Criminal Procedure Notes 3w164m

Page 1 of 7 

CRIMINAL PROCEDURE (The Bar Lecture Series) By Williard B. Riano CHAPTER I – Preliminary Considerations 



Adversarial or Accusatorial v. Inquisitorial System Adversarial or Accusatorial  The system of procedure in our jurisdiction.  Two contending parties before the court which hears them impartially and renders judgment only after trial.  The court takes a ive role and relies solely on the evidence presented by both sides to the action in order to reach a verdict. Inquisitorial  The court plays a very active role and is not limited to the evidence presented before it. The court may utilize evidence gathered outside the court and a judge or group of judges may actively participate in the gathering of facts and evidence. Requisites for the Exercise of Criminal Jurisdiction Basic requirements before a court can acquire jurisdiction over criminal cases  Jurisdiction over the subject matter (or offense charged)  The authority of the court to hear and determine a particular criminal case  It is the law that confers jurisdiction (e.g. B.P. 129) and not the rules  Jurisdiction over a criminal case is determined by the allegations in the complaint or information  Jurisdiction is determined by the penalty imposable by law on the offense and not by the penalty imposed after trial  Jurisdiction over the territory  In criminal cases, venue is jurisdictional  For jurisdiction to be acquired by the courts in criminal cases, the offense should have been committed or any one of its essential ingredients should have taken place within the territorial jurisdiction of the court  Jurisdiction over the person of the accused  This kind of jurisdiction requires that the person charged of the offense must be brought into its forum for trial by:  warrant of arrest; or

-

-

-

voluntary submission by the court Injunction will not be granted to restrain a criminal prosecution either a preliminary or final injunction however, there are ex exceptions to said rule that are meant to apply in extreme cases. (Brocka v. Enrile, 192 SCRA 183, 188) In our criminal justice system, the public prosecutor exercises the jurisdiction in determining whether a criminal case shall be filed in court, and the court must respect the exercise of such jurisdiction. (People v. Yecyec, 739 SCRA 719, 732) Mandamus is a remedial measure for parties aggrieved which shall be issued when “any tribunal, corporation, board, officer or person unlawfully neglects the performance of an act which the law specifically ens as a duty resulting from an office, trust or station.” The writ of mandamus is not available to control discretion.

CHAPTER II – Prosecution of Offenses (Rue 110) 

Institution of Criminal Action It depends upon whether or not the offense is one which requires a preliminary investigation. (Sec. 1, Rule 110, Rules of Court)  Where a preliminary investigation is required  Instituted by the filing of the complaint with the proper officer for the purpose of conducting preliminary investigation (Sec. 1, Rule 110, Rules of Court)  Penalty imposed is more than 4 years, 2 months and 1 day  Filed at the office of the public prosecutor  Where a preliminary investigation is not required (a) By filing the complaint or information directly with the Municipal Trial Court and Municipal Circuit Trial Court (direct filing) (b) By filing the complaint with the office of the prosecutor (Sec. 1, Rule 110, Rules of Court) In Manila and other chartered cities, a special rule prevails, “the complaint shall be filed with the office of the prosecutor unless otherwise provided in their charters.” (Sec. 1, Rule 110, Rules of Court) There is no direct filing of an information or complaint with the Regional Trial Court because its jurisdiction covers offenses which require preliminary investigation. Direct filing in court occurs in a case where a preliminary investigation is not to be conducted and this refers to offenses for which the penalty prescribed by law is less than 4 years, 2 months and 1 day. This penalty is covered by the jurisdiction of the MTC.

