINSTATED. > > SO ORDERED.' --- ## VI. RATIO DECIDENDI AND DOCTRINES ### A. Ratio Decidendi 1. Standing of the Offended Party in Rule 45 Petitions: The Court ruled that AAA had the requisite personality to file the petition.
Open full week page
Week 4· August 27, 2026

Week 4 - Rule 111 - Prosecution of Civil Action

Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsWhen Separate Civil Action is SuspendedIndependent Civil ActionsEffect of Death on Civil Actions
→

Week 4 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 4 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1Ambassador Hotel, Inc. vs. Social Security System, G.R. No. 194137, June 21, 2017I — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsDIRECT
2Chiok vs. People, G.R. Nos. 179814 & 180021, December 7, 2015I — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsDIRECT
3Bernardo vs. People, G.R. No. 182210, October 5, 2015I — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsDIRECT
4Heirs of Simon vs. Chan, G.R. No. 157547, February 23, 2011I — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsDIRECT
5Lee Pue Liong vs. Chua Pue Chin Lee, G.R. No. 181658, August 7, 2013I — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsDIRECT
6Ricarze vs. CA, G.R. No. 160451, February 9, 2007I — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsDIRECT
7Hun Hyung Park vs. Eun Wong Choi, G.R. No. 165496, February 12, 2007I — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsDIRECT
8ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp. vs. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 133347, October 15, 2008I — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsDIRECT
9Heirs of Sarah Marie Palma Burgos vs. CA, G.R. No. 167911, February 8, 2010I — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsDIRECT
10Co vs. Muñoz, Jr., G.R. No. 181986, December 4, 2013II — When Separate Civil Action is SuspendedDIRECT
11Dominga vs. Colina, supraII — When Separate Civil Action is SuspendedDIRECT
12Ching vs. Nicdao, G.R. No. 141181, April 27, 2007II — When Separate Civil Action is SuspendedDIRECT
13Lim vs. Kou Co Ping, G.R. Nos. 175256 & 179160, August 23, 2012III — Independent Civil ActionsDIRECT
14Padua vs. Robles, G.R. No. L-40486, August 29, 1975III — Independent Civil ActionsDIRECT
15Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. vs. People, G.R. No. 147703, April 14, 2004III — Independent Civil ActionsINCIDENTAL
16Bermudez vs. Melencio-Herrera, G.R. No. L-32055, February 26, 1988III — Independent Civil ActionsDIRECT
17Cojuangco, Jr. vs. CA, G.R. No. L-37404, November 18, 1991III — Independent Civil ActionsDIRECT
18Bordador vs. Luz, G.R. No. 130148, December 15, 1997III — Independent Civil ActionsDIRECT
19Gandionco vs. Peñaranda, G.R. No. 79284, November 27, 1987III — Independent Civil ActionsANALOGOUS
20Cabugao vs. People, G.R. Nos. 163879 & 165805, July 30, 2014III — Independent Civil ActionsINCIDENTAL
21People vs. Lipata, G.R. No. 200302, April 20, 2016IV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsDIRECT
22People vs. Abungan, G.R. No. 136843, September 28, 2000IV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsDIRECT
23People vs. Soria, G.R. No. 179031, February 24, 2014IV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsDIRECT
24People vs. Toukyo, G.R. No. 225593, March 20, 2017IV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsDIRECT
25People vs. Paras, G.R. No. 192912, October 22, 2013IV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsDIRECT
26People vs. Dionaldo, G.R. No. 207949, September 9, 2015IV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsDIRECT
27People vs. Culas, G.R. No. 211166, June 5, 2017IV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsDIRECT
28People vs. Antido, G.R. No. 208651, March 14, 2018IV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsDIRECT
29People vs. Jao, G.R. No. 225634, June 7, 2017IV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsDIRECT
30People vs. Dimaala, G.R. No. 225054, July 17, 2017IV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsDIRECT
31Domingo vs. Colina, G.R. No. 173330, June 17, 2013V — Effect of Acquittal on Civil Action or Civil LiabilityDIRECT
32Nissan-Gallery vs. Felipe, G.R. No. 199067, November 11, 2013V — Effect of Acquittal on Civil Action or Civil LiabilityDIRECT
33Balerta vs. People, G.R. No. 205144, November 26, 2014V — Effect of Acquittal on Civil Action or Civil LiabilityDIRECT
34Lumantas vs. Calapiz, G.R. No. 163753, January 15, 2014V — Effect of Acquittal on Civil Action or Civil LiabilityDIRECT
35Madarang vs. CA, G.R. No. 143044, July 14, 2005V — Effect of Acquittal on Civil Action or Civil LiabilityINCIDENTAL
36Ty-de Zuzuarregui vs. Villarosa, G.R. No. 183788, April 5, 2010VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
37San Miguel Properties, Inc. vs. Perez, G.R. No. 166836, September 4, 2013VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
38People vs. Arambulo, Jr., G.R. No. 186597, June 17, 2015VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
39Sps. Gabitano vs. San Miguel Corp., G.R. No. 188767, July 24, 2013VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
40Yap vs. Paras, G.R. No. 101236, January 30, 1992VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
41Pimentel vs. Pimentel, G.R. No. 172060, September 13, 2010VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
42Abunado vs. People, G.R. No. 159218, March 30, 2004VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
43Magestrado vs. People, G.R. No. 148072, July 10, 2007VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
44Beltran vs. People, G.R. No. 137567, June 20, 2000VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
45People vs. Consing, G.R. No. 148193, January 16, 2003VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
46Samson vs. Daway, G.R. Nos. 160054-55, July 21, 2004VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
47Yap vs. Cabales, G.R. No. 159186, June 5, 2009VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
48Jose vs. Suarez, G.R. No. 176795, June 30, 2008VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT
49Reyes vs. Rossi, G.R. No. 159823, February 18, 2013VI — Prejudicial QuestionDIRECT

Recitation Map

One line per digested case — what it is assigned for, and how it came out.
CaseWhat it is forDisposition
Ambassador Hotel, Inc. v. Social Security SystemI — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsPetition DENIED; CA Decision and Resolution AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION (judgment award to earn 6% per annum interest from finality until fully paid)
Chiok v. PeopleI — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsChiok's petition (G.R. No. 179814) and Chua's petition (G.R. No. 180021, certiorari/mandamus branch) DENIED; Chua's petition (G.R. No. 180021, civil-liability branch) GRANTED IN PART — Chiok ordered to pay ₱9,563,900.00 with interest
Bernardo v. PeopleI — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsCA Decision AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION; heirs of Paz Bernardo ordered to pay ₱460,000.00 with 12% interest per annum from institution of criminal charges; fine of ₱460,000.00 DELETED
Heirs of Simon v. ChanI — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsPetition GRANTED; CA Decision REVERSED and SET ASIDE; MeTC Pasay City's October 23, 2000 dismissal (litis pendentia) REINSTATED; costs against respondent
Lee Pue Liong v. Chua Pue Chin LeeI — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsPetition DENIED; CA Decision and Resolution AFFIRMED
Ricarze v. CAI — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsPetition DENIED; CA Decision and Resolution AFFIRMED; case REMANDED to the RTC of Makati City for further proceedings
Hun Hyung Park v. Eun Wong ChoiI — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsPetition DENIED; case REMANDED to the MeTC of Makati City for the sole purpose of receiving evidence on the civil aspect; costs against petitioner
ABS-CBN Broadcasting Corp. v. OmbudsmanI — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsPetition DISMISSED for lack of merit
Heirs of Sarah Marie Palma Burgos v. CAI — Institution of Criminal and Civil ActionsPetition DENIED; CA Decision AFFIRMED
Co v. Muñoz, Jr.II — When Separate Civil Action is SuspendedPetition DENIED; CA Decision (acquitting Muñoz of libel) AFFIRMED — no civil liability because no libel was committed
Ching v. NicdaoII — When Separate Civil Action is SuspendedPetition DENIED for lack of merit; CA acquittal of Nicdao, and the extinction of her civil liability to Ching, stand
Lim v. Kou Co PingIII — Independent Civil ActionsLily Lim's Petition (G.R. No. 175256) GRANTED — CA Resolution dismissing her appeal REVERSED and SET ASIDE, appeal REINSTATED; Kou Co Ping's Petition (G.R. No. 179160) DENIED — CA Decision AFFIRMED in toto
Padua v. RoblesIII — Independent Civil ActionsOrder of dismissal of the complaint in Civil Case No. 1079-O SET ASIDE; case REMANDED to the trial court for further proceedings; no pronouncement as to costs
Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. v. PeopleIII — Independent Civil ActionsPetition DENIED; assailed CA Resolutions AFFIRMED; costs against petitioner
Bermudez v. Melencio-HerreraIII — Independent Civil ActionsPetition GRANTED; Orders of March 10, 1970 and May 7, 1970 ANNULLED and SET ASIDE; case REMANDED for further proceedings; no costs
Cojuangco, Jr. v. CAIII — Independent Civil ActionsPetition GRANTED; CA Decision and Resolution SET ASIDE; trial court's consolidation Orders REINSTATED; no costs
Bordador v. LuzIII — Independent Civil ActionsPetition DENIED; CA decision and resolution AFFIRMED; double costs against petitioners
Gandionco v. PeñarandaIII — Independent Civil ActionsPetition DISMISSED; costs against petitioner
Cabugao v. PeopleIII — Independent Civil ActionsDr. Antonio P. Cabugao ACQUITTED of reckless imprudence resulting to homicide; Dr. Clenio Ynzon's criminal liability EXTINGUISHED by his death pending appeal, but his civil liability SUBSISTS and may be pursued via a separate civil action against his executor/administrator or estate
People v. LipataIV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsCA Decision SET ASIDE; criminal and civil liabilities ex delicto of appellant EXTINGUISHED by his death prior to final judgment
People v. AbunganIV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsCriminal case DISMISSED and appealed RTC Decision SET ASIDE; costs de oficio
People v. SoriaIV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsNovember 14, 2012 Decision SET ASIDE; Criminal Case No. Q-01-98692 DISMISSED on account of accused-appellant's demise
People v. ToukyoIV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsCA Decision SET ASIDE; Criminal Case No. 31270-R DISMISSED by reason of accused-appellant's death; case DECLARED CLOSED and TERMINATED
People v. ParasIV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsJune 4, 2014 Decision SET ASIDE; Criminal Case No. TCS-2729 DISMISSED by reason of accused-appellant's death
People v. DionaldoIV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsJuly 23, 2014 and September 24, 2014 Resolutions SET ASIDE and Criminal Case No. C-68329 DISMISSED, insofar as accused-appellant Renato Dionaldo is concerned, by reason of his death
People v. CulasIV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsJuly 18, 2014 Resolution SET ASIDE; Crim. Case No. BN-01-02-3754 DISMISSED by reason of accused-appellant's death; case DECLARED CLOSED and TERMINATED
People v. AntidoIV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsApril 7, 2014 Resolution SET ASIDE; Criminal Case No. 03-212115 DISMISSED by reason of accused-appellant's death; case DECLARED CLOSED and TERMINATED
People v. JaoIV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsJao's appeal DENIED and conviction AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS; cases against Catigtig DISMISSED and DECLARED CLOSED and TERMINATED by reason of his death
People v. DimaalaIV — Effect of Death on Civil ActionsCrim. Case No. 4994-C DISMISSED by reason of accused-appellant's death; case DECLARED CLOSED and TERMINATED
Domingo v. ColinaV — Effect of Acquittal on Civil Action or Civil LiabilityPetition DENIED; CA Decision and Resolution AFFIRMED — civil liability of ₱175,000.00 plus interest SURVIVES the criminal dismissal
Nissan-Gallery v. FelipeV — Effect of Acquittal on Civil Action or Civil LiabilityPetition GRANTED; CA Decision and Resolution SET ASIDE; RTC ruling holding Felipe civilly liable REINSTATED, with interest reduced to 6% per annum
Balerta v. PeopleV — Effect of Acquittal on Civil Action or Civil LiabilityPetition GRANTED; CA Decision REVERSED; Balerta ACQUITTED of Estafa; civil liability of ₱185,584.06 SET ASIDE for lack of basis
Lumantas v. CalapizV — Effect of Acquittal on Civil Action or Civil LiabilityPetition DENIED; CA Decision AFFIRMED with modification (6% interest from filing of Information) — physician civilly liable for moral damages despite acquittal
Madarang v. CAV — Effect of Acquittal on Civil Action or Civil LiabilityPetition DENIED; CA Decision AFFIRMED — falsification and grave coercion charges may proceed to trial; no res judicata from the non-final civil replevin ruling
Ty-de Zuzuarregui v. VillarosaVI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition GRANTED; CA Resolutions REVERSED and SET ASIDE; criminal proceedings SUSPENDED until final resolution of CA-G.R. SP No. 87222
San Miguel Properties, Inc. v. PerezVI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition DENIED; CA Decision AFFIRMED; petitioner ordered to pay costs of suit
People v. Arambulo, Jr.VI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition DENIED; CA Decision and Resolution AFFIRMED; RTC enjoined from hearing Criminal Case No. C-62784 until termination of SEC Case No. 03-99-6259
Sps. Gabitano v. San Miguel Corp.VI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition DENIED; CA Decision AFFIRMED; suspension of preliminary investigation LIFTED
Yap v. ParasVI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition GRANTED; Orders of dismissal REVERSED and SET ASIDE; Criminal Case No. 1902-G REINSTATED for further proceedings before a different judge
Pimentel v. PimentelVI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition DENIED; CA Decision AFFIRMED
Abunado v. PeopleVI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition DENIED; CA Decision AFFIRMED; bigamy conviction and indeterminate sentence upheld
Magestrado v. PeopleVI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition DISMISSED for lack of merit; CA Resolutions AFFIRMED; MeTC directed to proceed with trial
Beltran v. PeopleVI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition DISMISSED for lack of merit
People v. ConsingVI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition GRANTED; CA Decision REVERSED and SET ASIDE; permanent injunction LIFTED; RTC ordered to proceed with arraignment and trial
Samson v. DawayVI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition DISMISSED
Yap v. CabalesVI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition DENIED; CA Decision and Resolution AFFIRMED
Jose v. SuarezVI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition GRANTED; CA Decision SET ASIDE; Writ of Preliminary Injunction LIFTED
Reyes v. RossiVI — Prejudicial QuestionPetition DENIED; CA Decision and Resolution AFFIRMED
Open full week page
Week 5· September 3, 2026

