I. Introduction

In the Philippines, a “frustrated murder case” is not just a dispute between two individuals; it is a public offense where the State is the principal complainant. Because of this, “withdrawing” such a case is not as simple as the offended party changing their mind or signing an affidavit of desistance.

This article explains, in the Philippine context:

What a frustrated murder case is
How such a case is initiated
What “withdrawing” can realistically mean at different stages
The legal limits of affidavits of desistance
The roles of the complainant, prosecutor, and court
Other ways a frustrated murder case may be terminated

This is general legal information, not a substitute for advice from a lawyer handling a specific case.

II. Legal Framework: What Is Frustrated Murder?

1. Murder under the Revised Penal Code (RPC)

Under the RPC, murder is a form of homicide with qualifying circumstances, such as:

Treachery (alevosía)
Taking advantage of superior strength
By means of fire, explosion, poison, etc.
With evident premeditation
In consideration of a price, reward, or promise
On the occasion of or by reason of certain circumstances (e.g., killing a person under specific conditions defined by law)

Without these qualifying circumstances, the killing is usually homicide, not murder.

2. Stages of Execution (Article 6, RPC)

Crimes under the RPC typically have three stages:

Attempted – Offender begins the commission but does not perform all the acts of execution due to causes other than their own spontaneous desistance.
Frustrated – Offender performs all the acts of execution which would ordinarily produce the felony, but the felony is not produced due to causes independent of the offender’s will (e.g., victim is saved by timely medical treatment).
Consummated – All acts of execution are performed and the crime is produced (e.g., victim dies).

3. Elements of Frustrated Murder

For frustrated murder, the usual elements are:

The offender performed all acts of execution which would have caused the death of the victim;
The intended death did not occur for reasons independent of the will of the offender (e.g., surgery saved the victim);
There was intent to kill (animus interficendi);
At least one qualifying circumstance of murder is present (treachery, etc.).

The label “frustrated murder case” usually refers to a criminal case where the Information filed in court charges the accused with frustrated murder under the RPC.

III. How a Frustrated Murder Case Starts

A frustrated murder case typically passes through these stages:

Police report / blotter / initial complaint
- Incident is reported to the police.
- Police conduct initial investigation: take statements, gather evidence, bring suspect into custody if warranted.
Inquest or Regular Preliminary Investigation
- If the suspect is arrested in flagrante or under a warrantless arrest, an inquest proceeding may be held.
- Otherwise, the offended party or police file a complaint-affidavit with the Office of the City/Provincial Prosecutor, triggering a preliminary investigation.
- The public prosecutor determines probable cause to charge frustrated murder (or another crime) in court.
Filing of Information in Court
- If the prosecutor finds probable cause, an Information for frustrated murder is filed with the Regional Trial Court (RTC).
- The court issues a warrant of arrest, sets bail (if allowed), and schedules arraignment.
Arraignment and Trial
- Accused is arraigned and enters a plea.
- Trial proceeds: prosecution presents evidence, then the defense.

Understanding these stages is crucial because “withdrawing the case” means very different things depending on where the case is in this process.

IV. What Does “Withdrawing a Case” Actually Mean?

In Philippine criminal procedure, there is no literal mechanism called “withdrawal of a criminal case” by the private complainant, especially for public offenses like frustrated murder. Instead, several things may happen:

The private complainant stops cooperating or signs an affidavit of desistance.
The public prosecutor may move to dismiss the complaint (pre-prosecution) or withdraw the Information (post-filing) if there is no probable cause or if evidence has collapsed.
The court may grant or deny the prosecutor’s motion, or independently dismiss the case on various grounds.

So “withdrawing” a frustrated murder case usually refers to one of three levels:

Withdrawal of the complaint before or during preliminary investigation;
Motion to dismiss or withdraw Information after filing in court;
Termination of the case through dismissal, acquittal, or other grounds (like prescription, death of accused, etc.).

