GENERAL
Romulo advised Judge Aquino that Dr. Verstuyft is entitled to immunity from search
Municher vs. CA
Facts: Violation of the “Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972,” was filed against Minucher
following a “buy-bust operation” conducted by Philippine police narcotic agents
accompanied by Scalzo in the house of Minucher, an Iranian national, where heroin
was said to have been seized. Minucher was later acquitted by the court. Minucher
later on filed for damages due to trumped-up charges of drug trafficking made by
Arthur Scalzo. Scalzo on his counterclaims that he had acted in the discharge of his
official duties as being merely an agent of the Drug Enforcement Administration of
the United States Department of Justice. Scalzo subsequently filed a motion to
dismiss the complaint on the ground that, being a special agent of the United
States Drug Enforcement Administration, he was entitled to diplomatic immunity.
He attached to his motion Diplomatic Note of the United States Embassy
addressed to DOJ of the Philippines and a Certification of Vice Consul Donna
Woodward, certifying that the note is a true and faithful copy of its original. Trial
court denied the motion to dismiss.
It is a recognized principle of international law and under our system of separation
ISSUE: Whether or not Arthur Scalzo is indeed entitled to diplomatic immunity.
of powers that diplomatic immunity is essentially a political question and courts
RULLING: YES. A foreign agent, operating within a territory, can be cloaked with
immunity from suit as long as it can be established that he is acting within the
directives of the sending state. The consent or imprimatur of the Philippine
government to the activities of the United States Drug Enforcement Agency,
however, can be gleaned from the undisputed facts in the case. The official
exchanges of communication between agencies of the government of the two
countries Certifications from officials of both the Philippine Department of Foreign
Affairs and the United States Embassy. Participation of members of the Philippine
Narcotics Command in the “buy-bust operation” conducted at the residence of
Minucher at the behest of Scalzo. These may be inadequate to support the
“diplomatic status” of the latter but they give enough indication that the Philippine
government has given its imprimatur, if not consent, to the activities within
Philippine territory of agent Scalzo of the United States Drug Enforcement Agency.
The job description of Scalzo has tasked him to conduct surveillance on suspected
drug suppliers and, after having ascertained the target, to inform local law enforcers
who would then be expected to make the arrest. In conducting surveillance
activities on Minucher, later acting as the poseur-buyer during the buy-bust
operation, and then becoming a principal witness in the criminal case against
Minucher, Scalzo hardly can be said to have acted beyond the scope of his official
function or duties.
issued by the MeTC. After fixing petitioner’s bail, the MeTC released him to the
WHO vs. Aquino
Facts: Dr. Leonce Verstuyft was assigned by WHO to its regional office in Manila as
Acting Assistant Director of Health Services. His personal effects, contained in
twelve (12) crates, were allowed free entry from duties and taxes. Constabulary
Offshore Action Center (COSAC) suspected that the crates “contain large quantities
of highly dutiable goods” beyond the official needs of Verstuyft. Upon application of
the COSAC officers, Judge Aquino issued a search warrant for the search and
seizure of the personal effects of Verstuyft. Secretary of Foreign Affairs Carlos P.
in respect for his personal baggage as accorded to members of diplomatic
missions pursuant to the Host Agreement and requested that the search warrant be
suspended. The Solicitor General accordingly joined Verstuyft for the quashal of the
search warrant but respondent judge nevertheless summarily denied the quashal.
Verstuyft, thus, filed a petition for certiorari and prohibition with the SC. WHO joined
Verstuyft in asserting diplomatic immunity.
Issue: Whether or not personal effect of Verstuyft can be exempted from search
and seizure under the diplomatic immunity.
Held: Yes. The executive branch of the Phils has expressly recognized that Verstuyft
is entitled to diplomatic immunity, pursuant to the provisions of the Host
Agreement. The DFA formally advised respondent judge of the Philippine
Government's official position. The Solicitor General, as principal law officer of the
gorvernment, likewise expressly affirmed said petitioner's right to diplomatic
immunity and asked for the quashal of the search warrant.
should refuse to look beyond a determination by the executive branch of the
government, and where the plea of diplomatic immunity is recognized and affirmed
by the executive branch of the government as in the case at bar, it is then the duty
of the courts to accept the claim of immunity upon appropriate suggestion by the
principal law officer of the government, the Solicitor General in this case, or other
officer acting under his discretion. Courts may not so exercise their jurisdiction by
seizure and detention of property, as to embarass the executive arm of the
government in conducting foreign relations.
The Court, therefore, holds the respondent judge acted without jurisdiction and
with grave abuse of discretion in not ordering the quashal of the search warrant
issued by him in disregard of the diplomatic immunity of petitioner Verstuyft. (World
Health Organization vs. Aquino, G.R. No. L-35131, November 29, 1972, 48 SCRA
243)
Liang vs.PP
FACTS: Petitioner is an economist working with the Asian Development Bank
(ADB). Sometime in 1994, for allegedly uttering defamatory words against fellow
ADB worker Joyce Cabal, he was charged before the MeTC of Mandaluyong City
with two counts of oral defamation. Petitioner was arrested by virtue of a warrant
custody of the Security Officer of ADB. The next day, the MeTC judge received an
“office of protocol” from the DFA stating that petitioner is covered by immunity from
legal process under section 45 of the Agreement between the ADB and the
Philippine Government regarding the Headquarters of the ADB in the country.
Based on the said protocol communication that petitioner is immune from suit, the
MeTC judge without notice to the prosecution dismissed the criminal cases. The
latter filed a motion for reconsideration which was opposed by the DFA. When its
motion was denied, the prosecution filed a petition for certiorari and mandamus
with the RTC of Pasig City which set aside the MeTC rulings and ordered the latter
1
court to enforce the warrant of arrest it earlier issued. After the motion for