Page 1 of 7

Page 2 of 7 -

-

-

-

-

-



No direct filing with the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila because in Manila and other chartered cities, the complaints, as a rule, shall be filed with the office of the prosecutor, unless otherwise provided in their charters. The charter shall prevail over the Rules of Court. The institution of criminal action shall interrupt the period of prescription of the offense charged unless otherwise provided in special laws. Where preliminary investigation is not required, the filing of the information or complaint directly with the MTC and MCTC shall interrupt the period of prescription of the offense charged. Act No. 3326 is the law that governs the period of prescription for violations penalized by special acts and municipal ordinances. In Zaldivia v. Reyes, a case involving an offense punishable by a municipal ordinance, held that Act No. 3326 says that the period of prescription shall be suspended when proceedings are instituted against the guilty person. The proceedings referred to are “judicial proceedings” and not istrative proceedings. This ruling is not controlling in special laws. In Panaguiton Jr. v. Department of Justice, the court held that Act No. 3326 applies to offenses under B.P. Blg. 22. An offense under B.P. Blg. 22 merits the penalty of imprisonment of not less than thirty (30) days but not more than one (1) year or by a fine xxx. In SEC v. Interport Resources Corporation, Even the filing of the complaint in the Office of the Ombudsman effectively interrupts the running of the prescriptive period. In Disini v. Sandiganbayan, irrespective of whether the offense charged is punishable by the Revised Penal Code or by a special law, it is the filing of the complaint or information on the office of the public prosecutor for purposes of preliminary investigation that interrupts the period of prescription. The running of the prescriptive period id interrupted with the filing of the action even if the court which the action was first filed is without jurisdiction.

Prosecution of the Criminal Action A criminal action is prosecuted under the direction and control of the public prosecutor. This general rule applies to a criminal action commenced either by a complaint or information. The public prosecutor, in the exercise of his functions, has the power and discretion to: 1. Determine whether a prima facie case exists; 2. Decide which of the conflicting testimonies should be believed free from the interference or control of the offended party; and 3. Subject only to the right against self-incrimination, determine which witnesses to present in court. (Chua v. Padillo) Not even the Supreme Court can order the prosecution of a person against whom the prosecutor does not find sufficient evidence to at least a prima facie case. The only possible exception to the rule is when there is an

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

unmistakable showing of grave abuse of discretion on the part of the prosecutor. (Chua v. Padillo) The public prosecutor may turn over the actual prosecution of the criminal case to the private prosecutor he may, at any time, take over the actual conduct of the trial. (People v. Tan) The presence of a public prosecutor in the trial of criminal cases is necessary to protect vital State interests. A criminal action in a Municipal Trial Court or in a Municipal Circuit Trial Court shall also be prosecuted under the direction and control of the prosecutor (Sec. 5, Rule 110). However, when the prosecutor assigned is not available, the action may be prosecuted by: a. The offended party; b. Any peace officer; or c. Public officer charged with the enforcement of the law violated A dismissal of a criminal case by the trial court or of there is an acquittal of the accused, it is only the OSG that may bring an appeal on the criminal aspect representing the People. The people are deemed the real parties in interest in the criminal case and, therefore, only the OSG can represent them in criminal proceedings pending in the CA or in this Court. The private complainant or the offended party may, however, file an appeal without the intervention of the OSG but only insofar as the civil liability of the accused is concerned. In criminal cases, the Solicitor General is regarded as the appellate counsel of the People of the Philippines. General Rule: The Solicitor General is solely vested with the authority to represent the people in the Court of Appeals or in the Supreme Court. Exception: In “all cases elevated to the Sandiganbayan and from the Sandiganbayan to the Supreme Court, the Office of the Ombudsman, through its special prosecutor, shall represent the People of the Philippines, except in cases filed pursuant to Executive Order Nos. 1, 2, 14 and 14A, issued in 1986”. (People v. Sandiganbayan, First and Third Divisions, 712 SCRA 359, 403) Where the offense is a violation of a special law, the same shall be prosecuted pursuant to the provisions of said law. (Sec. 5, Rule 110) The prosecution of special laws does not detract from the public prosecutor having control and supervision over the case. (Bureau of Customs v. Sherman, 648 SCRA 809, 814) A private prosecutor may prosecute the criminal action up to the end of the trial, even in the absence of the public prosecutor, if he is authorized to do so in writing. The written authorization shall be given by either the Chief of the Prosecution Office of the Regional State Prosecutor. The written authorization in order to be given effect must be approved by the court.

Page 2 of 7

Page 3 of 7 -





The private prosecutor shall continue to prosecute the case up to the end of the trial even in the absence of a public prosecutor, unless the authority is revoked or otherwise withdrawn.