V. Withdrawal at the Prosecutor’s Level (Before Filing in Court)

1. Before Filing a Complaint-Affidavit

At this very early stage:

The offended party can simply choose not to file any complaint-affidavit or blotter at all.
There is no case yet in the formal sense, so there is nothing to “withdraw.”

2. After Filing a Complaint-Affidavit, Before Prosecutor’s Resolution

Once a complaint-affidavit is filed and preliminary investigation or inquest is ongoing:

The offended party may execute an Affidavit of Desistance or a “Manifestation of Withdrawal of Complaint.”
The prosecutor is not bound to dismiss the case just because of that desistance.
The prosecutor evaluates:
- Whether probable cause still exists based on other evidence (medical reports, eyewitnesses, police testimony, etc.)
- Whether the desistance appears voluntary or is suspect (e.g., due to intimidation or bribery).

Key point: At this stage, the case may be dismissed by the prosecutor (no Information filed), but it is still a discretionary act of the prosecutor, not a right of the complainant.

3. After Prosecutor’s Resolution but Before Filing Information

If the prosecutor has already issued a Resolution finding probable cause but has not yet filed the Information in court:

The offended party can still file a desistance or the accused can file a motion for reconsideration or petition for review with the DOJ.
The prosecutor or the DOJ, reviewing the entire record, may reverse the resolution and order the case dismissed.
Again, this is discretionary and depends on the evidence and law, not mere agreement of parties.

VI. Withdrawal After the Case Is Filed in Court

Once the Information for frustrated murder is filed in the RTC, control of the case is shared between:

The public prosecutor (in charge of prosecuting in behalf of the State); and
The court (which must approve dismissals and other critical actions).

The private complainant’s role is then primarily as a witness and as the injured party in the civil aspect.

We must distinguish several sub-stages:

1. Before Arraignment

At this stage:

The prosecutor may file a Motion to Withdraw Information or a Motion to Dismiss if:
- Upon re-evaluation, there is no probable cause; or
- New evidence emerges negating the charge; or
- The DOJ issues a resolution reversing the earlier finding of probable cause.
The court must act on the motion:
- The judge may grant the motion (case dismissed/Information withdrawn).
- Or deny it (case proceeds).

Affidavits of desistance from the offended party may be attached to the motion, but they are not controlling. The court will consider:

Nature of the crime (serious public offense);
Circumstances surrounding desistance (voluntariness, possibility of coercion/bribery);
Other independent evidence (police, medical, physical evidence).

If the court grants the motion before arraignment, dismissal usually does not bar refiling of the case (no double jeopardy yet, because accused has not been arraigned and trial has not begun), subject to prescription and other rules.

2. After Arraignment, Before Trial

After arraignment:

Double jeopardy may attach depending on the ground and nature of dismissal.
If the prosecutor asks to withdraw the Information, the court will be more cautious because the accused has already pleaded.
A dismissal with the express consent of the accused on grounds not related to the merits (e.g., prosecutor’s failure to prosecute) may bar re-filing under double jeopardy rules.
However, dismissals without arraignment or for lack of jurisdiction or other special grounds may not produce double jeopardy.

Desistance of the offended party at this stage:

Does not automatically extinguish the criminal action.
May still weaken the prosecution’s case, especially if the complainant is the main or only eyewitness.

3. During Trial

If the case is already being tried:

The offended party might refuse to testify or may recant earlier statements.
The prosecutor may treat the witness as hostile or rely on other evidence (documents, other witnesses, forensic evidence).
The court may compel attendance of a subpoenaed witness, including the complainant.

If, because of desistance/recantation, the prosecution’s evidence collapses, the court may:

Acquit the accused for failure of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; or
Dismiss the case on certain grounds.

An acquittal (or a dismissal tantamount to an acquittal on the merits) bars further prosecution for the same offense by virtue of double jeopardy.

VII. Affidavits of Desistance, Recantation, and Their Limits

1. Nature of Affidavit of Desistance

An Affidavit of Desistance is a sworn statement by the offended party that:

They are no longer interested in pursuing the case; and/or
They have settled with the accused; and/or
They request that the complaint or case be dropped.