reconsideration was denied, the petitioner elevated the case to the SC via a petition
for review arguing that he is covered by immunity under the Agreement and that no
preliminary investigation was held before the criminal case.
government by any formal requirement as to form. It can be oral. It can be written.
ISSUES: (1) Whether or not the petitioner’s case is covered with immunity from
legal process with regard to Section 45 of the Agreement between the ADB and the
Philippine Gov’t. (2) Whether or not the conduct of preliminary investigation was
imperative.
clear in that recognition is the premise that the inability of petitioner Estrada is no
HELD: (1) NO. The petitioner’s case is not covered by the immunity. Courts cannot
blindly adhere to the communication from the DFA that the petitioner is covered by
any immunity. It has no binding effect in courts. The court needs to protect the right
to due process not only of the accused but also of the prosecution. Secondly, the
immunity under Section 45 of the Agreement is not absolute, but subject to the
exception that the acts must be done in “official capacity”. Hence, slandering a
person could not possibly be covered by the immunity agreement because our
laws do not allow the commission of a crime, such as defamation, in the name of
official duty. (2) NO. Preliminary Investigation is not a matter of right in cases
cognizable by the MeTC such as this case. Being purely a statutory right,
preliminary investigation may be invoked only when specifically granted by law. The
rule on criminal procedure is clear that no preliminary investigation is required in
cases falling within the jurisdiction of the MeTC. Hence, SC denied the petition.
withdrawal of support from their Commander-in-Chief and demanded that she
Raegan vs. CIR
FACTS: Petitioner questioned the payment of an income tax assessed on him by
public respondent on an amount realized by him on a sale of his automobile to a
member of the US Marine Corps, the transaction having taken place at the Clark
Field Air Base. Petitioner contends that the base is outside Philippine territory and
therefore beyond the jurisdictional power to tax.
of coup d’etat.
ISSUE: Whether or not a sale made on a foreign military base is excluded from tax.
ISSUE: Whether the act complained of was service-connected and therefore
HELD: No. The said foreign military bases is not a foreign soil or territory for
purposes of income tax legislation. Philippine jurisdictional rights including the
power to tax are preserved.
RULING: The military justice system is disciplinary in nature, aimed at achieving the
Estrada vs. Desierto
Facts: February 5, 2001, petitioner filed with this Court a petition for prohibition with
a prayer for a writ of preliminary injunction. It sought to enjoin the respondent
Ombudsman from "conducting any further proceedings in any other criminal
complaint that may be filed in his office, until after the term of petitioner as
President is over and only if legally warranted." February 6, 2001, Thru another
counsel, petitioner filed for Quo Warranto. He prayed for judgment "confirming
petitioner to be the lawful and incumbent President of the Republic of the
Philippines temporarily unable to discharge the duties of his office, and declaring
respondent to have taken her oath as and to be holding the Office of the President,
only in an acting capacity pursuant to the provisions of the Constitution."
held that the offense is service-connected. xxx It bears stressing that the charge
ISSUES: (1) Whether or not the petitioner resigned as president. (2) Whether or not
petitioner Estrada is a President on leave while respondent Arroyo is an Acting
President.
violation allegedly caused dishonor and disrespect to the military profession. In
Held: (1) Resignation is not a high level legal abstraction. It is a factual question and
its elements are beyond quibble: there must be an intent to resign and the intent
must be coupled by acts of relinquishment. The validity of a resignation is not
It can be express. It can be implied. As long as the resignation is clear, it must be
given legal effect. (2) What leaps to the eye from these irrefutable facts is that both
houses of Congress have recognized respondent Arroyo as the President. Implicitly
longer temporary. Congress has clearly rejected petitioner's claim of inability. In
fine, even if the petitioner can prove that he did not resign, still, he cannot
successfully claim that he is a President on leave on the ground that he is merely
unable to govern temporarily. That claim has been laid to rest by Congress and the
decision that respondent Arroyo is the de jure, president made by a co-equal
branch of government cannot be reviewed by this Court.
Gonzales vs. Abaya
FACTS: On July 27, 2003 at around 1:00 a.m., more than 300 heavily armed junior
officers and enlisted men of the AFP entered the premises of the Oakwood Premier
Luxury Apartments on Ayala Avenue, Makati City, where they disarmed the security
guards and planted explosive devices around the building. They then declared their
resign as President of the Republic. After much negotiation, the group finally laid
down their arms. Subsequently, an Information for coup d’etat was filed against
them with the RTC, at the same time that they were tried at court martial for
conduct unbecoming an officer. They question the jurisdiction of the court martial,
contending that the RTC ordered that their act was not service-connected and that
their violation of Art. 96 of the Articles of War (RA 7055) was absorbed by the crime
cognizable by court martial or absorbed by the crime of coup d'etat cognizable by
regular courts
highest form of discipline in order to ensure the highest degree of military efficiency.
Military law is established not merely to enforce discipline in times of war, but also
to preserve the tranquility and security of the State in times of war, but also to
preserve the tranquility and security of the State in time of peace; for there is
nothing more dangerous to the public peace and safety than a licentious and
undisciplined military body. The administration of military justice has been
universally practiced. Since time immemorial, all the armies in almost all countries
of the world look upon the power of military law and its administration as the most
effective means of enforcing discipline. For this reason, the court martial has
become invariably an indispensable part of any organized armed forces, it being
the most potent agency in enforcing discipline both in peace and in war. The Court
against the petitioners concerns the alleged violation of their solemn oath as
officers to defend the Constitution and the duly-constituted authorities. Such
2
