CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: PROSECUTORS DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE

CAUSE VS. JUDGES DETERMINATION OF PROBABLE CAUSE

Probable cause for the issuance of a warrant of arrest is the

existence of such facts and circumstances that would lead a
reasonably discreet and prudent person to believe that an offense
was committed by the person sought to be arrested. This must be
distinguished from the prosecutors finding of probable cause which
is for the filing of the proper criminal information. Probable cause
for warrant of arrest is determined to address the necessity
of placing the accused under custody in order not to frustrate
the ends of justice.
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: PROBABLE CAUSE DETERMINED AT TWO
STAGES

In a criminal prosecution, probable cause is determined at two stages. The first

is at the executive level, where determination is made by the prosecutor during
the preliminary investigation, before the filing of the criminal information. The
second is at the judicial level, undertaken by the judge before the issuance of a
warrant of arrest. (MA. GRACIA HAO AND DANNY HAO v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 183345, September 17. 2014)

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: A JUDGE IS MANDATED TO PERSONALLY

DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF PROBABLE CAUSE

Under the Constitution and the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, a judge is
mandated to personally determine the existence of probable cause after
his personal evaluation of the prosecutors resolution and the supporting
evidence for the crime charged. These provisions command the judge to refrain
from making a mindless acquiescence to the prosecutors findings and to
conduct his own examination of the facts and circumstances presented by both
parties. (MA. GRACIA HAO AND DANNY HAO v. PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, G.R. No. 183345, September 17. 2014)
CRIMINAL PROCEDURE: ISSUES WETHER RAISED OR NOT BY THE
PARTIES MAY BE RESOLVED BY THE APPEALLATE COURT.

Corollary thereto, the CA correctly upgraded accused-appellants conviction

from simple Estafa to Syndicated Estafa. In a criminal case, an appeal throws
the whole case wide open for review. Issues whether raised or not by the
parties may be resolved by the appellate court.48 Hence, accused-appellants
appeal conferred upon the appellate court full jurisdiction and rendered it
competent to examine the records, revise the judgment appealed from, increase
the penalty, and cite the proper provision of the penal law. (PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PALMY TIBAYAN AND RICO Z.
PUERTO,Accused-Appellants, G.R. Nos. 209655-60, January 14, 2015)