Intervention of the Offended Party in the Prosecution of the Criminal Action “Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.” (Art. 100, RPC) Thus, a person convicted of a crime is both criminally and civilly liable. The civil liability for a crime includes restitution, reparation of damage caused, and indemnification for consequential damages. (Art. 104, RPC) The appointment of a private prosecutor is done by the offended party and is the mode by which he intervenes in the prosecution of the offense. The intervention is only allowed where the civil action for recovery of the civil liability arising from the offense charged is instituted in the criminal action pursuant to Rule 111. The offended party may not intervene in the prosecution of the offense through a private prosecutor if the offended party: a. waives the civil action; b. reserves the right to institute it separately; or c. institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action. Prosecution of “Private Crimes” The crime of adultery and concubinage shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended spouse. The action cannot be instituted against one party alone. It must be instituted against both guilty parties unless one of them is no longer alive. (Sec. 5, Rule 110) The offenses of seduction, abduction and acts of lasciviousness shall not be prosecuted except upon a complaint filed by the offended party or her parents, grandparents or guardian, nor, in any case, if the offender has been expressly pardoned by any of them. (Sec. 5, Rule 110) If the offended party dies or become incapacitated before she can file the complaint, and she has no known parents, grandparents or guardian, the State shall initiate the criminal action in her behalf. In the order of those who may file the complaint, the State is the last and may only do so in the absence of the persons mentioned in Sec. 5 of Rule 110:  Parents  Grandparents  Guardian  State The offended party, even if a minor, has the right to initiate the prosecution of the offense, independently of her parents, grandparents or guardian except if she is incompetent or incapable of doing so. (Sec. 5, Rule 110) If the minor fails to initiate the prosecution of the offense, the complaint may be filed by the minor’s parents, grandparents or guardian. (Sec. 5, Rule 110) The crime of rape was reclassified as a crime against persons pursuant to an amendment of R.A. 8353. Thus, prosecution for such crime may now be



commenced in court even by the filing of an information by the public prosecutor. The Complaint and Information Complaint – a sworn written statement charging a person with an offense, subscribed by the offended party, any peace officer, or other public officer, charged with the enforcement of the law violated. (Sec. 3, Rule 110) A complainant’s role is limited to that of a witness for the prosecution. Information – an accusation in writing charging a person with an offense subscribed by the prosecutor and filed with the court. (Sec. 4, Rule 110) A complaint and an information is filed in the name of the People of the Philippines and against all persons who appear to be responsible for the offense involved. (Sec. 2, Rule 110) Jeopardy does not attach where an accused pleads guilty to a defective indictment. A valid information signed by the competent officer, confers jurisdiction on the court over the person of the accused and the subject matter of the accusation. A complaint or information is deemed sufficient if it contains the following: a. name of the accused; b. designation of the offense given by the statute; c. acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense; d. name of the offended party; e. approximate date of the commission of the offense; and f. place where the offense was committed. (Sec. 6, Rule 110) The test to determine the sufficiency of the complaint or information is whether the crime is described in intelligible with such particularity as to apprise the accused, with reasonable certainty, of the offense charged to enable the accused to suitably prepare for his defense (Lazarte Jr. v. Sandiganbayan) since he is presumed to have no independent knowledge of the facts that constitute the offense. (People v. Cinco) An information is fatally defective when it is clear that it does not really charge an offense or when an essential element of the crime has not been sufficiently alleged. Objections relating to the form of the complaint or information cannot be made for the first time on appeal. The accused-appellant should move before arraignment either for:  a bill of particulars, if he wants to know the exact date of the commission of the allege offense; or  the quashal of the information,, if it does not conform to the prescribed form.

Page 3 of 7

Page 4 of 7 If he fails to pursue either remedy, he is deemed to waive his objections to any formal defect in the information. (People v. Teodoro) -