short, the charge has a bearing on their professional conduct or behavior as military
officers. Equally indicative of the “service-connected” nature of the offense is the
penalty prescribed for the same – dismissal from the service – imposable only by
the military court. Such penalty is purely disciplinary in character, evidently
intended to cleanse the military profession of misfits and to preserve the stringent
standard of military discipline.
Philippine waters.
TERRITORIAL
People vs.Tulin
Facts: In the evening of March 2, 1991, "M/T Tabangao," a cargo vessel owned by
the PNOC Shipping and Transport Corporation,loaded with barrels of kerosene,
regular gasoline, and diesel oil, was boarded by 7 fully armed pirates. The pirates
includingthe accused Roger P. Tulin, Virgilio Loyola, and Andres Infante Jr. detained
the crew and completely took over the vessel.The vessel was directed to proceed
to Singapore where the cargoes were unloaded transferred and sold under the
directsupervision of accused Cheong San Hiong. Thereafter, the captive vessel
returned to the Philippines.  A series of arrests was thereafter effected and all the
accused were charged with qualified piracy or violation of PresidentialDecree No.
532 (Piracy in Philippine Waters). They were subsequently convicted of the crime
charged. Hence, this appeal.Meanwhile accused Cheong argues that the trial court
erred in convicting and punishing him as an accomplice when theacts allegedly
committed by him were done or executed outside of Philippine waters and territory,
stripping the Philippinecourts of jurisdiction to hold him for trial, to convict, and
sentence.
Held: Yes, the Philippine courts have jurisdiction on the case. Piracy is a villainy not
Held: Article 122 of the Revised Penal Code, before its amendment, provided that
piracy must be committed on the high seas byany person not a member of its
complement nor a passenger thereof. Upon its amendment by Republic Act No.
7659, thecoverage of the pertinent provision was widened to include offenses
committed "in Philippine waters." On the other hand,under Presidential Decree No.
532 (issued in 1974), the coverage of the law on piracy embraces any person
including "apassenger or member of the complement of said vessel in Philippine
waters." Hence, passenger or not, a member of thecomplement or not, any person
is covered by the law.Republic Act No. 7659 neither superseded nor amended the
provisions on piracy under Presidential Decree No. 532. Thereis no contradiction
between the two laws. There is likewise no ambiguity and hence, there is no need
to construe or interpretthe law. All the presidential decree did was to widen the
coverage of the law, in keeping with the intent to protect thecitizenry as well as
neighboring states from crimes against the law of nations. As expressed in one of
the "whereas" clausesof Presidential Decree No. 532, piracy is "among the highest
forms of lawlessness condemned by the penal statutes of allcountries." For this
reason, piracy under the Article 122, as amended, and piracy under Presidential
Decree No. 532 existharmoniously as separate laws. As regards the contention that
the trial court did not acquire jurisdiction over the person of accused-
appellantHiong since the crime was committed outside Philippine waters, suffice it
to state that unquestionably, the attackon and seizure of "M/T Tabangao" (renamed
"M/T Galilee" by the pirates) and its cargo were committed inPhilippine waters,
although the captive vessel was later brought by the pirates to Singapore where its
cargo wasoff-loaded, transferred, and sold. And such transfer was done under
accused-appellant Hiong's direct supervision.Although Presidential Decree No. 532
requires that the attack and seizure of the vessel and its cargo be committedin
Philippine waters, the disposition by the pirates of the vessel and its cargo is still
deemed part of the act of piracy, hence, the same need not be committed in
People vs.Lol-lo and Saraw
Facts: On June 30, 1920, sixer vintas intercepted two Dutch boats which were on
its way in the midst of the islands of Buang and Bukid in the Dutch East Indies. The
six vintas were manned by 24 armed Moros. The said Dutch boats were carrying
men, women and children. At first, the Moros asked for food. But when they got on
the Dutch boats, they asked for themselves all the vessel’s cargo, attacked nearly
all of the men and brutally violated two of the women by methods too tremendous
to be described. All of the persons on the Dutch boat, except the two young
women, were again placed on it and holes were made in it, the idea that it would
submerge. The Moros finally arrived at Maruro, a Dutch possession. Two of the
Moro marauders were Lol-lo, who also raped one of the women, and Saraw. At
Maruro, the two women were able to escape. Lol-lo and Saraw later returned to
their home in South Ubian, Tawi-Tawi, Sulu. They were arrested there and were
charged in the Court of First Instance of Sulu with the crime of piracy.
Issue: Whether or not Philippine courts have jurisdiction over the crime of piracy
alleged in this case.
against any particular state but against all mankind. It should be tried and punished
in the sufficient tribunal of any country where the offender may be found or into
which he may be carried. The jurisdiction of piracy, unlike all other crimes, has no
territorial limits.
Arigo vs.Swift
Facts: The USS Guardian is an Avenger-class mine countermeasures ship of the
US Navy. In December 2012, the US Embassy in the Philippines requested
diplomatic clearance for the said vessel “to enter and exit the territorial waters of
the Philippines and to arrive at the port of Subic Bay for the purpose of routine ship
replenishment, maintenance, and crew liberty.” On January 6, 2013, the ship left
Sasebo, Japan for Subic Bay, arriving on January 13, 2013 after a brief stop for fuel
in Okinawa, Japan. On January 15, 2013, the USS Guardian departed Subic Bay for
its next port of call in Makassar, Indonesia. On January 17, 2013 at 2:20 a.m. while
transiting the Sulu Sea, the ship ran aground on the northwest side of South Shoal
of the Tubbataha Reefs, about 80 miles east-southeast of Palawan. No one was
injured in the incident, and there have been no reports of leaking fuel or oil.
Petitioners claim that the grounding, salvaging and post-salvaging operations of the
USS Guardian cause and continue to cause environmental damage of such
magnitude as to affect the provinces of Palawan, Antique, Aklan, Guimaras, Iloilo,
Negros Occidental, Negros Oriental, Zamboanga del Norte, Basilan, Sulu, and
Tawi-Tawi, which events violate their constitutional rights to a balanced and
healthful ecology.
3
Held: The US respondents were sued in their official capacity as commanding