Week 5 - Preliminary Examination (Prelim Exam)

Coverage: Weeks 1-4
→

Coverage

Coverage: Weeks 1-4
This is the Preliminary Examination week, testing everything covered in Weeks 1 through 4: the nature and sources of remedial law, the accusatorial system, liberal construction of the Rules, the different kinds and elements of criminal jurisdiction (especially the Sandiganbayan's twin jurisdictional tests), how criminal actions are instituted and when they prescribe, the sufficiency and amendment of complaints and informations, venue, and the full Rule 111 framework on civil actions — implied institution, suspension, independent civil actions, the Bayotas doctrine on death of the accused, effect of acquittal, and prejudicial questions. Given how dense the sufficiency-of-information and Sandiganbayan-jurisdiction clusters are, budget extra review time for those two areas specifically, since they are both the most heavily populated with case law on your syllabus and consistently among the most tested topics in bar-style questions.
Open full week page
Week 6· September 10, 2026

Week 6 - Rule 112 - Preliminary Investigation

Nature and PurposeA.M. No. 24-02-09-SC May 28, 2024DOJ Department Circular No. 015 July 16, 2024DOJ Department Circular No. 028 November 13, 2024
→

Week 6 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 6 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1Galvez vs. CA, G.R. No. 187919, April 25, 20121 — Nature and PurposeDIRECT
2Callo-Claridad vs. Esteban, G.R. No. 191567, March 20, 20131 — Nature and PurposeDIRECT
3Punzalan vs. Plata, G.R. No. 160316, September 2, 20131 — Nature and PurposeDIRECT
4Salapuddin vs. CA, G.R. No. 184681, February 25, 20131 — Nature and PurposeDIRECT
5Mendoza vs. People, G.R. No. 197293, April 21, 20141 — Nature and PurposeDIRECT
6Arroyo vs. Department of Justice, G.R. No. 199082, September 18, 20121 — Nature and PurposeDIRECT
7Navarro vs. Cornejo, G.R. No. 263329, February 8, 20231 — Nature and PurposeDIRECT
8Ocampo vs. Abando, G.R. No. 176830, February 11, 20141 — Nature and PurposeDIRECT
9Estrada vs. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 212761, July 31, 20181 — Nature and PurposeDIRECT
10Marinas vs. Siochi, G.R. Nos. L-25707, L-25753 & L-25754, May 14, 19811 — Nature and PurposeDIRECT
11Duterte vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 130191, April 27, 19981 — Nature and PurposeDIRECT
12People vs. Gomez, G.R. No. L-29086, September 30, 19821 — Nature and PurposeDIRECT
13Estrada vs. Office of the Ombudsman, supra3.a — DOJ Department Circular No. 015 July 16, 2024: Probable CauseDIRECT
14Sy Tiong Shiou vs. Sy Chim, G.R. No. 174168, March 30, 20093.a — DOJ Department Circular No. 015 July 16, 2024: Probable CauseDIRECT
15Mangila vs. Pangilinan, G.R. No. 160739, July 17, 20135 — Officers Authorized to Conduct Preliminary InvestigationDIRECT
16Yambot vs. Armivit, G.R. No. 172677, September 12, 20085 — Officers Authorized to Conduct Preliminary InvestigationANALOGOUS
17Tetangco vs. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 156427, January 20, 20067 — Doctrine of Non-InterferenceDIRECT
18Alawiya vs. Atumanong, G.R. No. 164170, April 16, 20097 — Doctrine of Non-InterferenceDIRECT
19Maximo vs. Villapando, G.R. No. 214925, April 26, 20178 — Resolution of the Investigating Prosecutor and its ReviewDIRECT
20Quisay vs. People, G.R. No. 216920, January 13, 20168 — Resolution of the Investigating Prosecutor and its ReviewDIRECT
21De Lima vs. Reyes, G.R. No. 209330, January 11, 20168 — Resolution of the Investigating Prosecutor and its ReviewDIRECT
22Estrada vs. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 212140, January 21, 20158 — Resolution of the Investigating Prosecutor and its ReviewDIRECT
23Shu vs. Dee, G.R. No. 182573, April 23, 20148 — Resolution of the Investigating Prosecutor and its ReviewDIRECT
24Pestillos vs. Generoso (Pestilos vs. Generoso), G.R. No. 182601, November 10, 20149 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssueANALOGOUS
25The Law Firm of Chavez Miranda Aseoche vs. Fria, G.R. No. 183014, August 7, 20139 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssueDIRECT
26Hao vs. People, G.R. No. 183345, September 17, 20149 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssueDIRECT
27Mendoza vs. People, supra9 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssueDIRECT
28Maza vs. Turla, G.R. No. 187094, February 15, 20179 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssueDIRECT
29Anlud Metal Recycling Corporation vs. Ang, G.R. No. 182157, August 17, 20159 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssueDIRECT
30De Lima vs. Guerrero, G.R. No. 229781, October 10, 20179 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssueDIRECT
31Cajipe vs. People, G.R. No. 203605, April 23, 20149 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssueDIRECT
32Ladlad vs. Velasco, G.R. Nos. 172070-72, June 1, 200710 — When Accused Lawfully Arrested Without WarrantDIRECT
33De Castro vs. Fernandez, Jr., G.R. No. 155141, February 14, 200710 — When Accused Lawfully Arrested Without WarrantDIRECT
34Victorias Milling Co. vs. Padilla, G.R. No. 156963, October 6, 200811 — Cases Not Requiring PI Nor Covered by the Rules on Summary ProcedureDIRECT
35Borlongan, Jr. vs. Peña, G.R. No. 143591, November 23, 200711 — Cases Not Requiring PI Nor Covered by the Rules on Summary ProcedureDIRECT
36Tabujara vs. People, G.R. No. 175162, October 29, 200811 — Cases Not Requiring PI Nor Covered by the Rules on Summary ProcedureDIRECT