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

The failure to object the alleged defect before entering their pleas of not guilty amounted to a waiver of the defect in the information. (People v. Mamaruncas) An accused is deemed to have waived his right to assail the sufficiency of the information when he voluntarily entered a plea when arraigned and participated in the trial. (Frias v. People) Where the objection is based on lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, the same may be raised or considered motu proprio by the court at any stage of the proceedings or on appeal. (Fukuzume v. People) The real nature of the criminal charge is determined by the actual recital of the facts in the complaint of information. (People v. Valdez) Every element of the offense must be stated in the information. The requirement of alleging the elements of a crime in the information is to inform the accused of the nature of the accusation against him so as to enable him to suitably prepare his defense. The presumption is that the accused has no independent knowledge of the facts that constitute the offense. (People v. Valdez) It is not necessary to state in the complaint or information the precise date the offense was committed EXCEPT when the date of the commission is a material element of the offense. The offense may be alleged to have been committed on a date as near as possible to the actual date of its commission. Sec. 7, Rule 110 establishes the following rules in designating the name of the accused: a. The complaint or information must state the name and surname of the accused, or any appellation or nickname by which he has been or is known. b. If his name cannot be ascertained, he must be described under a fictitious name. A description of the accused under a fictitious name must be accompanied by a statement that his true name is unknown. c. If, later, his true name is disclosed by him or becomes known in some other manner, his true name shall be inserted in the complaint or information and in the records of the case. The first duty of the prosecution is to prove the identity of the accused for there can be no conviction without proof of identity of the criminal beyond reasonable doubt. (People v. Espera) In every criminal case, the task of the prosecution is always twofold: 1. to prove beyond reasonable doubt the commission of the crime charged; and

2.

-

-

-

-

-

-

to establish with the same quantum of proof the identity of the person or persons responsible therefor. (People v. Yau) Positive identification pertains essentially to proof of identity. The two types of positive identification: 1. Direct evidence – a witness may identify a suspect or accused in a criminal case as the perpetrator of the crime as an eyewitness to the very act of the commission of the crime. 2. Circumstancial evidence – although a witness may not have actually seen the very act of commission of the crime, he still may be able to positively identify a suspect of accused when the latter is the person or one of the persons last seen with the victim immediately before and right after the commission of the crime. The offended party is the person against whom or against whose property the offense was committed. (Sec. 12, Rule 110) If the offended party is a juridical person, it is sufficient to state the name, or any name or designation by which it is known or by which it is identified, without need of averring that it is a juridical person or that it is organized in accordance with the law. (Sec. 12 [c], Rule 110) In offenses against property, if the name of the offended party is unknown, the property must be described with such particularity as to properly identify the offense charged. (Sec. 12 [a], Rule 110) In offenses against property, if the subject matter is: 1. generic and not identifiable, an error in the designation of the offended party is fatal and would result in the acquittal of the accused. 2. specific and identifiable, an error in the designation of the offended party is immaterial. (Senador v. People) In designating the offense, the following rules must be observed: a. The name given to the offense by statute shall be stated in the complaint or information. If the statute gives no designation, then reference shall be made to the section or subsection punishing it. (Sec. 8, Rule 110) b. To be included in the complete designation is an averment of the acts or omissions constituting the offense. (Sec. 12 [c], Rule 110) c. It shall specify the qualifying and aggravating circumstances of the offense. (Sec. 12 [c], Rule 110) The character of the crime is determined neither by the caption or the preamble of the information nor by the specification of the provision of law alleged to have been violated, they being conclusions of law, but by the recital of the ultimate facts and circumstances in the information.

Page 4 of 7

Page 5 of 7 -

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Every information must state the qualifying and the aggravating circumstances attending the commission of the crime. An accused cannot be liable for an offense graver that that of which he was indicted. It would be a denial of the right of the accused to be informed of the charges against him, and consequently, a denial of due process. The acts and omissions complained of must be alleged in such form as is sufficient to enable a person of common understanding to know what offense is intended to be charged and enable the court to know the proper judgment. The information must allege clearly the elements of the crime. The purpose of which is to inform the accused of the nature of the accusation against him so as to enable him to prepare for his defense. It is sufficient for the complaint or information to use ordinary and concise language sufficient to enable a person of common understanding to know the following: a. the offense being charged; b. the acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense; and c. the qualifying and aggravating circumstances. Duplicity presupposes that there is a der of distinct offenses in one information or complaint. General rule: a complaint or information must charge only one offense. This rule prohibits duplicity (or multifariousness) of offenses in a single complaint or information. This means that a single complaint or information must charge only one offense. More than one offense may be charged under one complaint or information when the law prescribes a single punishment for various offenses. Where a single act violates two or more entirely distinct and unrelated provisions of law, the prosecution of the accused for more than one offense in separate informations is justified. (Loney v. People) The rationale behind the prohibition of duplicitous complaints or information is to give the accused the necessary knowledge of the charge against him and enable him to sufficiently prepare for his defense. (People v. Court of Appeals) Exception to the rule on duplicity: A complaint or information may contain two or more offenses when the law prescribes a single punishment for various offenses as in complex and compound crimes treated under Art. 48 of the RPC. This provision imposes a single penalty when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies. A single penalty is also provided under the same provision when an offense is a necessary means to commit the other. The imposable penalty shall be that which corresponds to the graver offense. A single penalty is also imposable in the case of special complex crime. An information for rape with homicide is therefore not duplicitous. Exceptions to the Rule on Duplicity: 1. Compound Crimes