officers of the US Navy who had control and supervision over the USS Guardian
and its crew. The alleged act or omission resulting in the unfortunate grounding of
the USS Guardian on the TRNP was committed while they were performing official
military duties. Considering that the satisfaction of a judgment against said officials
will require remedial actions and appropriation of funds by the US government, the
suit is deemed to be one against the US itself. The principle of State immunity
therefore bars the exercise of jurisdiction by this Court over the persons of
respondents Swift, Rice and Robling. During the deliberations, Senior Associate
Justice Antonio T. Carpio took the position that the conduct of the US in this case,
when its warship entered a restricted area in violation of R.A. No. 10067 and
caused damage to the TRNP reef system, brings the matter within the ambit of
Article 31 of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS). He
explained that while historically, warships enjoy sovereign immunity from suit as
extensions of their flag State, Art. 31 of the UNCLOS creates an exception to this
rule in cases where they fail to comply with the rules and regulations of the coastal
State regarding passage through the latter’s internal waters and the territorial sea.
employed as well, thus, the RTC should consider the same with the end in mind of
AAA vs. BBB
Facts: AAA filed an application for the issuance of a Temporary Protection Order
with a request to make the same permanent after due hearing, before the RTC.
Finding good ground in AAA’s application, the RTC issued a TPO. The TPO was
thereafter, made permanent by virtue of a Decision of the RTC dated August 14,
2007. BBB appealed before the CA. CA affirmed RTC’s decision but ordered the
remand of the case for the latter to determine in the proper proceedings to
determine who shall be awarded custody of the children. The CA found that under
the provisions of RA9262, BBB had subjected AAA and their children to
psychological, emotional and economic abuses. BBB displayed acts of marital
infidelity which exposed AAA to public ridicule causing her emotional and
psychological distress. While BBB alleged that FFF was only a professional
colleague, he continued to have public appearances with her which did not help to
dispel AAA’s accusation that the two had an extra-marital relation. BBB filed a
Manifestation and Motion to Render Judgment Based on a MOA alleging that he
and AAA had entered into a compromise regarding the custody, exercise of
parental authority over, and support of DDD and EEE: that BBB shall have the
custody over both children.
by the questioned measure is missing the Supreme Court do not see how the
ISSUE: Whether or not the RTC should determine who shall be awarded custody
over the children.
indiscriminate slaughter, considering that they can be killed anywhere, with no less
HELD: YES. All told, the Court finds no merit in BBB’s petition, but there exists a
necessity to remand the case for the RTC to resolve matters relative to who shall be
granted custody over the three children, how the spouses shall exercise visitation
rights, and the amount and manner of providing financial support. The RTC and the
CA found substantial evidence and did not commit reversible errors when they
issued the PPO against BBB. Events, which took place after the issuance of the
PPO, do not erase the fact that psychological, emotional and economic abuses
were committed by BBB against AAA. Hence, BBB’s claim that he now has actual
sole care of DDD and EEE does not necessarily call for this Court’s revocation of
the PPO and the award to him of custody over the children. This Court, thus,
affirms the CA’s order to remand the case for the RTC to resolve the question of
custody. Since the children are now all older than seven years of age, they can
choose for themselves whom they want to stay with. If all the three children would
manifest to the RTC their choice to stay with AAA, then the PPO issued by RTC
shall continue to be executed in its entirety. However, if any of the three children
would choose to be under BBB’s care, necessarily, the PPO issued against BBB
relative to them is to be modified. The PPO, in its entirety, would remain effective
only as to AAA and any of the children who opt to stay with her. Consequently, the
RTC may accordingly alter the manner and amount of financial support BBB should
give depending on who shall finally be awarded custody over the children. Pursuant
to Articles 201 and 202 of the Family Code, BBB’s resources and means and the
necessities of AAA and the children are the essential factors in determining the
amount of support, and the same can be reduced or increased proportionately. The
RTC is reminded to be circumspect in resolving the matter of support, which is a
mutual responsibility of the spouses. The parties do not dispute that AAA is now
promoting the best interests of the children.
Sources of Criminal Law
Ynot vs. IAC
Facts: On January 13, 1984, the petitioner transported six carabaos in a pump boat
from Masbate to Iloilo when the same was confiscated by the police station
commander of Barotac Nuevo, Iloilo for the violation of E.O. 626-A. A case was
filed by the petitioner questioning the constitutionality of executive order and the
recovery of the carabaos. After considering the merits of the case, the confiscation
was sustained and the court declined to rule on the constitutionality issue. The
petitioner appealed the decision to the Intermediate Appellate Court but it also
upheld the ruling of RTC.
Issue: Is E.O. 626-A unconstitutional?
Ruling: The Respondent contends that it is a valid exercise of police power to
justify EO 626-A amending EO 626 in asic rule prohibiting the slaughter of carabaos
except under certain conditions. The supreme court said that The reasonable
connection between the means employed and the purpose sought to be achieved
prohibition of the inter-provincial transport of carabaos can prevent their
difficulty in one province than in another. Obviously, retaining the carabaos in one
province will not prevent their slaughter there, any more than moving them to
another province will make it easier to kill them there. The Supreme Court found
E.O. 626-A unconstitutional. The executive act defined the prohibition, convicted
the petitioner and immediately imposed punishment, which was carried out
forthright. Due process was not properly observed. In the instant case, the
carabaos were arbitrarily confiscated by the police station commander, were
returned to the petitioner only after he had filed a complaint for recovery and given
4
a supersedes bond of P12,000.00. The measure struck at once and pounced upon