Recitation Map

One line per digested case — what it is assigned for, and how it came out.
CaseWhat it is forDisposition
Galvez v. CA1 — Nature and PurposeCA Decision dated 27 June 2008 in CA-G.R. SP No. 97160 AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION: Gilbert G. Guy, Rafael H. Galvez, Philip Leung, Katherine L. Guy, and Eugenio H. Galvez, Jr. to be charged for SYNDICATED ESTAFA under Article 315(2)(a), Revised Penal Code, in relation to Section 1, P.D. No. 1689.
Callo-Claridad v. Esteban1 — Nature and PurposePetition for review on certiorari DENIED. CA Decision promulgated 20 November 2009 AFFIRMED. Petitioner to pay costs of suit.
Punzalan v. Plata1 — Nature and PurposePetition GRANTED. CA Decision dated 29 September 2003 in CA-G.R. SP No. 62633 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. DOJ Resolutions dated 6 June 2000 and 11 October 2000 REINSTATED (informations ordered withdrawn).
Salapuddin v. CA1 — Nature and PurposePetition GRANTED. CA Decision (6 August 2008) and Resolution (16 October 2008) in CA-G.R. SP No. 103461 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Secretary of Justice's Resolution dated 23 April 2008 in I.S. No. 2007-992 REINSTATED; Salapuddin excluded from the Information.
Mendoza v. People1 — Nature and PurposePetition GRANTED. CA Decision dated 14 January 2011 in CA-G.R. SP No. 110774 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Criminal Case Nos. MC08-11604-05 against Alfredo C. Mendoza DISMISSED.
Arroyo v. Department of Justice1 — Nature and PurposePetitions and supplemental petitions DISMISSED. Comelec Resolution No. 9266, Joint Order No. 001-2011, and the Fact-Finding Team's Initial Report declared VALID. The Joint Committee's Rules of Procedure declared INEFFECTIVE for lack of publication. The conduct of the preliminary investigation declared VALID; proceedings in RTC Pasay City, Branch 112 to proceed with dispatch.
Navarro v. Cornejo1 — Nature and PurposePetition GRANTED. CA Decision (21 July 2022) and Resolution (20 September 2022) in CA-G.R. SP No. 166222 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Informations against Navarro for Rape and Acts of Lasciviousness DISMISSED for lack of probable cause.
Ocampo v. Abando1 — Nature and PurposeConsolidated petitions DISMISSED. RTC Manila, Branch 32 ordered to proceed with dispatch in Criminal Case No. 08-262163. Petitioners to remain on temporary liberty under previously granted bail, subject to stated conditions.
Estrada v. Ombudsman1 — Nature and PurposePetitions DISMISSED for lack of merit. Ombudsman's finding of probable cause against all petitioners AFFIRMED.
Marinas v. Siochi1 — Nature and PurposePetition DENIED; Writ of Preliminary Injunction lifted; costs against petitioners.
Duterte v. Sandiganbayan1 — Nature and PurposePetition GRANTED. Criminal Case No. 23193 DISMISSED. Temporary restraining order of 4 September 1997 made PERMANENT.
People v. Gomez1 — Nature and PurposeOrder of dismissal dated 2 November 1966 SET ASIDE; Court of First Instance of Zamboanga ordered to proceed to trial in Criminal Cases Nos. 3083, 3084, 3088, and 3128.
Sy Tiong Shiou v. Sy Chim3.a — DOJ Department Circular No. 015 July 16, 2024: Probable CausePetition for review DENIED (G.R. No. 174168 only). CA Decision (31 May 2006) and Resolution (8 August 2006) in CA-G.R. SP No. 91416 AFFIRMED; costs against petitioners.
Mangila v. Pangilinan5 — Officers Authorized to Conduct Preliminary InvestigationPetition for review DENIED for lack of merit. CA Resolutions dated 14 October 2003 and 19 November 2003 in CA-G.R. SP No. 79745 AFFIRMED; petitioner ordered to pay costs of suit.
Yambot v. Armivit5 — Officers Authorized to Conduct Preliminary InvestigationPetition for review on certiorari DENIED. CA Decision (16 September 2005) and Resolution (8 May 2006) in CA-G.R. SP No. 54397 AFFIRMED.
Tetangco v. Ombudsman7 — Doctrine of Non-InterferencePetition DISMISSED for lack of merit. No pronouncement as to costs.
Alawiya v. Atumanong7 — Doctrine of Non-InterferencePetition GRANTED insofar as the case is REMANDED to the RTC, Branch 41, Manila, to independently evaluate or assess the merits of the case and determine whether probable cause exists to hold the accused for trial.
Maximo v. Villapando8 — Resolution of the Investigating Prosecutor and its ReviewBoth petitions DENIED. CA Decision (13 June 2014) and Resolution (16 October 2014) AFFIRMED — Amended Information for Perjury against Villapando DISMISSED without prejudice to the filing of a new Information by an authorized officer.
Quisay v. People8 — Resolution of the Investigating Prosecutor and its ReviewPetition GRANTED. CA Decision (10 October 2014) and Resolution (30 January 2015) in CA-G.R. SP No. 131968 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. The Information (Pabatid Sakdal) against petitioner QUASHED and the criminal case against her DISMISSED.
De Lima v. Reyes8 — Resolution of the Investigating Prosecutor and its ReviewPetition DISMISSED for being moot. Branch 52, Regional Trial Court of Palawan DIRECTED to proceed with the prosecution of Criminal Case No. 26839.
Estrada v. Ombudsman8 — Resolution of the Investigating Prosecutor and its ReviewPetition for Certiorari DISMISSED for prematurity and forum shopping.
Shu v. Dee8 — Resolution of the Investigating Prosecutor and its ReviewPetition GRANTED. CA Decision (19 June 2007) and Resolution (4 April 2008) REVERSED and SET ASIDE, reinstating the Secretary of Justice's finding of probable cause for falsification against respondents.
Pestillos v. Generoso (Pestilos v. Generoso)9 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssuePetition DENIED. CA Decision (Jan. 21, 2008) and Resolution (Apr. 17, 2008) in CA-G.R. SP No. 91541 AFFIRMED. City Prosecutor of Quezon City ORDERED to proceed with the criminal proceedings against petitioners.
The Law Firm of Chavez Miranda Aseoche v. Fria9 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssuePetition DENIED. RTC Resolution (8 January 2008) and Order (16 May 2008) in S.C.A. Case No. 07-096 AFFIRMED, sustaining the MTC's dismissal of Criminal Case No. 46400 for lack of probable cause.
Hao v. People9 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssuePetition DENIED. CA Decision (28 February 2006) and Resolution (13 June 2008) in CA-G.R. SP No. 86289 AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION — petitioners ordered charged and arraigned for simple estafa under Article 315(2)(a), RPC, instead of syndicated estafa; warrants of arrest issued STAND.
Maza v. Turla9 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssuePetition PARTIALLY GRANTED. RTC Orders dated 18 July 2008 and 2 December 2008 in Criminal Case Nos. 1879-P and 1880-P SET ASIDE. Case REMANDED to the RTC for further proceedings — a proper exercise of the judge's Section 5(a), Rule 112 options — with due and deliberate dispatch.
Anlud Metal Recycling Corporation v. Ang9 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssuePetition for Review DENIED. CA Decision (4 December 2007) and Resolution (13 March 2008) in CA-G.R. SP No. 97124, affirming the RTC Decision (18 September 2006) and Order (3 October 2006) in Criminal Case No. 12691-04-C dismissing the estafa charge against respondent, AFFIRMED.
De Lima v. Guerrero9 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssuePetition for prohibition and certiorari DISMISSED for lack of merit; the Regional Trial Court of Muntinlupa City, Branch 204 ordered to proceed with dispatch with Criminal Case No. 17-165. Provisional reliefs rejected.
Cajipe v. People9 — When Warrant of Arrest May IssuePetition GRANTED. CA Decision (15 June 2012) and Resolution (5 October 2012) in CA-G.R. SP 117756 REVERSED. RTC Order dismissing the case against petitioners AFFIRMED. Charges DISMISSED; warrants of arrest against petitioners ORDERED WITHDRAWN.
Ladlad v. Velasco10 — When Accused Lawfully Arrested Without WarrantPetitions GRANTED. In G.R. No. 175013, Orders dated 31 May 2006 and 29 August 2006 SET ASIDE. In G.R. Nos. 172070-72 and 172074-76, Orders dated 22 March 2006 and 4 April 2006 SET ASIDE. RTC Makati, Branch 150, ORDERED to DISMISS Criminal Case Nos. 06-452 and 06-944.
De Castro v. Fernandez, Jr.10 — When Accused Lawfully Arrested Without WarrantPetition DISMISSED for availment of the wrong remedy; on the merits, Orders dated 5 August 2002 and 28 August 2002 of the RTC, Las Piñas City, Branch 254, AFFIRMED.
Victorias Milling Co. v. Padilla11 — Cases Not Requiring PI Nor Covered by the Rules on Summary ProcedurePetition GRANTED. MTCC Judge (or the incumbent Presiding Judge of the MTCC of Victorias City) ORDERED to determine the existence of probable cause against respondents as conspirators, in accordance with the procedure in Section 8(b), Rule 112, Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure.
Borlongan, Jr. v. Peña11 — Cases Not Requiring PI Nor Covered by the Rules on Summary ProcedurePetition GRANTED. CA Decision dated 20 June 2000 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. TRO dated 2 August 2000 made PERMANENT. MTCC, City of Bago, ORDERED to DISMISS Criminal Case Nos. 6683-86.
Tabujara v. People11 — Cases Not Requiring PI Nor Covered by the Rules on Summary ProcedurePetition GRANTED. CA Decision and Resolution REVERSED and SET ASIDE. MTC of Meycauayan, Bulacan, Branch 11, DIRECTED to dismiss Criminal Cases Nos. 99-29037 and 99-29038 for lack of probable cause and to quash the warrants of arrest.
Open full week page
Week 7· September 17, 2026

Week 7 - Rule 113 - Arrest

Definition; How MadeDuty of Arresting OfficerExecution of WarrantWarrantless Arrest
→

Week 7 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 7 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1Sanchez vs. People, G.R. No. 204589, November 19, 20141 — Definition; How MadeDIRECT
2Luz vs. People, G.R. No. 197788, February 29, 20121 — Definition; How MadeDIRECT
3Homar vs. People, G.R. No. 182534, September 2, 20151 — Definition; How MadeDIRECT
4People vs. Cunanan, G.R. No. 198024, March 16, 20151 — Definition; How MadeDIRECT
5Sanchez vs. Demetriou, G.R. Nos. 111771-77, November 9, 19931 — Definition; How MadeDIRECT
6Soria vs. Desierto, G.R. No. 153524, January 31, 20052 — Duty of Arresting OfficerDIRECT
7People vs. Albior, G.R. No. L-75034, June 30, 19882 — Duty of Arresting OfficerDIRECT
8Sayo vs. Chief of Police of Manila, G.R. No. L-2128, May 12, 19482 — Duty of Arresting OfficerDIRECT
9People vs. Sapal, G.R. No. 124526, March 17, 20002 — Duty of Arresting OfficerDIRECT
10People vs. Sanchez, G.R. No. 188610, June 29, 20102 — Duty of Arresting OfficerINCIDENTAL
11People vs. Givera, G.R. No. 132159, January 18, 20013 — Execution of WarrantDIRECT
12People vs. Pardillo, G.R. No. 219590, June 7, 20174.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
13Miguel vs. People, G.R. No. 227038, July 31, 20174.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
14Dacanay vs. People, G.R. No. 199018, September 27, 20174.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
15People vs. Villareal, G.R. No. 201363, March 18, 20134.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
16People vs. Villareal, supra4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
17People vs. Almodiel, G.R. No. 200951, September 5, 20124.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
18People vs. Paalaras, G.R. No. 219582, July 11, 20184.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
19People vs. Andaya, G.R. No. 183700, October 13, 20144.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
20People vs. Edaño, G.R. No. 188133, July 7, 20144.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
21Antiquera vs. People, G.R. No. 180661, December 11, 20134.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
22People vs. Amminudin, G.R. No. 74869, July 6, 19884.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
23People vs. Tangliben, G.R. No. 63630, April 6, 19904.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
24People vs. Maspil, G.R. No. 85177, August 20, 19904.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
25People vs. Molina, G.R. No. 133917, February 19, 20014.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
26People vs. Mengote, G.R. No. 87059, June 22, 19924.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
27People vs. Del Rosario, G.R. No. 127755, April 14, 19994.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDIRECT
28People vs. Villareal, G.R. No. 201363, March 18, 20134.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitDIRECT
29Pestillos vs. Generoso (Pestilos vs. Generoso), G.R. No. 182601, November 10, 20144.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitDIRECT
30Comerciante vs. People, G.R. No. 205926, July 22, 20154.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitANALOGOUS
31Miguel vs. People, G.R. No. 227038, July 31, 20174.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitDIRECT
32Veridiano vs. People, G.R. No. 200370, June 7, 20174.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitDIRECT
33People vs. Del Rosario, G.R. No. 127755, April 14, 19994.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitDIRECT
34Rolito Go vs. CA, G.R. No. 101837, February 11, 19924.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitDIRECT
35Posadas vs. Ombudsman, G.R. No. 131492, September 29, 20004.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitDIRECT
36People vs. Gerente, G.R. Nos. 95847-48, March 10, 19934.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitDIRECT
37Abelita vs. Doria, G.R. No. 170672, August 14, 20094.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitDIRECT
38Mallari vs. CA, G.R. No. 110569, December 9, 19965 — Method of Arrest With and Without WarrantDIRECT
39People vs. Tan, G.R. No. 87783, August 6, 19905 — Method of Arrest With and Without WarrantDIRECT