when a single act constitutes 2 or more grave or less grave felonies 2. Complex Crime Proper  when an offense is necessary for committing the other 3. Composite Crime  in substance, made up of two (2) or more crimes but in the eyes of the law only one (1) crime is committed.  ex. robbery with homicide, rape with homicide  if homicide has no relation with the robbery, like an afterthought, two (2) separate information must be filed 4. Continued Crimes/Delito Continuado  a series of acts arising from one (1) criminal impulse Duplicity of the offense is a ground for a motion to quash. Should the information be defective because of the duplicity, an objection must be timely interposed by the accused before trial; otherwise, he is deemed to have waived said defect. Venue of Criminal Actions As a rule, criminal actions shall be instituted and tried in the court of the municipality or territory: a. where the offense was committed; or b. where any of its essential ingredients occurred. (Sec. 15 [a], Rule 110) A court cannot exercise jurisdiction over a person charged with an offense committed outside its limited jurisdiction. Venus in criminal cases is a jurisdictional matter as it is an element of jurisdiction. The Rule requires that the complaint or information, to be deemed sufficient, should state the place where the offense was committed. The principle is to ensure that the defendant is not compelled to move tom and appear in, a different court from that of the province where the crime was committed as it would cause him great inconvenience in looking for his witnesses and other evidence in another place xxx (Treñas v. People) Venue is an essential element of jurisdiction in criminal cases. Its twofold reason: 1. Jurisdiction of trial courts is limited to well-defined territories, trial court can only hear and try cases involving crimes committed within its territorial jurisdiction; and 2. Necessity and justice of having an accused on trial in the municipality or province where witnesses and other facilities for his defense are available. It is not enough to allege in the complaint or information the place of the commission of the crime. Such place must also be proven during the trial.

Page 5 of 7

Page 6 of 7 -

-

4.

In civil cases, where the complaint is filed in the wrong venue, the ground for motion to dismiss would be that “the venue is improperly laid” In criminal cases, where the complaint is filed in the wrong venue, the ground for motion to quash would be that “the court trying the case has no jurisdiction over the offense charged”. In criminal cases, improper venue means lack of jurisdiction. Exceptions to venue in criminal cases: 1. Where the offense was committed under the circumstances enumerated in Art. 2 of the RPC, the offense is cognizable before Philippine courts even if committed outside the territory of the Philippines. In this case, the offense shall be cognizable by the court where the criminal action is first filed.

2.

3.

Art. 2. Application of its provisions. — Except as provided in the treaties and laws of preferential application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced not only within the Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, but also outside of its jurisdiction, against those who: a. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship; b. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or obligations and securities issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands; c. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the obligations and securities mentioned in the presiding number; d. While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in the exercise of their functions; or e. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations, defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code. Where the Supreme Court, pursuant to its constitutional powers, orders a change of venue or place of trial to avoid miscarriage of justice. Where the offense is committed in a train, aircraft. or other private or public vehicle in the course of its trip, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried in the court of any municipality of territory where said train, aircraft or vehicle ed during its trip. It may also be instituted and tried in the place of departure and arrival.

5.

6.

-

Where the offense is committed on board a vessel in the course of its voyage, the criminal action shall be instituted and tried not necessarily in the place of the commission of the crime. It may be instituted and tried in the court of the first port of entry, or in the court of the municipality or territory where the vessel ed during the voyage. Where the case is cognizable by the Sandiganbayan, the criminal action need not be filed and tried in the place where the act as committed but generally, where the court actually sits in Quezon City. Where the offense is written defamation, the criminal action need not be necessarily be filed in the RTC of the province or city where the alleged libellous article was printed and first published. It may be filed in the province or city where the offended party held office at the time of the commission of the offense if he is a public officer, or in the province or city where he actually resided at the time of the commission of the offense in case the offended party is a private individual.