In public crimes like frustrated murder:

It is merely persuasive but not binding on the prosecutor or the court.
Courts and prosecutors treat such affidavits with great caution because:
- They may be obtained through intimidation, pressure, or monetary consideration.
- Public interest in prosecuting serious crimes cannot be bargained away by private parties.

2. Affidavit of Recantation

Sometimes, the offended party or key witness later claims:

That their previous statements were false; or
That they misidentified the accused.

Recantations are viewed with even greater suspicion, especially if they contradict earlier testimony or affidavits. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that:

Recantations do not automatically nullify previous testimonies.
Courts will compare the recantation against the entire record of evidence.

3. Compromise and Settlement

Criminal liability for frustrated murder cannot be compromised:

Under the Civil Code and related jurisprudence, criminal liability for public crimes is not subject to compromise.
However, the civil aspect (damages, compensation) may be the subject of settlement.

Such settlement may influence willingness of the offended party to testify, but cannot, by itself, extinguish the criminal action.

VIII. Limits of the Offended Party’s Control Over the Case

Under the RPC and the Rules of Court, there is a distinction between:

Public crimes (like homicide, murder, frustrated murder, theft, robbery, etc.), and
Private crimes (e.g., adultery, concubinage, seduction, abduction, acts of lasciviousness under Article 344 RPC), which generally require a complaint by the offended party and may not proceed without it.

Frustrated murder is a public crime.

Therefore:

Once a complaint is initiated and especially once an Information is filed, the case primarily belongs to the State.
The offended party cannot unilaterally stop the prosecution.
The State has an interest in preventing and punishing violent crimes, independent of the victim’s personal wishes.

In private crimes (Article 344), withdrawal of the complaint by the offended party usually extinguishes criminal liability. That rule does not apply to frustrated murder.

IX. Role of the Prosecutor and the Court

1. Prosecutor’s Control Before and After Filing

Before filing the Information, the prosecutor has full control over whether to:
- File an Information for frustrated murder;
- File for a different offense (e.g., frustrated homicide, serious physical injuries); or
- Dismiss the complaint.
After filing the Information, the prosecutor must work under the supervision of the court:
- They can move to withdraw the Information or dismiss the case, but only with leave of court.
- The court is not bound to grant the motion; it must independently assess the existence of probable cause.

2. Court’s Role

The court must:

Ensure that there is probable cause and due process.
Prevent dismissals that may:
- Be based on collusion,
- Undermine public interest, or
- Violate the accused’s rights (or unduly favor the accused).

Dismissal after arraignment can trigger double jeopardy protections, making re-filing impossible except in narrow situations (e.g., lack of jurisdiction, nullity of the Information, or dismissal at the accused’s instance on grounds not amounting to an acquittal).

X. Other Ways a Frustrated Murder Case May End

Apart from desistance or withdrawal motions, a frustrated murder case can terminate by:

Acquittal – The court finds that the prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Bars re-filing for the same offense.
Conviction – The accused is found guilty; the case moves into sentencing and execution of judgment (and possible appeal).
Death of the Accused – Criminal liability is extinguished by death before final judgment.
- The civil liability ex delicto is also generally extinguished, but claims based on other sources may survive against the estate.
Amnesty or Pardon – In some cases, amnesty (a public act) or absolute pardon (presidential act) may extinguish the criminal liability. For pardon, civil liability may remain.
Prescription of the Crime – Criminal liability prescribes after a certain period from the commission of the offense, depending on the penalty prescribed by law.
- Murder (and its stages) generally falls under the 20-year prescriptive period in Article 90, for crimes punishable by reclusion temporal / reclusion perpetua.
Provisional Dismissal and Lapse of Time (Rule 117, Sec. 8)
- A case may be provisionally dismissed with the express consent of the accused and notice to the offended party.
- If not revived within the periods set by rule (depending on penalty), the dismissal becomes permanent and re-filing is barred.