Recitation Map

One line per digested case — what it is assigned for, and how it came out.
CaseWhat it is forDisposition
Sanchez v. People1 — Definition; How MadePetition GRANTED. CA Decision (25 July 2012) and Resolution (20 Nov. 2012) in CA-G.R. CR No. 31742 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Petitioner Rizaldy Sanchez y Cajili ACQUITTED on reasonable doubt and ordered immediately released, unless lawfully held for another cause.
Luz v. People1 — Definition; How MadePetition GRANTED. CA Decision (18 Feb. 2011) and Resolution (8 July 2011) in CA-G.R. CR No. 32516 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Petitioner Rodel Luz y Ong ACQUITTED and ordered immediately released from detention, unless confined for another lawful cause.
Homar v. People1 — Definition; How MadePetition GRANTED. CA Decision (10 Jan. 2008) and Resolution (11 Apr. 2008) in CA-G.R. CR No. 29364 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Petitioner ACQUITTED and ordered immediately RELEASED from detention, unless confined for any other lawful cause.
People v. Cunanan1 — Definition; How MadeAppeal DENIED. CA Decision (27 Jan. 2011, CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 04062), affirming RTC Pasig City, Br. 164 (Crim. Case No. 15143-D), AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION — Rafael Cunanan y David guilty of violation of Section 5, Article II, R.A. No. 9165, sentenced to life imprisonment and a P500,000.00 fine, not eligible for parole.
Sanchez v. Demetriou1 — Definition; How MadePetition for certiorari and prohibition DISMISSED. Respondent Judge Demetriou DIRECTED to continue with the trial of Criminal Cases Nos. 101141 to 101147 and to decide them with deliberate dispatch.
Soria v. Desierto2 — Duty of Arresting OfficerPetition for certiorari DISMISSED for lack of merit. Joint Resolution (31 Jan. 2002) and Order (25 Mar. 2002) of the Office of the Ombudsman, dismissing the complaint for violation of Article 125, Revised Penal Code, AFFIRMED. No costs.
People v. Albior2 — Duty of Arresting OfficerAccused-appellant Francisco Albior ACQUITTED of Robbery with Homicide with Rape, on reasonable doubt, following exclusion of his extrajudicial confession.
Sayo v. Chief of Police of Manila2 — Duty of Arresting OfficerPetition for habeas corpus GRANTED. Petitioners Melencio Sayo and Joaquin Mostero declared illegally restrained of their liberty; release ordered, unless detained by virtue of a process issued by a competent court of justice. (Motion for reconsideration subsequently DENIED per Resolution of 27 August 1948, Tuason and Padilla, JJ., dissenting.)
People v. Sapal2 — Duty of Arresting OfficerDecision of 8 March 1996 (RTC Manila, Br. 35) REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Accused-appellant Jimmy Sapal y Nasa ACQUITTED of illegal possession of marijuana, on reasonable doubt. Bureau of Corrections ORDERED to immediately release accused unless otherwise detained for lawful cause; DEU-WPD ORDERED to release the Toyota Corolla to movant-appellant Joel N. Go.
People v. Sanchez2 — Duty of Arresting OfficerAppeal DENIED. CA Decision (27 Feb. 2009, CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 02902), affirming RTC Marikina City, Br. 272 (Crim. Case Nos. 06-8245-MK to 06-8248-MK), AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION — Albert Sanchez y Galera guilty of two counts of Murder and two counts of Frustrated Murder; heirs of Jufer James and Edgar De Leon awarded increased moral damages (P75,000.00 each) and exemplary damages (P30,000.00 each) per count of murder.
People v. Givera3 — Execution of WarrantAppeal DENIED for lack of merit. RTC (Branch 102, Quezon City) Decision AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION — accused-appellant Cesar Givera y Garote guilty of murder, sentenced to reclusion perpetua; ordered to pay the heirs of Eusebio Gardon P50,000.00 as indemnity and, additionally per the modification, P50,000.00 as moral damages, plus costs.
People v. Pardillo4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoAppeal DISMISSED. Decision dated July 31, 2013 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 01689, affirming the RTC's judgment of conviction for violation of Section 11, Article II, RA 9165, AFFIRMED in toto.
Miguel v. People4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoPetition GRANTED. Decision dated October 21, 2015 and Resolution dated September 5, 2016 of the CA in CA-G.R. CR No. 35318 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Petitioner Jeffrey Miguel y Remegio ACQUITTED of illegal possession of dangerous drugs. Director of the Bureau of Corrections ordered to cause his immediate release, unless lawfully held for any other reason.
Dacanay v. People4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoPetition for Review DENIED. Decision dated May 26, 2011 of the CA in CA-G.R. CR No. 30826, affirming the RTC of Mandaluyong City, Branch 209, Decision dated July 16, 2006, AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION as to penalty (indeterminate sentence of 12 years and 1 day to 14 years and 8 months).
People v. Villareal4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDecision of the CA in CA-G.R. CR No. 31320 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Appellant Nazareno Villareal y Lualhati ACQUITTED on reasonable doubt and ordered immediately released from detention, unless his continued confinement is warranted by some other cause or ground.
People v. Almodiel4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoAppeal DISMISSED. Decision dated 14 November 2011 of the CA in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 00632-MIN, affirming the RTC of Butuan City, Branch 4, conviction for violation of Section 5, Article II, RA 9165, AFFIRMED in toto.
People v. Paalaras4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoCourt REVERSES and SETS ASIDE the CA Decision dated 29 January 2015 in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 01758. Accused-appellant Benito Palaras y Lapu-os ACQUITTED in Criminal Case Nos. 8561-69 and 8562-69 on the ground of reasonable doubt. Director of the Bureau of Corrections ordered to immediately release him unless detained for some other lawful cause.
People v. Andaya4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoCourt REVERSES and SETS ASIDE the decision promulgated on 11 February 2008; ACQUITS accused Pablito Andaya y Reano for failure to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt; ORDERS his immediate release from confinement.
People v. Edaño4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoCourt REVERSES and SETS ASIDE the October 16, 2008 decision and December 23, 2008 resolution of the CA in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 01142. Appellant Oliver Renato Edaño y Ebdane ACQUITTED for failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt; ordered immediately RELEASED from detention.
Antiquera v. People4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoCourt REVERSES and SETS ASIDE the Decision dated September 21, 2007 and Resolution dated November 16, 2007 of the CA in CA-G.R. CR 28937, and ACQUITS the accused George Antiquera y Codes for lack of evidence sufficient to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Bail bond ordered cancelled and released.
People v. Amminudin4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDecision of the trial court REVERSED; accused-appellant Idel Aminnudin ACQUITTED.
People v. Tangliben4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoJudgment of conviction AFFIRMED but MODIFIED; accused-appellant Medel Tangliben y Bernardino sentenced to imprisonment ranging from six (6) years and one (1) day to twelve (12) years and a fine of Six Thousand Pesos (P6,000.00).
People v. Maspil4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoAppealed decision of the RTC of Baguio City, Branch 5, AFFIRMED. Accused-appellants Moises Maspil, Jr. y Wayway and Salcedo Bagking y Altaki found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal transportation of marijuana, sentenced to LIFE IMPRISONMENT each and a fine of P20,000.00 each.
People v. Molina4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDecision of the RTC of Davao City, Branch 17, in Criminal Case No. 37,264-96 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Accused-appellants Nasario Molina y Manamat and Gregorio Mula y Malagura ACQUITTED and ordered RELEASED from confinement unless validly detained for other offenses. No costs.
People v. Mengote4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoAppealed decision REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Accused-appellant Rogelio Mengote y Tejas ACQUITTED and ordered released immediately unless validly detained for other offenses. No costs.
People v. Del Rosario4.a — Warrantless Arrest: In Flagrante DelictoDecision of the RTC of Cabanatuan City convicting accused Joselito del Rosario y Pascual of Robbery with Homicide and sentencing him to death REVISED and SET ASIDE. Accused ACQUITTED of the crime charged. Immediate RELEASE ordered unless held for some other lawful cause.
People v. Villareal4.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitDecision of the CA in CA-G.R. CR No. 31320 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Appellant Nazareno Villareal y Lualhati ACQUITTED on reasonable doubt and ordered immediately released from detention, unless his continued confinement is warranted by some other cause or ground.
Pestillos v. Generoso (Pestilos v. Generoso)4.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitPetition DENIED. Decision dated January 21, 2008 and Resolution dated April 17, 2008 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. SP No. 91541 AFFIRMED. The City Prosecutor of Quezon City ORDERED to proceed with the criminal proceedings against the petitioners.
Comerciante v. People4.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitPetition GRANTED. Decision dated October 20, 2011 and Resolution dated February 19, 2013 of the CA in CA-G.R. CR No. 32813 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Petitioner Alvin Comerciante y Gonzales ACQUITTED. Director of the Bureau of Corrections ordered to cause his immediate release, unless lawfully held for any other reason.
Miguel v. People4.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitPetition GRANTED. Decision dated October 21, 2015 and Resolution dated September 5, 2016 of the CA in CA-G.R. CR No. 35318 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Petitioner Jeffrey Miguel y Remegio ACQUITTED of illegal possession of dangerous drugs. Director of the Bureau of Corrections ordered to cause his immediate release, unless lawfully held for any other reason.
Veridiano v. People4.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitDecision dated July 16, 2010 of the RTC in Crim. Case No. 16976-SP and the Decision dated November 18, 2011 and Resolution dated January 25, 2012 of the CA in CA-G.R. CR No. 33588 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Petitioner Mario Veridiano y Sapi ACQUITTED and ordered immediately RELEASED from confinement unless held for some other lawful cause.
People v. Del Rosario4.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitDecision of the RTC of Cabanatuan City convicting accused Joselito del Rosario y Pascual of Robbery with Homicide and sentencing him to death REVISED and SET ASIDE. Accused ACQUITTED of the crime charged. Immediate RELEASE ordered unless held for some other lawful cause.
Rolito Go v. CA4.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitPetition for Review on Certiorari GRANTED. Order of the trial court dated July 17, 1991 SET ASIDE and NULLIFIED; Decision of the Court of Appeals dated September 23, 1991 REVERSED. Office of the Provincial Prosecutor ORDERED to conduct preliminary investigation within fifteen (15) days; trial SUSPENDED pending its conclusion. Petitioner ORDERED released upon posting of cash bail of P100,000.00.
Posadas v. Ombudsman4.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitPetition GRANTED. The Ombudsman and his agents PROHIBITED from prosecuting petitioners for violation of P.D. No. 1829, Section 1(c). The Sandiganbayan ORDERED to dismiss the Information in Criminal Case No. 22801 against petitioners.
People v. Gerente4.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitAppealed decision AFFIRMED, with modification of the civil indemnity awarded to the heirs of the victim, Clarito Blace, which is increased to P50,000.00.
Abelita v. Doria4.b — Warrantless Arrest: Hot PursuitPetition DENIED. The 10 July 2004 Decision and 18 October 2004 Order of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 217, in Civil Case No. Q-98-33442, AFFIRMED.
Mallari v. CA5 — Method of Arrest With and Without WarrantPetition GRANTED. CA Decision (affirming RTC Capas, Tarlac, Br. 66, Crim. Case No. 531) REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Petitioner Diosdado Mallari ACQUITTED of Illegal Possession of Firearms and Ammunition for insufficiency of evidence and ordered immediately released unless held on other legal grounds — the acquittal rests on the prosecution's failure to prove the separate element of absence of a license, not on any defect in the arrest.
People v. Tan5 — Method of Arrest With and Without WarrantDecision AFFIRMED. Adelina Castiller y Castro guilty of violating Section 4, Article II, R.A. No. 6425 (Dangerous Drugs Act), sentenced to reclusion perpetua, fine of P20,000.00, and costs.
Open full week page
Week 8· September 24, 2026

Week 8 - Rule 114 - Bail

Definition, Nature, and PurposeConditions of the Bail; RequirementsBail as a Matter of RightBail, When Discretionary
→