In United States vs. Bull (15 Phil., 7), this court held: . . . No court of the Philippine Islands had jurisdiction over an offense or crime committed on the high seas or within the territorial waters of any other country, but when she came within three miles of a line drawn from the headlands, which embrace the entrance to Manila Bay, she was within territorial waters, and a new set of principles became applicable. (Wheaton, International Law [Dana ed.], p. 255, note 105; Bonfils, Le Droit Int., secs. 490 et seq.; Latour, La Mer Ter., ch. 1.) The ship and her crew were then subject to the jurisdiction of the territorial sovereign subject to such limitations as have been conceded by that sovereignty through the proper political agency. . . .

-

High seas - any waters on the sea coast which are without the boundaries of the low water mark although such waters may be in the jurisdictional limits of a foreign government; parts of the sea that are not included in the exclusive economic zone, in the territorial seas, or in the internal waters of a state, or in the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic state (United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea).

Page 6 of 7

Page 7 of 7 -

Jurisdiction over crimes committed on board foreign vessels while in Philippine waters: a. If the foreign vessel is a warship, our courts have no jurisdiction as such is an extension of the country to which it belongs and is not subject to the laws of another state. (US v. Fowler, 1 Phil. 614)

b.

What is LEAVE OF COURT? Permission obtained from a court to take some action which, without such permission, would not be allowable; as, to sue a receiver, to file an amended pleading, to plead several pleas. -

b.

If the foreign vessel is a merchant vessel, there are two rules as to jurisdiction, namely: (1) French rule is that crimes committed on board are not triable in our country unless those affect the peace and security of our country, and (2) English rule is that crimes are triable unless such crimes affect merely the internal management of the vessel. The English rule is followed in our jurisdiction.

-

-



For the crime of perjury, the making of a deliberate and intentional falsehood before a notary public in Makati City, the information has sufficiently alleged that all the elements of the offense were committed in Makati City, hence, it is the proper venue of the case. A criminal case in violation of B.P. 22 may be filed in any of the places where any of its elements occurred. In particular, the place where the checks is: a. drawn; b. issued; c. delivered; or d. dishonoured (Yalong v. People) Estafa by postdating or issuing a bad check, may be a transitory or continuing offense. Its basic elements if deceit and damage may arise independently in separate places. Theft is not a continuing offense. The description of the place of the commission of the offense must be specific. Amendment or Substitution of the Complaint or Information Amendment – the correction of an error or omission in a complaint or information If amendment is made before the accused enters his plea, the complaint or information may be amended in form or in substance, without the need for leave of court. (Sec. 14, Rule 110) Where the accused has not yet been arraigned, the RTC was correct in directing the amendment of the information. (Dabalos v. RTC) Leave of court is required even if the amendment is made before plea in the following instances: a. the amendment downgrades the nature of the offense; or

the amendment excludes any accused from the complaint or information (Sec. 14, Rule 110)

-

-

If the amendment is made after the accused enters his plea, a formal or substantial amendment of the complaint or information may be made without leave of court. After the entry of plea, only a formal amendment may be made but with leave of court and if it does not prejudice the rights of the accused. After arraignment, a substantial amendment is proscribed except if the same is beneficial to the accused. (Ricarze v. Court of Appeals) Types of Amendment: 1. Formal  does not change the nature of the crime alleged  does not affect the essence of the offense  does not cause surprise or deprive the accused of an opportunity meet the new averment (allegation) 2. Substantial Test to determine when the rights of the accused are prejudiced by the amendment of a complaint or information is, when a defense of the accused, under the original complaint or information, would no longer be available after the amendment is made, and when any evidence the accused might have would be inapplicable to the complaint or information, as amended. The following are held to be formal amendments: 1. new allegations which relate only to the range of the penalty that the court might impose in the event of conviction; 2. amendment which does not charge another offenses different or distinct from that charged in the original one; 3. additional allegations which do not alter the prosecution’s theory of the case so as to surprise to the accused

Page 7 of 7