Practice question
A summary-procedure criminal complaint arises and is filed timely with the proper prosecution office after the April 2025 Consebido ruling. No issue about retroactively reviving an old prescribed offense exists. Must interruption always wait until an information is later filed in court?
- Yes; the 2025 clarification preserved that absolute rule.
- Yes; prosecution-office proceedings never matter.
- No; the new prospective rule recognizes filing with the prosecution office as tolling in the covered setting.
- Yes; delay automatically acquits the accused.
- No; because filing eliminates every other criminal requirement.
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/statutes/acts/act1930/act_3815_1930.html — Revised Penal Code Articles90–91, prescription of crimes and computation.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2025/apr2025/gr_258563_2025.html — People v. Consebido, G.R.258563, April2 2025, MAIN en banc decision, prospective tolling clarification for summary-procedure offenses.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.