XI. Civil Liability When the Case Is “Withdrawn” or Dismissed

A frustrated murder case has both:

Criminal aspect – punishment of the offender;
Civil aspect – damages to the victim (medical expenses, lost income, moral damages, etc.).

Key points:

The offended party may reserve the right to file a separate civil action, or file it together with the criminal case.
Even if the criminal case is dismissed or the accused is acquitted, civil liability may still be adjudged if:
- There is preponderance of evidence showing civil liability, even if reasonable doubt exists as to guilt.
The offended party and the accused may compromise the civil aspect (settlement payments, waivers of claims).
A valid civil compromise does not automatically extinguish the criminal case for frustrated murder, but it may influence the complainant’s cooperation and the availability of evidence.

XII. Illustrative Practical Scenarios

Scenario 1: Complainant Wants to “Withdraw” Before Filing in Court

A person is attacked with a deadly weapon; the victim survives after surgery (frustrated murder scenario).
Victim files a complaint-affidavit with the prosecutor.
Later, victim and accused settle; victim wants to “withdraw the case.”

What can happen?

Victim executes an Affidavit of Desistance and submits it to the prosecutor.
Prosecutor evaluates independently:
- If remaining evidence still supports probable cause, the prosecutor may still file an Information despite desistance.
- If evidence is weak or the complaint seems baseless, the prosecutor may dismiss the complaint.

The decision lies with the prosecutor, not the victim.

Scenario 2: Case Already Filed, Before Arraignment

Information for frustrated murder already filed in the RTC.
Victim now wants to “withdraw” and has signed desistance.

What is possible?

Prosecutor may file a Motion to Withdraw Information or Motion to Dismiss, citing desistance and re-evaluation of evidence.
Court will review and may:
- Grant the motion: case dismissed, no arraignment, so refiling still possible (subject to prescription).
- Deny the motion: case continues.

Desistance is important but not controlling.

Scenario 3: Case in Trial, Complainant Stops Cooperating

The complainant, previously cooperative, suddenly refuses to testify or claims not to remember.

What can happen?

Prosecutor may treat them as hostile witness or rely on prior statements and other witnesses, subject to the rules on evidence.
If prosecution evidence is insufficient without the complainant’s testimony, the court may acquit for failure of proof beyond reasonable doubt.

This results not from formal “withdrawal,” but from evidentiary failure.

XIII. Practical Takeaways

Frustrated murder is a serious public offense. The case belongs primarily to the State, not just to the offended party.
An offended party cannot simply “withdraw” a frustrated murder case at will. At best, they can:
- Execute an Affidavit of Desistance;
- Settle the civil aspect;
- Stop cooperating as a witness (subject to court processes).
Affidavits of desistance/recantation are not automatically accepted:
- Prosecutors and courts evaluate them against other evidence and public interest.
Prosecutor and court control:
- The prosecutor decides whether to file or maintain the case, subject to DOJ review.
- The court must approve any withdrawal/dismissal once the Information is filed.
Double jeopardy and timing matter:
- Dismissal before arraignment usually does not bar refiling.
- Acquittal or dismissal after arraignment on the merits generally bars re-filing.
Civil liability is separate:
- May be settled or compromised even if the criminal case continues.
- May subsist even after acquittal, depending on the judgment.

XIV. Conclusion

“Withdrawing a frustrated murder case” in the Philippines is not a straightforward legal act but a shorthand for a combination of:

Desistance or non-cooperation by the private complainant;
Discretionary decisions by prosecutors; and
Judicial rulings on motions to dismiss or withdraw Informations, guided by public interest and evidence.

Because frustrated murder is a grave offense against public order and safety, Philippine law deliberately limits the power of individuals to terminate such cases by mere agreement or apology. Any attempt to “withdraw” must always be viewed through the lens of state interest, procedural safeguards, and the rights of both the accused and the offended party.