Week 8 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 8 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847, August 18, 20151 — Definition, Nature, and PurposeDIRECT
2People vs. Escobar, G.R. No. 214300, July 26, 20171 — Definition, Nature, and PurposeDIRECT
3Miranda vs. Tuliao, G.R. No. 158763, March 31, 20061 — Definition, Nature, and PurposeDIRECT
4Allado vs. Diokno, G.R. No. 113630, May 5, 19941 — Definition, Nature, and PurposeINCIDENTAL
5Roberts vs. CA, G.R. No. 113930, March 5, 19961 — Definition, Nature, and PurposeINCIDENTAL
6Docena-Caspe vs. Bugtas, A.M. No. RTJ-03-1767, March 28, 20031 — Definition, Nature, and PurposeDIRECT
7People vs. Gako, Jr., G.R. No. 135045, December 15, 20001 — Definition, Nature, and PurposeDIRECT
8Santiago vs. Vasquez, G.R. Nos. 99289-90, January 27, 19931 — Definition, Nature, and PurposeDIRECT
9Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847, August 18, 20153 — Bail as a Matter of RightDIRECT
10People vs. Escobar, G.R. No. 214300, July 26, 20173 — Bail as a Matter of RightDIRECT
11Recto vs. People, G.R. No. 236461, December 5, 20183 — Bail as a Matter of RightDIRECT
12Tolentino vs. Camano, Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-00-1522, January 20, 20003 — Bail as a Matter of RightDIRECT
13Government of the US vs. Puruganan, G.R. No. 148571, September 24, 20023 — Bail as a Matter of RightREJECTED
14Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region vs. Olalia, G.R. No. 153675, April 19, 20073 — Bail as a Matter of RightDIRECT
15Qui vs. People, G.R. No. 196161, September 26, 20124 — Bail, When DiscretionaryDIRECT
16Leviste vs. CA, G.R. No. 189122, March 17, 20104 — Bail, When DiscretionaryDIRECT
17Recto vs. People, G.R. No. 236461, December 5, 20184 — Bail, When DiscretionaryDIRECT
18Trillanes, Jr. vs. Pimentel, G.R. No. 179817, June 27, 20085 — Capital OffensesDIRECT
19Enrile vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 213847, August 18, 20155 — Capital OffensesDIRECT
20People vs. Valdez, G.R. Nos. 216007-09, December 8, 20155 — Capital OffensesREJECTED
21People vs. Hilario, G.R. No. 210610, January 11, 2018Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
22People vs. Erguiza, G.R. No. 171348, November 26, 2008Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
23Jacob vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 162206, November 17, 2010Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
24Crisostomo vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152398, April 14, 2005Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
25People vs. Abatayo, G.R. No. 139456, July 7, 2004Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
26People vs. Larrañaga, G.R. Nos. 138874-75, February 3, 2004Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
27Pielago vs. People, G.R. No. 202020, March 13, 2013Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
28People vs. Cruz, G.R. No. 194234, June 18, 2014Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
29People vs. Lagarde, G.R. No. 182549, January 20, 2009Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
30People vs. Lara, G.R. No. 199877, August 13, 2012Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
31People vs. Deniega, G.R. No. 103499, December 29, 1995Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
32People vs. Tomaquin, G.R. No. 133188, July 23, 2004Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
33People vs. Bermas, G.R. No. 120420, April 21, 1999Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
34Domondon vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 166606, November 29, 2005Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
35Ombudsman vs. Jurado, G.R. No. 154155, August 6, 2008Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
36Tatad vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 72335-39, March 21, 1988Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
37Coscolluela vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 191411, July 15, 2013Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
38Chavez vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. L-29169, August 19, 1968Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
39People vs. Gamboa, G.R. No. 91374, February 25, 1991Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
40Herrera vs. Alba, G.R. No. 148220, June 15, 2005Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
41People vs. Fieldad, G.R. No. 196005, October 1, 2014Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
42People vs. Olvis, G.R. No. 71092, September 30, 1987Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
43Beltran vs. Samson, G.R. No. 32025, September 23, 1929Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
44Villaflor vs. Summers, G.R. No. 16444, September 8, 1920Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
45Marcelo vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 109242, January 26, 1999Rights of the AccusedDIRECT
46Dy Teban Trading vs. Dy, G.R. No. 185647, July 26, 2017Rights of the AccusedANALOGOUS

Recitation Map

One line per digested case — what it is assigned for, and how it came out.
CaseWhat it is forDisposition
Enrile v. Sandiganbayan1 — Definition, Nature, and PurposeWHEREFORE, the Court GRANTS the petition for certiorari ; ISSUES the writ of certiorari ANNULING and SETTING ASIDE the Resolutions issued by the Sandiganbayan (Third Division) in Case No.
People v. Escobar1 — Definition, Nature, and PurposeWHEREFORE, the Petition is DENIED. The Court of Appeals Decision dated March 24, 2014 in CA-G.R. SP No. 128189 is AFFIRMED. Escobar may be provisionally released if he indeed has paid the surety bond that must be contained in a public document and approved by the Regional Trial Court judge.
Miranda v. Tuliao1 — Definition, Nature, and Purpose'The Temporary Restraining Order issued by this Court dated 4 August 2003 is hereby LIFTED. Costs against Petitioners.
Allado v. Diokno1 — Definition, Nature, and PurposeWHEREFORE, the petition for certiorari and prohibition is GRANTED. The temporary restraining order we issued on 28 February 1994 in favor of petitioners, Atty. Diosdado Jose Allado and Atty. Roberto L. Mendoza, is made permanent.
Roberts v. CA1 — Definition, Nature, and Purpose—
Docena-Caspe v. Bugtas1 — Definition, Nature, and PurposeWHEREFORE, in view of all the foregoing, respondent Judge Arnulfo O. Bugtas is ordered to pay a FINE in the amount of Twenty Thousand Pesos (P20,000.00) and STERNLY WARNED that a repetition of the same or similar acts shall be dealt with more severely. SO ORDERED…
People v. Gako, Jr.1 — Definition, Nature, and Purpose—
Santiago v. Vasquez1 — Definition, Nature, and Purpose—
Enrile v. Sandiganbayan3 — Bail as a Matter of RightWHEREFORE, the Court GRANTS the petition for certiorari ; ISSUES the writ of certiorari ANNULING and SETTING ASIDE the Resolutions issued by the Sandiganbayan (Third Division) in Case No.
People v. Escobar3 — Bail as a Matter of RightWHEREFORE, the Petition is DENIED. The Court of Appeals Decision dated March 24, 2014 in CA-G.R. SP No. 128189 is AFFIRMED. Escobar may be provisionally released if he indeed has paid the surety bond that must be contained in a public document and approved by the Regional Trial Court judge.
Recto v. People3 — Bail as a Matter of RightWHEREFORE, premises considered, the Petition for Review on Certiorari is hereby GRANTED. The Decision dated June 29, 2017 and Resolution dated January 11, 2018 issued by the Thirteenth Division and Former Thirteenth Division, respectively, of the Court of Appeals in CA G.R. SP No.
Tolentino v. Camano, Jr.3 — Bail as a Matter of RightWHEREFORE, finding no merit in the instant complaint, the same is hereby DISMISSED. SO ORDERED…
Government of the US v. Puruganan3 — Bail as a Matter of RightWHEREFORE, the Petition is GRANTED. The assailed RTC Order dated May 23, 2001 is hereby declared NULL and VOID, while the challenged Order dated July 3, 2001 is SET ASIDE insofar as it granted bail to Respondent Mark Jimenez. The bail bond posted by private respondent is CANCELLED.
Government of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region v. Olalia3 — Bail as a Matter of RightWHEREFORE, we DISMISS the petition. This case is REMANDED to the trial court to determine whether private respondent is entitled to bail on the basis of 'clear and convincing evidence.' If not, the trial court should order the cancellation of his bail bond and his immediate detention; and thereafter…
Qui v. People4 — Bail, When Discretionary—
Leviste v. CA4 — Bail, When DiscretionaryWHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, accused Jose Antonio Leviste y Casals is hereby found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of homicide and is sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as minimum, to twelve (12) years and one (1) day of rec…
Recto v. People4 — Bail, When DiscretionaryWHEREFORE, premises considered, the Petition for Review on Certiorari is hereby GRANTED. The Decision dated June 29, 2017 and Resolution dated January 11, 2018 issued by the Thirteenth Division and Former Thirteenth Division, respectively, of the Court of Appeals in CA G.R. SP No.
Trillanes, Jr. v. Pimentel5 — Capital Offenses—
Enrile v. Sandiganbayan5 — Capital OffensesWHEREFORE, the Court GRANTS the petition for certiorari; ISSUES the writ of certiorari ANNULING and SETTING ASIDE the Resolutions issued by the Sandiganbayan (Third Division) in Case No.
People v. Valdez5 — Capital OffensesWHEREFORE, premises considered, the petition is DENIED for lack of merit. Private respondent Luzviminda S. Valdez is entitled to bail, as a matter of right, in Criminal Case Nos. SB-14-CRM-0321, 0322 and 0324.
People v. HilarioRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, premises considered, the Decision dated July 18, 2013 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 05244 is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Accused-appellant Marilou D. Hilario is ACQUITTED of the charge of illegal sale of dangerous drugs, under Article II, Section 5 of Republic Act No.
People v. ErguizaRights of the AccusedDecision dated November 18, 2005 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR H.C. No. 00763 REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Larry Erguiza ACQUITTED and ordered immediately RELEASED from custody unless held for some other lawful cause; the Director of the Bureau of Corrections ORDERED to implement the Decision forthwith and to INFORM the Court within five days of the date of actual release. Costs de oficio.
Jacob v. SandiganbayanRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, there being no showing that the impugned Resolutions dated February 4, 2002 of the Sandiganbayan Special Fourth Division and December 12, 2003 of the Sandiganbayan Fourth Division in Criminal Case Nos.
Crisostomo v. SandiganbayanRights of the Accused—
People v. AbatayoRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Mandaue City, Branch 56, is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS. The appellant is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of two (2) counts of homicide as defined and penalized in Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and is sentenced t…
People v. LarrañagaRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, the Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 7, Cebu City in Criminal Cases Nos. CBU 45303 and 45304 is AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS:…
Pielago v. PeopleRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, the Decision dated February 1, 2012 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 33475 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION, that: (1) the amount of exemplary damages is increased from ₱25,000.00 to ₱30,000.00; and (2) petitioner Mike Alvin Pielago y Ros is ordered to pay the private offended party…
People v. CruzRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, the Decision dated August 21, 2007 of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 94, in Criminal Case No. Q-03-118062, as well as the Decision dated March 24, 2010 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03154 are hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE.
People v. LagardeRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, the CA’s March 7, 2007 Decision in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00069 is AFFIRMED IN TOTO. No costs. SO ORDERED…
People v. LaraRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, premises considered, the Decision dated July 28, 2011 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR HC No. 03685 is hereby AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED…
People v. DeniegaRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, appellants Rey Daniega y Macoy and Hoyle Diaz y Urnillo are hereby ACQUITTED of the crime of Rape with Homicide. Their immediate release from custody is hereby ordered unless they are being held on other legal grounds. SO ORDERED…
People v. TomaquinRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, appellant Elizar Tomaquin is hereby ACQUITTED and ordered RELEASED immediately, unless he is being detained for some other legal cause.
People v. BermasRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, let this case be REMANDED to the court a quo for trial on the basis of the complaint, aforequoted, under which he was arraigned. Atty. Ricardo A. Fernandez, Jr. of the Anti-Death Penalty Task Force is hereby appointed counsel de officio for the appellant. Attys.
Domondon v. SandiganbayanRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, the petition is DISMISSED. The Resolution of the Sandiganbayan dated September 13, 2004 denying petitioners’ motion to dismiss and its Resolution dated January 11, 2005 denying the motion for reconsideration, are AFFIRMED. SO ORDERED…
Ombudsman v. JuradoRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, the petition is GRANTED and the appealed Decision REVERSED AND SET ASIDE. The Decision of the Ombudsman in OMB-ADM-0-97-0656 finding respondent guilty of neglect of duty is REINSTATED. SO ORDERED…
Tatad v. SandiganbayanRights of the Accused'Accordingly, the Court Resolved to give due course to the petition and to grant the same. The informations in Criminal Cases Nos. 10499, 10500, 10501, 10502 and 10503, entitled 'People of the Philippines vs. Francisco S. Tatad' are hereby DISMISSED.
Coscolluela v. SandiganbayanRights of the Accused—
Chavez v. Court of AppealsRights of the Accused'Upon the view we take of this case, judgment is hereby rendered directing the respondent Warden of the City Jail of Manila or the Director of Prisons or any other officer or person in custody of petitioner Roger Chavez by reason of the judgment of the Court of First Instance of Rizal, Quezon City B…
People v. GamboaRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is AFFIRMED with the sole modification that the indemnity to the heirs of the offended party is increased to P50,000.00, with costs against the appellant.
Herrera v. AlbaRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, we DISMISS the petition. We AFFIRM the Decision of the Court of Appeals dated 29 November 2000 in CA-G.R. SP No. 59766. We also AFFIRM the Orders dated 3 February 2000 and 8 June 2000 issued by Branch 48 of the Regional Trial Court of Manila in Civil Case No. SP-98-88759. SO ORDERED…
People v. FieldadRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, we DISMISS the appeal. The Decision dated 22 October 2010 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 03943, affirming with modification the 3 November 2008 Joint Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Urdaneta City, Pangasinan is AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS: 1.
People v. OlvisRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered modifying the Decision dated November 30, 1984. The accused-appellants Leonardo Cademas and Dominador Sorela are ACQUITTED on the ground of reasonable doubt.
Beltran v. SamsonRights of the Accused'Wherefore, we find the present action well taken, and it is ordered that the respondents and those under their orders desist and abstain absolutely and forever from compelling the petitioner to take down dictation in his handwriting for the purpose of submitting the latter for comparison.
Villaflor v. SummersRights of the Accused'The writ of habeas corpus prayed for is hereby denied. The costs shall be taxed against the petitioner. So ordered.'
Marcelo v. SandiganbayanRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, the decision of the Sandiganbayan is AFFIRMED.'
Dy Teban Trading v. DyRights of the AccusedWHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the petition is GRANTED. The Decision dated December 17, 2008 of the Court of Appeals is REVERSED. The Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Butuan City dated August 22, 2008 and its Orders dated June 18, 2007 and May 26, 2008 are REINSTATED. SO ORDERED…
Open full week page
Week 9· October 1, 2026