the petitioner without giving him a chance to be heard, thus denying due process.
submitted the required comment as it would be an “axercise in futility.”
Constitutional Limitations
Due process and Equal Protection
White Light Corp. v. City of Manila
On 3 Dec 1992, then Mayor Lim signed into law Ord 7774 entitled “An Ordinance
prohibiting short time admission in hotels, motels, lodging houses, pension houses
and similar establishments in the City of Manila”. White Light Corp is an operator of
mini hotels and motels who sought to have the Ordinance be nullified as the said
Ordinance infringes on the private rights of their patrons. The RTC ruled in favor of
WLC. It ruled that the Ordinance strikes at the personal liberty of the individual
guaranteed by the Constitution. The City maintains that the ordinance is valid as it
is a valid exercise of police power. Under the LGC, the City is empowered to
regulate the establishment, operation and maintenance of cafes, restaurants,
beerhouses, hotels, motels, inns, pension houses, lodging houses and other similar
establishments, including tourist guides and transports. The CA ruled in favor of the
City.
WON the CA erred in not finding that the law does violence to the policy of the
ISSUE: Whether or not Ord 7774 is valid.
WON the CA seriously erredin declaring RA 9262 as invalid and unconstitutional
HELD: The SC ruled that the said ordinance is null and void as it indeed infringes
upon individual liberty. It also violates the due process clause which serves as a
guaranty for protection against arbitrary regulation or seizure. The said ordinance
invades private rights. Note that not all who goes into motels and hotels for wash
up rate are really there for obscene purposes only. Some are tourists who needed
rest or to “wash up” or to freshen up. Hence, the infidelity sought to be avoided by
the said ordinance is more or less subjected only to a limited group of people. The
SC reiterates that individual rights may be adversely affected only to the extent that
may fairly be required by the legitimate demands of public interest or public
welfare.
v. Elizalde Rope Workerkers’ Union, the Court ruled that all that is required of a valid
Garcia v. Drilon
Facts: Private respondent Rosalie filed a petition before the RTC of Bacolod City a
Temporary Protection Order against her husband, Jesus, pursuant to R.A. 9262,
entitled “An Act Defining Violence Against Women and Their Children, Providing for
Protective Measures for Victims, Prescribing Penalties Therefor, and for Other
Purposes.” She claimed to be a victim of physical, emotional, psychological and
economic violence, being threatened of deprivation of custody of her children and
of financial support and also a victim of marital infidelity on the part of petitioner.
any evidence one may have in support of one’s defense. The grant of the TPO
The TPO was granted but the petitioner failed to faithfully comply with the
conditions set forth by the said TPO, private-respondent filed another application
for the issuance of a TPO ex parte. The trial court issued a modified TPO and
extended the same when petitioner failed to comment on why the TPO should not
be modified.  After the given time allowance to answer, the petitioner no longer
Petitioner filed before the CA a petition for prohibition with prayer for injunction and
TRO on, questioning the constitutionality of the RA 9262 for violating the due
process and equal protection clauses, and the validity of the modified TPO for
being “an unwanted product of an invalid law.”
The CA issued a TRO on the enforcement of the TPO but however, denied the
petition for failure to raise the issue of constitutionality in his pleadings before the
trial court and the petition for prohibition to annul protection orders issued by the
trial court constituted collateral attack on said law.
Petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration but was denied. Thus, this petition is
filed.
Issues: WON the CA erred in dismissing the petition on the theory that the issue of
constitutionality was not raised at the earliest opportunity and that the petition
constitutes a collateral attack on the validity of the law.
WON the CA committed serious error in failing to conclude that RA 9262 is
discriminatory, unjust and violative of the equal protection clause.
WON the CA committed grave mistake in not finding that RA 9262 runs counter to
the due process clause of the Constitution
state to protect the family as a basic social institution
because it allows an undue delegation of judicial power to Brgy. Officials.
Decision:                1. Petitioner contends that the RTC has limited authority and
jurisdiction, inadequate to tackle the complex issue of constitutionality. Family
Courts have authority and jurisdiction to consider the constitutionality of a statute.
The question of constitutionality must be raised at the earliest possible time so that
if not raised in the pleadings, it may not be raised in the trial and if not raised in the
trial court, it may not be considered in appeal.
2. RA 9262 does not violate the guaranty of equal protection of the laws. Equal
protection simply requires that all persons or things similarly situated should be
treated alike, both as to rights conferred and responsibilities imposed. In Victoriano
classification is that it be reasonable, which means that the classification should be
based on substantial distinctions which make for real differences; that it must be
germane to the purpose of the law; not limited to existing conditions only; and
apply equally to each member of the class. Therefore, RA9262 is based on a valid
classification and did not violate the equal protection clause by favouring women
over men as victims of violence and abuse to whom the Senate extends its
protection.
3. RA 9262 is not violative of the due process clause of the Constitution. The
essence of due process is in the reasonable opportunity to be heard and submit
exparte cannot be impugned as violative of the right to due process.
4.  The non-referral of a VAWC case to a mediator is justified. Petitioner’s
contention that by not allowing mediation, the law violated the policy of the State to
protect and strengthen the family as a basic autonomous social institution cannot
5
be sustained. In a memorandum of the Court, it ruled that the court shall not refer
the case or any issue therof to a mediator. This is so because violence is not a From the foregoing, it is clear that there was nothing untruthful about what was
subject for compromise.
published in the Sunday Post. The criminal cases listed in the advertisement as
5. There is no undue delegation of judicial power to Barangay officials.  Judicial pending against the complainant had indeed beenfiled.

