Last night we talked about jurisdiction over the offenses

Person of the accused

Then over the territory

So you know that uh the person whom the complaint or information is filed is referred to is accused.
You say accused even if there are two or more. You cannot put an S because you cannot pronounce
that.

In America, you know what I am talking about, Trump, alright, the person against whom the criminal
case is filed is called a defendant. In the PH, if we say defendant, that refers to a civil action. So we say
accused not defendant. We do not follow what the US is doing. In most instances, they are the ones
copying from us.

What offenses fall within the jurisdiction of the Sandiganbayan

When we say PD? Presidential Decree

When we say RA? Republic Act

The Sandiganbayan was created not by the constitution but came into being in 1978 when Pres. Marcos
issued PD 1486. That was the beginning of the Sandiganbayan. PD 1486 was amended by PD 1606. PD
1606 was amended by RA 7975. RA 7975 was further amended by RA 8249. RA 10660 amended PD 1606
as amended.

TN: Need a copy of RA 8249 and PD 1606.

If we look at sec. 4, we can see a long list of public officers or government employees triable by the
Sandiganbayan.

Examples:

1. Governor
2. Vice-Governor
3. Members of the Sangguniang Panlalawigan
4. Department Heads of the Province
5. City Mayor
6. Vice- Mayor
7. Members of the Sangguniang Panglungsod
8. Department Heads of the City
9. Regional Directors
There is also a statement in section 4 stating that it includes government officials, employees and public
officers who occupy a position equivalent to a Salary Grade 27 and higher. (Although it should be or
higher)

If you are with the government, you have a salary grade. The highest salary grade is SG 33. Only one
person occupies that and that is the president.

TN: Later instead of later on. Later on is wrong

Compensation and Classification Act a law that classifies the position of the government into salary
grade.

If you are in sec.4, and you commit an offense, will the SB be the court that will try you? Yes if you
commit the following offenses:

1. Violation of RA 3019 or the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act

2. Violation of RA 1379 or Forfeiture of Illegally Acquired Wealth
3. Felonies punishable under Chapter 2, Section 2, Title 7, Book 2 of the RPC or Crimes Committed
by Public Officers (i.e.: Bribery, Malversation, Illegal Exaction)
4. Plunder/ Money Laundering/ Law against Gift-giving
5. Those who commit offenses in violation of EO no. 1, 2, 14, 14(b) or Sequestration cases
6. Any other offenses either, simple or complexed with some other crimes, committed by these
government officials in Sec. 4, in relation to their office.

Question: Here is the City Treasurer and the City Mayor. They commit anti-graft and corrupt practices
act. Will they be tried by the Sandiganbayan? According to Dean, this is a no brainer. Yes, because he is
in Section 4 and he commits one of the listed acts.

Suppose a governor commits bribery or illegal exaction, is he triable by the Sandiganbayan? Yes.

Suppose a governor commits rape or kidnapping or murder. May he be tried by the Sandiganbayan?

No, unless he commits rape in relation to his office then he will be tried in the Sandiganbayan. If he
commits murder in relation to his office then he will be tried in the SB.

It is important to know what the phrase in relation to their office means

It means that the office must become like a constituting element of the crime itself that the crime
cannot be committed without the office or that the offender commits the crime while in the
performance of the functions attached to his office however improper the performance is.

If triable by the Sandiganbayan, the penalty is immaterial. The Sandiganbayan has the jurisdiction to try
the offense regardless of penalty. If triable by SB, the SB will take cognizance of the case regardless of
the penalty.
Ex.: Suppose the penalty is only 2 months for the offense, still triable by the Sandiganbayan.

What if the offender commits any of the (six offenses) but he occupies a position equivalent to Salary
Grade 22, i.e.: he is a big time criminal who commits plunder, will he be tried by a Sandiganbayan?

No.

What court will try him then?

Either the RTC or MTC depending on the penalty prescribed by law for the offense committed. If the
penalty does not exceed six years of imprisonment, then it is the MTC that has jurisdiction. But if it
exceeds six years of imprisonment then it is the RTC that has jurisdiction.

TN: If the offender is a gov employee or public officer but not triable by SB in view of the position that
he holds, then this time the penalty becomes material in determining whether he will be tried by the
MTC or RTC. But if triable by the SB, regardless of the penalty.

Let us say the offender is in Sec. 4, and he commits any of the (six) offenses, then you say that he will be
tried by the SB.

But take note that if the information does not allege any damage to the government or bribery, or it
alleges damage to the government or bribery but the amount does not exceeds P 1 Million, then it is the
RTC that has exclusive, original jurisdiction.

How may the court acquire jurisdiction over the person of the accused?

1. By his valid arrest- will be explained more in detail when we reach Rule 113
2. By his voluntary appearance in court

Custody of the law as distinguished with Jurisdiction over the person of the accused:

How a person may be brought into the custody of the law:

1. Valid Arrest
2. Voluntary Surrender

Literally, it means custody over the body of the person of the guy who is detained, or actual detention.

There is only one instance when a person must be in the custody of the law in order to apply for a relief
from the court, and that is when he applies for bail or posts his bail.

Ex. Suppose X killed Y, and immediately after killing Y, X went into hiding. While in hiding, he learned
that there was a case filed against him and the amount of the bail recommended for his provisional
liberties was P200, 000. Can he post his bail?

Ans: No because he is not in the custody of the law. Technically speaking, he is a free man, although in
hiding.
 But in the same example, suppose X filed a motion to quash the information alleging that the facts
charged do not constitute an offense. Can he file that motion although he is not in the custody of the
law?

Ans: Yes, because by filing that motion, he submits himself to the jurisdiction of the court by his
voluntary appearance.

Voluntary Appearance It does not only mean you actually appear in court. It is also accomplished by
filing a motion in court asking for an affirmative relief.