Week 9 - Rule 116 - Arraignment and Plea

How MadePlea of Guilty to a Lesser OffensePlea of Guilty to a Capital OffensePlea of Guilty to a Non-Capital Offense
→

Week 9 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 9 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
0 of 19 assigned cases have digests. The remaining 19 are marked digest pending.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1Taglay vs. Daray, G.R. No. 164258, August 22, 20121 — How Madedigest pending
2Kummer vs. People, G.R. No. 174461, September 11, 20131 — How Madedigest pending
3Bandoy vs. Jacinto, Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-14-2399, November 19, 20141 — How Madedigest pending
4Ramiscal, Jr. vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 172476-99, September 15, 20101 — How Madedigest pending
5Pielago vs. People, G.R. No. 202020, March 13, 20131 — How Madedigest pending
6Daan vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 163972-77, March 28, 20082 — Plea of Guilty to a Lesser Offensedigest pending
7Bug-atan vs. People, G.R. No. 175195, September 15, 20102 — Plea of Guilty to a Lesser Offensedigest pending
8People vs. Villarama, G.R. No. 99287, June 23, 19922 — Plea of Guilty to a Lesser Offensedigest pending
9Sayre vs. Xenos, G.R. Nos. 244413 & 244415-16, February 18, 20202 — Plea of Guilty to a Lesser Offensedigest pending
10Estipona vs. Lobrigo, G.R. No. 226679, August 15, 20172 — Plea of Guilty to a Lesser Offensedigest pending
11People vs. Baharan, G.R. No. 188314, January 10, 20113 — Plea of Guilty to a Capital Offensedigest pending
12People vs. Gambao, G.R. No. 172707, October 1, 20133 — Plea of Guilty to a Capital Offensedigest pending
13People vs. Durango, G.R. Nos. 135438-39, April 5, 20003 — Plea of Guilty to a Capital Offensedigest pending
14People vs. Oden, G.R. Nos. 155511-22, April 14, 20043 — Plea of Guilty to a Capital Offensedigest pending
15People vs. Talusan, G.R. No. 179187, July 14, 20093 — Plea of Guilty to a Capital Offensedigest pending
16People vs. Flores, G.R. No. 137491, November 23, 20004 — Plea of Guilty to a Non-Capital Offensedigest pending
17People vs. Madraga, G.R. No. 129299, November 15, 20004 — Plea of Guilty to a Non-Capital Offensedigest pending
18People vs. Gumimba, G.R. No. 174056, February 27, 20075 — Improvident Plea of Guiltdigest pending
19People vs. Solamillo, G.R. No. 123161, June 18, 20035 — Improvident Plea of Guiltdigest pending
Open full week page
Week 10· October 8, 2026

Week 10 - Midterm Exam

Coverage: Weeks 6-9
→

Coverage

Coverage: Weeks 6-9
Open full week page
Week 11· October 15, 2026

Week 11 - Rule 117 - Motion to Quash

Time to Move to QuashForm and ContentsGroundsDouble Jeopardy
→

Week 11 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 11 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
0 of 71 assigned cases have digests. The remaining 71 are marked digest pending.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1Tolentino vs. Paqueo, G.R. No. 150606, June 7, 20071 — Time to Move to Quashdigest pending
2People vs. Ramirez, Jr., G.R. Nos. 150079-80, June 10, 20043 — Groundsdigest pending
3People vs. Salazar, G.R. No. 181900, October 20, 20103 — Groundsdigest pending
4People vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 156394, January 21, 20053 — Groundsdigest pending
5Rodis vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 71404-09, October 26, 19883 — Groundsdigest pending
6Quisay vs. People, G.R. No. 216920, January 13, 20163 — Groundsdigest pending
7Enrile vs. People, G.R. No. 213455, August 11, 20153 — Groundsdigest pending
8In Re: Salibo vs. Warden, G.R. No. 197597, April 8, 20153 — Groundsdigest pending
9Estrada vs. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 212761, July 31, 20183 — Groundsdigest pending
10Lazarte, Jr. vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 180122, March 13, 20093 — Groundsdigest pending
11Uy vs. CA, G.R. No. 119000, July 28, 19973 — Groundsdigest pending
12Eugenio vs. People, G.R. No. 168163, March 26, 20083 — Groundsdigest pending
13People vs. Rondero, G.R. No. 125687, December 9, 19993 — Groundsdigest pending
14Romualdez vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152259, July 29, 20043 — Groundsdigest pending
15Sasot vs. People, G.R. No. 143193, June 29, 20053 — Groundsdigest pending
16Pecho vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 111399, November 14, 19943 — Groundsdigest pending
17People vs. Desuyo, G.R. No. 140406, April 17, 20023 — Groundsdigest pending
18Monteverde vs. People, G.R. No. 139610, August 12, 20023 — Groundsdigest pending
19Loney vs. People, G.R. No. 152644, February 10, 20063 — Groundsdigest pending
20Cabico vs. Dimaculangan-Querijero, A.M. No. RTJ-02-1735, April 27, 20073 — Groundsdigest pending
21Poblete vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 150610, March 25, 20043 — Groundsdigest pending
22Valencia vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 141336, June 29, 20043 — Groundsdigest pending
23Tan vs. COMELEC, G.R. No. 112093, October 4, 19943 — Groundsdigest pending
24Antone vs. Beronilla, G.R. No. 183824, December 8, 20103 — Groundsdigest pending
25Vasquez vs. Hobilla-Alinio, G.R. Nos. 118813-14, April 8, 19973 — Groundsdigest pending
26Mendoza-Ong vs. People, G.R. Nos. 146368-69, October 18, 20043 — Groundsdigest pending
27Macasaet vs. People, G.R. No. 156747, February 23, 20053 — Groundsdigest pending
28Gomez vs. People, G.R. No. 216824, November 10, 20203 — Groundsdigest pending
29Dimayacyac vs. CA, G.R. No. 136264, May 28, 20043 — Groundsdigest pending
30People vs. Conte, G.R. Nos. 113513-14, August 23, 19953 — Groundsdigest pending
31Corpus, Jr. vs. People, G.R. No. 255740, August 16, 20233 — Groundsdigest pending
32People vs. Consebido, G.R. No. 258563, April 2, 20253 — Groundsdigest pending
33Garcia vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 170122, October 12, 20094 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
34Mallari vs. People, G.R. No. L-58886, December 13, 19884 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
35People vs. Pineda, G.R. No. L-44205, February 16, 19934 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
36People vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 153304-05, February 7, 20124 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
37Mari vs. Hon. Gonzales, G.R. No. 187728, September 12, 20114 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
38Alonto vs. People, G.R. No. 140078, December 9, 20044 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
39Flores vs. Joven, G.R. No. 129874, December 27, 20024 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
40People vs. Espinosa, G.R. Nos. 153714-20, August 15, 20034 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
41Dimatulac vs. Villon, G.R. No. 127107, October 12, 19984 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
42People vs. Nitafan, G.R. Nos. 107964-66, February 1, 19994 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
43People vs. Magat, G.R. No. 130026, May 31, 20004 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
44People vs. Dela Torre, G.R. Nos. 137953-58, April 11, 20024 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
45Palu-ay vs. CA, G.R. No. 112995, July 30, 19984 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
46People vs. Rondero, G.R. No. 125687, December 9, 19994 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
47Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. vs. People, G.R. No. 147703, April 14, 20044 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
48Argel vs. Pascua, A.M. No. RTJ-94-11314 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
49People vs. Tan, G.R. No. 167526, July 26, 20104 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
50Vincoy vs. CA, G.R. No. 156558, June 14, 20044 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
51People vs. Velasco, G.R. No. 127444, September 13, 20004 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
52People vs. Laggui, G.R. Nos. 76262-63, March 16, 19894 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
53People vs. CA, G.R. No. 142051, February 24, 20044 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
54Merciales vs. CA, G.R. No. 124171, March 18, 20024 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
55People vs. Vergara, G.R. Nos. 101557-58, April 28, 19934 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
56Tupaz vs. Ulep, G.R. No. 127777, October 1, 19994 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
57Sta. Rita vs. CA, G.R. No. 119894, August 21, 19954 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
58People vs. Verra, G.R. No. 134732, May 29, 20024 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
59People vs. Mogol, G.R. No. L-37837, August 24, 19844 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
60People vs. Alberto, G.R. No. 132374, August 22, 20024 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
61People vs. Saley, G.R. No. 121179, July 2, 19984 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
62Perez vs. CA, G.R. No. 80838, November 29, 19884 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
63People vs. Degamo, G.R. No. 121211, April 30, 20034 — Double Jeopardydigest pending
64De Lima vs. Guerrero, G.R. No. 229781, October 10, 20175 — Amendment of Complaint or Informationdigest pending
65People vs. Bayabos, G.R. Nos. 171222 & 174786, February 18, 20155 — Amendment of Complaint or Informationdigest pending
66Dio vs. People, G.R. No. 208146, June 8, 20165 — Amendment of Complaint or Informationdigest pending
67Gonzales vs. Salvador, G.R. No. 168340, December 5, 20066 — Effects of Sustaining a Motion to Quashdigest pending
68Mari vs. Gonzales, G.R. No. 187728, September 12, 20116 — Effects of Sustaining a Motion to Quashdigest pending
69People vs. Lacson, G.R. No. 149453, April 1, 20037 — Provisional Dismissaldigest pending
70Saldariega vs. Panganiban, G.R. No. 211933, April 15, 20157 — Provisional Dismissaldigest pending
71Torres vs. Aguinaldo, G.R. No. 164268, June 28, 20057 — Provisional Dismissaldigest pending
Open full week page
Week 12· October 22, 2026