power includes the duty of the courts of justice to settle actual controversies To this end, the publication of the subject advertisement by petitioner and Lim
involving rights which are legally demandable and enforceable and to determine cannot be deemed by this Court to have been done with actual malice. Aside from
whether or not there has been a grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or the fact that the information contained in said publication was true, the intention to
excess of jurisdiction on any part of any branch of the Government while executive let the public know the character of their radio commentator can at best be
power is the power to enforce and administer the laws.  The preliminary subsumed under the mantle of having been done with good motives and for
investigation conducted by the prosecutor is an executive, not a judicial, function.  justifiable ends. Wherefore, petitionis GRANTED. Decision of the RTC and CA is
The same holds true with the issuance of BPO.  Assistance by Brgy. Officials and REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Petitioner is ACQUITTED.

other law enforcement agencies is consistent with their duty executive function.

The petition for review on certiorari is denied for lack of merit.

Freedom of Religion
Ebralinag v. Division Superintendent of Schools of Cebu
Freedom of Expression FACTS:

Guingguing v. People Two special civil actions for certiorari, Mandamus and Prohibition were filed and
Facts:
consolidated raising the same issue whether school children who are members or a
CA affirmed with modification the decision rendered by the RTC finding Guingguing religious sect known as Jehovah’s Witnesses may be expelled from school (both
and Lim guilty of the crime of libel. This is a petition filed by Guingguing alone. This public and private), for refusing, on account of their religious beliefs, to take part in
case originated from the case filed by Torralba. . Complainant was a broadcast the flag ceremony which includes playing (by a band) or singing the Philippine
journalist who handled two programs for radio stations DYLA and DYFX. Lim national anthem, saluting the Philippine flag and reciting the patriotic pledge.

caused the publication of records of criminal cases filed against complainant as All of the petitioners in both (consolidated) cases were expelled from their classes
well as photographs of the latter being arrested. These were published by means of by the public school authorities in Cebu for refusing to salute the flag, sing the
a one-page advertisement paid for by Lim in the Sunday Post, a weekly publication national anthem and recite the patriotic pledge as required by Republic Act No.
edited and published by petitioner. The lower court concluded that the publication 1265 (An Act making flagceremony compulsory in all educational institutions) of
complained of was indeed libelous. The CA modified the penalty imposed but it July 11, 1955 , and by Department Order No. 8 (Rules and Regulations for
affirmed the RTCs finding of guilt.
Conducting the Flag Ceremony in All Educational Institutions)dated July 21, 1955 of
the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS) making the flag ceremony
Issue: Whether or not the publication subject matter of the instant case is indeed compulsory in all educational institutions.

libelous.
Petitioners are Jehovah’s Witnesses believing that by doing these is religious
worship/devotion akin to idolatry against their teachings. They contend that to
Held: Yes. Criminal libel is defined as a public and malicious imputation of a crime, compel transcends constitutional limits and invades protection against official
or of a vice or defect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or control and religious freedom. The respondents relied on the precedence of Gerona
circumstance tending to cause the dishonor, discredit, or contempt of a natural or et al v. Secretary of Education where the Court upheld the explulsions. Gerona
juridical person, or to blacken the memory of one who is dead.
doctrine provides that we are a system of separation of the church and state and
Two major propositions in the prosecution of defamatory remarks were established: the flag is devoid of religious significance and it doesn’t involve any religious
first, that libel against a public person is a greater offense than one directed against ceremony. The children of Jehovah’s Witnesses cannot be exempted from
an ordinary man, and second, that it is immaterial that the libel be true. This Court participation in the flag ceremony. They have no valid right to such exemption.
has accepted the proposition that the actual malice standard governs the Moreover, exemption to the requirement will disrupt school discipline and
prosecution of criminal libel cases concerning public figures.
demoralize the rest of the school population which by far constitutes the great
majority. The freedom of religious belief guaranteed by the Constitution does not
As it has been established that complainant was a public figure, it was incumbent and cannot mean exemption from or non-compliance with reasonable and non-
upon the prosecution to prove actual malice on the part of Lim and petitioner when discriminatory laws, rules and regulations promulgated by competent authority.

the latter published the article subject matter of the complaint. It should thus ISSUE: Whether or not the expulsion of petitioners violated their freedom of
proceed that if the statements made against the public figure are essentially true, religion?

then no conviction for libel can be had.

6
HELD:
In the instant case,  if Anti-Subversion Act is a bill of attainder, it would be totally
YES. The Court held that the expulsion of the petitioners from the school was not unnecessary to charge Communists in court, as the law alone, without more, would
justified.
suffice to secure their punishment. But the undeniable fact is that their guilt still has
Religious freedom is a fundamental right of highest priority and the amplest to be judicially established. The Government has yet to prove at the trial that the
protection among human rights, for it involves the relationship of man to his accused joined the Party knowingly, willfully and by overt acts, and that they joined
Creator. The right to religious profession and worship has a two-fold aspect, the Party, knowing its subversive character and with specific intent to further its
vis., freedom to believe and freedom to act on one’s belief. The first is basic objective. The ingredient of specific intent to pursue the unlawful goals of the
absolute as long as the belief is confined within the realm of thought. The Party must be shown by "overt acts." This constitutes an element of "membership"
second is subject to regulation where the belief is translated into external acts distinct from the ingredient of guilty knowledge. The former requires proof of direct
that affect the public welfare. The only limitation to religious freedom is the participation in the organization's unlawful activities, while the latter requires proof
existence of grave and present danger to public safety, morals, health and of mere adherence to the organization's illegal objectives.

interests where State has right to prevent.

Petitioners stress that while they do not take part in the compulsory flag ceremony, No excessive fines, nor cruel, degrading or inhuman punishment
they do not engage in “external acts” or behavior that would offend their People v. Echegaray
countrymen who believe in expressing their love of country through the observance Facts:

of the flag ceremony. They quietly stand at attention during the flag ceremony to The SC rendered a decision in the instant case affirming the conviction of the
show their respect for the right of those who choose to participate in the solemn accused-appellant for the crime of raping his ten-year old daughter.  The crime
proceedings. Since they do not engage in disruptive behavior, there is no warrant having been committed sometime in April, 1994, during which time Republic Act
for their expulsion.
(R.A.) No. 7659, commonly known as the Death Penalty Law, was already in effect,
accused-appellant was inevitably meted out the supreme penalty of death.

Freedom to associate The accused-appellant timely filed a Motion for Reconsideration which focused on
People v. Ferrer the sinister motive of the victim's grandmother that precipitated the filing of the
Facts of the Case:
alleged false accusation of rape against the accused.  This was dismissed.

On August 6, 1996, accused-appellant discharged the defense counsel, Atty. Julian

On March 5, 1970 a criminal complaint for violation of section 4 of the Anti- R. Vitug, and retained the services of the Anti-Death Penalty Task Force of the Free
Subversion Act was filed against the respondent Feliciano Co in the Court of First Legal Assistance Group of the Philippines.

Instance of Tarlac. The abovenamed accused, feloniously became an officer and/or A supplemental Motion for Reconsideration prepared by the FLAG on behalf of
ranking leader of the Communist Party of the Philippines, an outlawed and illegal accused-appellant.

organization aimed to overthrow the Government of the Philippines by means of
force, violence, deceit, subversion, or any other illegal means for the purpose of
establishing in the Philippines a totalitarian regime and placing the government
under the control and domination of an alien power.
question of the constitutionality of R.A. No. 7659.
In sum, the Supplemental Motion for Reconsideration raises three (3) main issues:
(1) mixed factual and legal matters relating to the trial proceedings and findings; (2)
alleged incompetence of accused-appellant's former counsel; and (3) purely legal

Meanwhile, on May 25, 1970, another criminal complaint was filed with the same
court, sharing the respondent Nilo Tayag and five others with subversion.
Issue: Whether or not Article III, Section 19 (1) absolutely abolished the death
Resolving the constitutional issues raised, the trial court, under the decision of Hon. penalty.

Simeon Ferrer in its resolution of September 15, 1970, declared the statute void on
the grounds that it is a bill of attainder and that it is vague and overboard, and Ratio:

dismissed the informations against the two accused.

One of the indispensable powers of the state is the power to secure society against
The Government appealed.
threatened and actual evil.  Pursuant to this, the legislative arm of government
enacts criminal laws that define and punish illegal acts that may be committed by
Issue: Whether or not, REPUBLIC ACT No. 1700, otherwise known as the Anti- its own subjects, the executive agencies enforce these laws, and the judiciary tries
Subversion Law a bill of attainder.
and sentences the criminals in accordance with these laws.

The opposition to the death penalty uniformly took the form of a constitutional
Held: No.  A bill of attainder is the substitution of judicial determination to a question of whether or not the death penalty is a cruel, unjust, excessive or unusual
legislative determination of guilt.
punishment in violation of the constitutional proscription against cruel and unusual
punishments.