Week 12 - Rule 118 - Pre-Trial

Pre-Trial AgreementNon-Appearance at Pre-Trial ConferencePre-Trial OrderCourt-Annexed Mediation and Judicial Dispute Resolution
→

Week 12 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 12 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
0 of 38 assigned cases have digests. The remaining 38 are marked digest pending.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1People vs. Hernandez, G.R. No. 108028, July 30, 19965 — Casesdigest pending
2Chua-Burce vs. CA, G.R. No. 109595, April 27, 20005 — Casesdigest pending
3People vs. Ancheta, G.R. No. 142431, January 14, 20045 — Casesdigest pending
4Bayas vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 143689-91, November 12, 20025 — Casesdigest pending
5People vs. Pepito, G.R. Nos. 147650-52, October 16, 20035 — Casesdigest pending
6People vs. Abelita, G.R. No. 96318, June 26, 19925 — Casesdigest pending
7Jaylo vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 111502-04, November 22, 20014 — Application for Examination of Witness for Accused Before Trialdigest pending
8Go vs. People, G.R. No. 185527, July 18, 20127 — Examination of Witness for the Prosecutiondigest pending
9Vda. de Manguerra vs. Risos, G.R. No. 152643, August 28, 20087 — Examination of Witness for the Prosecutiondigest pending
10Jaylo vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 111502-04, November 22, 20017 — Examination of Witness for the Prosecutiondigest pending
11Jimenez, Jr. vs. People, G.R. Nos. 209195 & 209215, September 17, 20149 — Discharge of Accused to be a State Witnessdigest pending
12Chua vs. CA, G.R. No. 103397, August 28, 19969 — Discharge of Accused to be a State Witnessdigest pending
13Monge vs. People, G.R. No. 170308, March 7, 20089 — Discharge of Accused to be a State Witnessdigest pending
14Ampatuan vs. De Lima, G.R. No. 197291, April 3, 20139 — Discharge of Accused to be a State Witnessdigest pending
15People vs. Chavez, G.R. No. 131377, February 11, 20039 — Discharge of Accused to be a State Witnessdigest pending
16Webb vs. De Leon, G.R. No. 121234, August 23, 19959 — Discharge of Accused to be a State Witnessdigest pending
17Monge vs. People, G.R. No. 170308, March 7, 200810 — Discharge of Accused Operates as Acquittaldigest pending
18Galvez vs. CA, G.R. No. 114046, October 24, 199411.a — When Mistake Has Been Made in Charging the Proper Offense: Distinguished from Rule 110, Sec. 14digest pending
19People vs. Molero, G.R. No. L-67842, September 24, 198611.a — When Mistake Has Been Made in Charging the Proper Offense: Distinguished from Rule 110, Sec. 14digest pending
20People vs. Mejia, G.R. Nos. 118940-41 & 119407, July 7, 199712 — Consolidationdigest pending
21Magleo vs. De Juan-Quinagoran, A.M. No. RTJ-12-2336, November 12, 201413 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
22Gloria Macapagal-Arroyo vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 220598, July 19, 201613 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
23People vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 197953, August 5, 201513 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
24Napoles vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 224162, February 6, 201813 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
25Singian vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 195011-19, September 30, 201313 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
26People vs. Go, G.R. No. 191015, August 6, 201413 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
27People vs. Cristobal, G.R. No. 159450, March 30, 201113 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
28Hun Hyung Park vs. Eun Won Choi, G.R. No. 165496, February 12, 200713 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
29Cabador vs. People, G.R. No. 186001, October 2, 200913 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
30Mupas vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 189365, October 12, 201113 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
31People vs. Alcanzado, G.R. No. 138335, May 20, 200413 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
32Ladiana vs. People, G.R. No. 144293, December 4, 200213 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
33People vs. Sayabac, G.R. No. 147201, January 15, 200413 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
34Ong vs. People, G.R. No. 140904, October 9, 200013 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
35People vs. Turingan, G.R. No. 121628, December 4, 199713 — Demurrer to Evidencedigest pending
36Alegre vs. Reyes, G.R. No. L-56923, May 9, 198814 — Reopening and Motion for New Trialdigest pending
37Re: Complaint against Ofelia Pinto, A.M. No. RTJ-11-2289, October 2, 201214 — Reopening and Motion for New Trialdigest pending
38Cabarles vs. Maceda, G.R. No. 161330, February 20, 200714 — Reopening and Motion for New Trialdigest pending
Open full week page
Week 13· October 29, 2026

Week 13 - Rule 120 - Judgment

Definition and FormContentsRules in Case of VariancePromulgation of Judgment
→

Week 13 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 13 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
0 of 51 assigned cases have digests. The remaining 51 are marked digest pending.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1People vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 156394, January 21, 20052 — Contentsdigest pending
2People vs. Bellaflor, G.R. No. 103275, June 15, 19942 — Contentsdigest pending
3People vs. Veneracion, G.R. Nos. 119987-88, October 12, 19952 — Contentsdigest pending
4People vs. Lascuna, G.R. No. 90626, August 18, 19932 — Contentsdigest pending
5Cruz vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 123340, August 29, 20022 — Contentsdigest pending
6Antiporda, Jr. vs. Garchitorena, G.R. No. 133289, December 23, 19992 — Contentsdigest pending
7Bacolod vs. People, G.R. No. 206236, July 15, 20132 — Contentsdigest pending
8Garces vs. Hernandez, Jr., G.R. No. 180761, August 9, 20102 — Contentsdigest pending
9Zafra vs. People, G.R. No. 176317, July 23, 20142 — Contentsdigest pending
10Lumanog, et al. vs. People, G.R. No. 182555, September 7, 20102 — Contentsdigest pending
11People vs. Lizada, G.R. Nos. 143468-71, January 24, 20032 — Contentsdigest pending
12People vs. Bugarin, G.R. Nos. 110817-22, June 13, 19972 — Contentsdigest pending
13Abay, Sr. vs. Garcia, G.R. No. 66132, June 27, 19882 — Contentsdigest pending
14People vs. Lindo, G.R. No. 189818, August 9, 20102 — Contentsdigest pending
15Malabanan vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 186329, August 2, 20173 — Rules in Case of Variancedigest pending
16People vs. Lucas, G.R. No. 50450, March 16, 19843 — Rules in Case of Variancedigest pending
17People vs. Tira, G.R. No. 139615, May 28, 20043 — Rules in Case of Variancedigest pending
18People vs. Corpuz, G.R. No. 168101, February 13, 20063 — Rules in Case of Variancedigest pending
19People vs. Abello, G.R. No. 151952, March 25, 20093 — Rules in Case of Variancedigest pending
20People vs. Pareja, G.R. No. 202122, January 15, 20143 — Rules in Case of Variancedigest pending
21People vs. Aycardo, G.R. No. 218114, June 5, 20173 — Rules in Case of Variancedigest pending
22People vs. Bongbonga, G.R. No. 214771, August 9, 20173 — Rules in Case of Variancedigest pending
23People vs. Caoili, G.R. No. 196342, August 8, 20173 — Rules in Case of Variancedigest pending
24Pangilinan vs. CA, G.R. No. 117363, December 17, 19993 — Rules in Case of Variancedigest pending
25Jaylo vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 183152-54, January 21, 20154 — Promulgation of Judgmentdigest pending
26Javier vs. Gonzales, G.R. No. 193150, January 23, 20174 — Promulgation of Judgmentdigest pending
27Pascua vs. CA, G.R. No. 140243, December 14, 20004 — Promulgation of Judgmentdigest pending
28People vs. Taruc, G.R. No. 185202, February 18, 20094 — Promulgation of Judgmentdigest pending
29Icdang vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 185960, January 25, 20124 — Promulgation of Judgmentdigest pending
30Cruz vs. Pascual, A.M. No. MTJ-93-782, May 12, 19954 — Promulgation of Judgmentdigest pending
31People vs. Viernes, G.R. Nos. 136733-35, December 13, 20015 — Modification of Judgmentdigest pending
32Patot vs. People, G.R. No. 143547, June 26, 20025 — Modification of Judgmentdigest pending
33Villareal vs. People, G.R. No. 151258 (and related petitions), December 1, 20145 — Modification of Judgmentdigest pending
34Tadeja vs. People, G.R. No. 145336, February 20, 20131 — New Trial or Reconsiderationdigest pending
35Custodio vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 96027-28, March 8, 20051 — New Trial or Reconsiderationdigest pending
36Neypes vs. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 141524, September 14, 20051 — New Trial or Reconsiderationdigest pending
37Judith Yu vs. Samson-Tatad, G.R. No. 170979, February 9, 20111 — New Trial or Reconsiderationdigest pending
38People vs. Astudillo, G.R. No. 141518, April 29, 20031 — New Trial or Reconsiderationdigest pending
39Mobilia Products vs. Umezawa, G.R. No. 149357, March 4, 20051 — New Trial or Reconsiderationdigest pending
40Payumo vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. Nos. 151911 & 154537, July 24, 20112 — Grounds for New Trialdigest pending
41Dinglasan, Jr. vs. CA, G.R. No. 145420, September 19, 20062 — Grounds for New Trialdigest pending
42In Re: Writ of Habeas Corpus (for Reynaldo de Villa), G.R. No. 158802, November 17, 20042 — Grounds for New Trialdigest pending
43People vs. Ducay, G.R. No. 86939, August 2, 19932 — Grounds for New Trialdigest pending
44People vs. Li Ka Kim, G.R. No. 148586, May 25, 20042 — Grounds for New Trialdigest pending
45People vs. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 68319, March 31, 19922 — Grounds for New Trialdigest pending
46People vs. Amparado, G.R. No. L-48656, December 21, 19872 — Grounds for New Trialdigest pending
47People vs. Ebias, G.R. No. 127130, October 12, 20002 — Grounds for New Trialdigest pending
48People vs. Del Mundo, G.R. Nos. 119964-69, September 20, 19962 — Grounds for New Trialdigest pending
49People vs. Remudo, G.R. No. 127905, August 30, 20012 — Grounds for New Trialdigest pending
50Obugan vs. People, G.R. No. 116506, May 22, 19954 — Effects of Granting New Trial or Reconsiderationdigest pending
51People vs. Licayan, G.R. No. 203961, July 29, 20154 — Effects of Granting New Trial or Reconsiderationdigest pending
Open full week page
Week 14· November 5, 2026

Week 14 - Rule 122 - Appeal

Who May AppealWhere to AppealHow to AppealWhen to Appeal
→

Week 14 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 14 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
0 of 21 assigned cases have digests. The remaining 21 are marked digest pending.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1Philippine Rabbit Bus Lines, Inc. vs. People, G.R. No. 147703, April 14, 20041 — Who May Appealdigest pending
2Heirs of Rillorta vs. Firme, G.R. No. 54904, January 29, 19881 — Who May Appealdigest pending
3Burgos, Jr. vs. Sps. Naval, G.R. No. 219468, June 8, 20161 — Who May Appealdigest pending
4People vs. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 164577, July 5, 20101 — Who May Appealdigest pending
5People vs. Hernandez, G.R. Nos. 154218 & 154372, August 28, 20061 — Who May Appealdigest pending
6People vs. Pajo, G.R. Nos. 135109-13, December 18, 20002 — Where to Appealdigest pending
7People vs. Mateo, G.R. Nos. 147678-87, July 7, 20043 — How to Appealdigest pending
8Roque vs. People, G.R. No. 193169, April 6, 20153 — How to Appealdigest pending
9Benito vs. People, G.R. No. 204644, February 11, 20153 — How to Appealdigest pending
10Judith Yu vs. Samson-Tatad, G.R. No. 170979, February 9, 20114 — When to Appealdigest pending
11Ramirez vs. People, G.R. No. 197832, October 2, 20134 — When to Appealdigest pending
12Rodriguez vs. People, G.R. No. 192799, October 24, 20124 — When to Appealdigest pending
13People vs. Rocha, G.R. No. 173797, August 31, 20074 — When to Appealdigest pending
14People vs. Escano, G.R. Nos. 129756-58, January 28, 20007 — Effect of Appeal by Any of Several Accuseddigest pending
15People vs. Cabales, G.R. Nos. 102723-24, June 19, 19977 — Effect of Appeal by Any of Several Accuseddigest pending
16People vs. Fernandez, G.R. No. 80481, June 27, 19907 — Effect of Appeal by Any of Several Accuseddigest pending
17Benabaye vs. People, G.R. No. 203466, February 25, 20157 — Effect of Appeal by Any of Several Accuseddigest pending
18People vs. Valdez, G.R. No. 175602, February 13, 20137 — Effect of Appeal by Any of Several Accuseddigest pending
19People vs. Brillantes, G.R. No. 190610, April 25, 20127 — Effect of Appeal by Any of Several Accuseddigest pending
20Teodoro vs. CA, G.R. No. 103174, July 11, 19968 — Withdrawal of Appealdigest pending
21People vs. Gatward, G.R. Nos. 119772-73, February 7, 19978 — Withdrawal of Appealdigest pending
Open full week page
Week 15· November 12, 2026

Week 15 - Exam

Coverage: Weeks 11-14
→

Coverage

Coverage: Weeks 11-14
Open full week page
Week 16· November 19, 2026

Week 16 - Rule 123 - Procedure in the Municipal Trial Court

Rule 123Dismissal of Appeal for Abandonment or Failure to ProsecuteQuorum of the Court; Certification of Cases to the Supreme CourtMotion for New Trial
→

Week 16 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 16 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
0 of 6 assigned cases have digests. The remaining 6 are marked digest pending.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1Celestial vs. People, G.R. No. 214865, August 19, 20151 — Rule 123: Dismissal of Appeal for Abandonment or Failure to Prosecutedigest pending
2Villena vs. People, G.R. No. 184091, January 31, 20111 — Rule 123: Dismissal of Appeal for Abandonment or Failure to Prosecutedigest pending
3Dimarucot vs. People, G.R. No. 183975, September 20, 20101 — Rule 123: Dismissal of Appeal for Abandonment or Failure to Prosecutedigest pending
4Dungo vs. People, G.R. No. 209464, July 1, 20132 — Rule 123: Quorum of the Court; Certification of Cases to the Supreme Courtdigest pending
5Baylosis, Sr. vs. People, G.R. No. 152119, August 14, 20073 — Rule 123: Motion for New Trialdigest pending
6Dinglasan, Jr. vs. CA, G.R. No. 145420, September 19, 20063 — Rule 123: Motion for New Trialdigest pending
Open full week page
Week 17· November 26, 2026

Week 17 - Rule 126 - Search and Seizure

BasisDefinitionCourt Where Application for Search Warrant May Be FiledPersonal Property to Be Seized
→

Week 17 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 17 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
0 of 55 assigned cases have digests. The remaining 55 are marked digest pending.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1Veridiano vs. People, G.R. No. 200370, June 7, 20171 — Basisdigest pending
2Stonehill vs. Diokno, G.R. No. L-19550, June 19, 19671 — Basisdigest pending
3Katz vs. United States, 389 U.S. 347, 19671 — Basisdigest pending
4People vs. Marti, G.R. No. 81561, January 18, 19911 — Basisdigest pending
5Te vs. Breva, G.R. No. 164974, August 5, 20152 — Definitiondigest pending
6Sps. Marimla vs. People, G.R. No. 158467, October 16, 20093 — Court Where Application for Search Warrant May Be Fileddigest pending
7Kenneth Roy vs. Taypin, G.R. No. 134217, May 11, 20003 — Court Where Application for Search Warrant May Be Fileddigest pending
8People vs. Chiu, G.R. Nos. 142915-16, February 27, 20043 — Court Where Application for Search Warrant May Be Fileddigest pending
9People vs. Nuñez, G.R. No. 177148, June 30, 20094 — Personal Property to Be Seizeddigest pending
10Tambasen vs. CA, G.R. No. 89103, July 14, 19954 — Personal Property to Be Seizeddigest pending
11Santos vs. Pryce Gases, Inc., G.R. No. 165122, November 23, 20075 — Requisites for Issuing a Search Warrantdigest pending
12Century Chinese Medicine Co. vs. People, G.R. No. 188526, November 11, 20135 — Requisites for Issuing a Search Warrantdigest pending
13PLDT vs. Alvarez, G.R. No. 179408, March 5, 20145 — Requisites for Issuing a Search Warrantdigest pending
14La Chemise Lacoste, S.A. vs. Fernandez, G.R. Nos. L-63796-97, May 2, 19845 — Requisites for Issuing a Search Warrantdigest pending
15Hon Ne Chan vs. Honda Motor Co., G.R. No. 172775, December 19, 20075 — Requisites for Issuing a Search Warrantdigest pending
16Kho vs. Makalintal, G.R. Nos. 94902-06, April 21, 19995 — Requisites for Issuing a Search Warrantdigest pending
17Worldwide Web Corp. vs. People, G.R. No. 161106, January 13, 20145 — Requisites for Issuing a Search Warrantdigest pending
18Pendon vs. CA, G.R. No. 84873, November 16, 19906 — Duty of a Judge Before Issuing a Warrantdigest pending
19People vs. Mamaril, G.R. No. 147607, January 22, 20046 — Duty of a Judge Before Issuing a Warrantdigest pending
20Yao, Sr. vs. People, G.R. No. 168306, June 19, 20076 — Duty of a Judge Before Issuing a Warrantdigest pending
21Uy vs. Bureau of Internal Revenue, G.R. No. 129651, October 20, 20006 — Duty of a Judge Before Issuing a Warrantdigest pending
22People vs. Aruta, G.R. No. 120915, April 3, 19987 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
23PICOP vs. Asuncion, G.R. No. 122092, May 19, 19997 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
24People vs. Estrada, G.R. No. 124461, September 25, 19987 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
25People vs. Salanguit, G.R. Nos. 133254-55, April 19, 20017 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
26Quelnan vs. People, G.R. No. 166061, July 6, 20077 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
27Pangandaman vs. Casar, G.R. No. L-71782, April 14, 19887 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
28People vs. CA, G.R. No. 126379, June 26, 19987 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
29People vs. Del Norte, G.R. No. 149462, March 29, 20047 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
30Al-Ghoul vs. CA, G.R. No. 126859, September 4, 20017 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
31People vs. Go, G.R. No. 144639, September 12, 20037 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
32Vallejo vs. CA, G.R. No. 156413, April 14, 20047 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
33People vs. Simbahon, G.R. No. 132371, April 9, 20037 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
34People vs. Dichoso, G.R. Nos. 101216-18, June 4, 19937 — Issuance and Form of Search Warrantdigest pending
35People vs. Huang Zhen Hua, G.R. No. 139301, September 29, 20048 — Right to Break Door or Window to Effect Searchdigest pending
36People vs. Del Castillo, G.R. No. 153254, September 30, 20049 — Search of House/Room/Premises to Be Made in the Presence of Two Witnessesdigest pending
37Quintero vs. NBI, G.R. No. L-35149, June 23, 19889 — Search of House/Room/Premises to Be Made in the Presence of Two Witnessesdigest pending
38Quintero vs. NBI, G.R. No. L-35149, June 23, 198812 — Receipt for the Property Seizeddigest pending
39People vs. Del Castillo, G.R. No. 153254, September 30, 200412 — Receipt for the Property Seizeddigest pending
40Tenorio vs. CA, G.R. No. 149504, October 10, 200313 — Delivery of Property and Inventory Thereof to Court; Return and Proceedings Thereondigest pending
41Betoy vs. Coliflores, A.M. No. MTJ-05-1608, February 28, 200613 — Delivery of Property and Inventory Thereof to Court; Return and Proceedings Thereondigest pending
42Macalat vs. CA, G.R. No. 123595, December 12, 199714 — Search Incidental to a Lawful Arrestdigest pending
43People vs. Chua, G.R. Nos. 136066-67, February 4, 200314 — Search Incidental to a Lawful Arrestdigest pending
44People vs. Sarap, G.R. No. 132165, March 26, 200314 — Search Incidental to a Lawful Arrestdigest pending
45People vs. Leangsiri, G.R. No. 112659, January 24, 199614 — Search Incidental to a Lawful Arrestdigest pending
46Valeroso vs. CA, G.R. No. 164815, September 3, 200914 — Search Incidental to a Lawful Arrestdigest pending
47People vs. Malmstedt, G.R. No. 91107, June 19, 199115.a — Other Instances of Valid Warrantless Search: Stop and Frisk Situationdigest pending
48Posadas vs. CA, G.R. No. 89139, August 2, 199015.a — Other Instances of Valid Warrantless Search: Stop and Frisk Situationdigest pending
49People vs. Mengote, G.R. No. 175783, September 3, 200715.a — Other Instances of Valid Warrantless Search: Stop and Frisk Situationdigest pending
50People vs. Tuazon, 532 SCRA 15215.b — Other Instances of Valid Warrantless Search: Search of Moving Vehiclesdigest pending
51Abenes vs. CA, G.R. No. 156320, February 14, 200715.b — Other Instances of Valid Warrantless Search: Search of Moving Vehiclesdigest pending
52Caballes vs. CA, G.R. No. 136292, January 15, 200215.b — Other Instances of Valid Warrantless Search: Search of Moving Vehiclesdigest pending
53People vs. Musa, G.R. No. 96177, January 27, 199315.c — Other Instances of Valid Warrantless Search: Evidence in Plain Viewdigest pending
54Ong vs. CA, G.R. No. 119858, April 29, 200316 — Motion to Quash Search Warrant or to Suppress Evidencedigest pending
55Demaisip vs. People, G.R. No. 89393, January 25, 199116 — Motion to Quash Search Warrant or to Suppress Evidencedigest pending
Open full week page
Week 18· December 3, 2026

Week 18 - Rule 127 - Provisional Remedies in Criminal Cases

Provisional Remedies — OverviewAttachment
→

Week 18 Coverage Table

The table below mirrors the coverage sheet's assigned cases for Week 18 and links each item to its digest page. Entries marked supra re-assign a case already listed earlier in the week under a later subtopic; they point at the same digest.
0 of 1 assigned cases have digests. The remaining 1 are marked digest pending.
Class. records how the case actually stands to the subtopic it was assigned under — DIRECT (the Court squarely applies the doctrine), ANALOGOUS (it decides the point under a different provision or doctrine), REJECTED (the Court found the doctrine not established), INCIDENTAL (the doctrine is mentioned but the disposition rests elsewhere). Reciting a REJECTED case as if it were DIRECT inverts the holding.
#Assigned CaseTopic/SubtopicClass.Digest
1Oñate vs. Abrogar, G.R. Nos. 107303 & 107491, February 23, 19951 — Provisional Remedies — Overview: Attachmentdigest pending
Open full week page
Week 19· December 10, 2026

Week 19 - Review

Comprehensive review of Rules 110-127
→

Coverage

Comprehensive review of Rules 110-127
Review week recapping the entire semester — Introduction, Jurisdiction, and Rules 110 through 127 — in preparation for the final exam.
Open full week page
Week 20· December 17, 2026

Week 20 - Final Exam

Coverage: Weeks 16-19 (and comprehensive)
→

Coverage

Coverage: Weeks 16-19 (and comprehensive)
Final exam week — covers Rules 123-125 (Procedure in MTC/CA/SC), Rule 126 (Search and Seizure), and Rule 127 (Provisional Remedies), typically comprehensive of the full semester.
Open full week page