7
Harden- "The penalty complained of is neither cruel, unjust nor excessive.  In Ex-
parte Kemmler, 136 U.S., 436, the United States Supreme Court said that
'punishments are cruel when they involve torture or a lingering death, but the
punishment of death is not cruel, within the meaning of that word as used in the
constitution.  It implies there something inhuman and barbarous, something more
than the mere extinguishment of life.
perception of what crimes are heinous and that the fact of their very heinousness
Limaco- "x x x there are quite a number of people who honestly believe that the
supreme penalty is either morally wrong or unwise or ineffective.  However, as long
as that penalty remains in the statute books, and as long as our criminal law
provides for its imposition in certain cases, it is the duty of judicial officers to
respect and apply the law regardless of their private opinions,"
Oriental, there was clearly, among the hundred or so re-impositionists in the Lower
Munoz- A reading of Section 19 (1) of Article III will readily show that there is really
nothing therein which expressly declares the abolition of the death penalty.  The
provision merely says that the death penalty shall not be imposed unless for
compelling reasons involving heinous crimes the Congress hereafter provides for it
and, if already imposed, shall be reduced to reclusion perpetua.  The language,
while rather awkward, is still plain enough
crimes."
Nothing is more defining of the true content of Article III, Section 19 (1) of the 1987
Constitution than the form in which the legislature took the initiative in re-imposing
the death penalty.
crimes; (2) that Congress specify and penalize by death, only crimes that
The Senate never doubted its power as vested in it by the constitution, to enact
legislation re-imposing the death penalty for compelling reasons involving heinous
crimes.  Pursuant to this constitutional mandate, the Senate proceeded to a two-
step process consisting of:  first, the decision, as a matter of policy, to re-impose
the death penalty or not; and second, the vote to pass on the third reading the bill
re-imposing the death penalty for compelling reasons involving heinous crimes.
and (3) that Congress, in enacting this death penalty bill be singularly
With seventeen (17) affirmative votes and seven (7) negative votes and no
abstention, the Chair declared that the Senate has voted to re-incorporate death as
a penalty in the scale of penalties as provided in the Revised Penal Code. 
must be squarely applied.
The import of this amendment is unmistakable.  By this amendment, the death
penalty was not completely abolished by the 1987 Constitution.  Rather, it merely
suspended the death penalty and gave Congress the discretion to review it at the
propitious time.
human standards of decency or its effects, repercussions, implications and
We have no doubt, therefore, that insofar as the element of heinousness is
concerned, R.A. No. 7659 has correctly identified crimes warranting the mandatory
penalty of death.  As to the other crimes in R.A. No. 7659 punished by reclusion
perpetua to death, they are admittingly no less abominable than those mandatorily
penalized by death.  The proper time to determine their heinousness in
contemplation of law, is when on automatic review, we are called to pass on a
death sentence involving crimes punishable by reclusion perpetua to death under
R.A. No. 7659, with the trial court meting out the death sentence in exercise of
judicial discretion.  This is not to say, however, that the aggravating circumstances
under the Revised Penal Code need be additionally alleged as establishing the
heinousness of the crime for the trial court to validly impose the death penalty in
the crimes under R.A. No. 7659 which are punished with the flexible penalty of
reclusion perpetua to death.
It is immaterial and irrelevant that R.A. No. 7659 cites that there has been an
A studious comparison of the legislative proceedings in the Senate and in the
House of Representatives reveals that, while both Chambers were not wanting of
oppositors to the death penalty, the Lower House seemed less quarrelsome about
the form of the death penalty bill as a special law specifying certain heinous crimes
without regard to the provisions of the Revised Penal Code and more unified in the
involves the compulsion and the imperative to suppress, if not completely
eradicate, their occurrence.  Be it the foregoing general statement of
Representative Sanchez or the following details of the nature of the heinous crimes
enumerated in House Bill No. 62 by Representative Miguel L. Romero of Negros
House, no doubt as to their cause.
Article III, Section 19 (1) of the 1987 Constitution plainly vests in Congress the
power to re-impose the death penalty "for compelling reasons involving heinous
crimes".  This power is not subsumed in the plenary legislative power of Congress,
for it is subject to a clear showing of "compelling reasons involving heinous
The constitutional exercise of this limited power to re-impose the death
penalty entails (1) that Congress define or describe what is meant by heinous
qualify as heinous in accordance with the definition or description set in the
death penalty bill and/or designate crimes punishable by reclusion perpetua to
death in which latter case, death can only be imposed upon the attendance of
circumstances duly proven in court that characterize the crime to be heinous
in accordance with the definition or description set in the death penalty bill;
motivated by "compelling reasons involving heinous crimes."
It is specifically against the foregoing capital crimes that the test of heinousness
We believe, however, that the elements of heinousness and compulsion are
inseparable and are, in fact, interspersed with each other.  Because the subject
crimes are either so revolting and debasing as to violate the most minimum of the
consequences so destructive, destabilizing, debilitating, or aggravating in the
context of our socio-political and economic agenda as a developing nation, these
crimes must be frustrated, curtailed and altogether eradicated. 
Article III, Section 19 (1) of the 1987 Constitution simply states that congress, for
compelling reasons involving heinous crimes, may re-impose the death penalty. 
Nothing in the said provision imposes a requirement that for a death penalty bill to
be valid, a positive manifestation in the form of a higher incidence of crime should
first be perceived and statistically proven following the suspension of the death
penalty.  Neither does the said provision require that the death penalty be resorted
to as a last recourse when all other criminal reforms have failed to abate criminality
in society.
"alarming upsurge of such crimes", for the same was never intended by said law to
8
be the yardstick to determine the existence of compelling reasons involving 3. The name of the offended party; and

heinous crimes.  Fittingly, thus, what R.A. No. 7659 states is that "the Congress, in 4. The approximate time of the commission of the offense, and the place wherein
the interest of justice, public order and rule of law, and the need to rationalize and the offense was committed.

harmonize the penal sanctions for heinous crimes, finds compelling reasons to The 4th element is satisfied. Even though the information indicates that the time of
impose the death penalty for said crimes."
offense was committed “on or about the 5th of July 1991,” such is not fatal to the
prosecution’s cause considering that Section 11 of the same Rule requires a
statement of the precise time only when the same is a material ingredient of the
Corpuz v. People offense.

FACTS:

Accused Corpuz received from complainant Tangcoy pieces of jewelry with an What is the form of demand required in estafa with abuse of confidence?

obligation to sell the same and remit the proceeds of the sale or to return the same Note first that the elements of estafa with abuse of confidence are as follows:

if not sold, after the expiration of 30 days.

(a) that money, goods or other personal property is received by the offender in trust,
The period expired without Corpuz remitting anything to Tangcoy.
or on commission, or for administration, or under any other obligation involving the
When Corpuz and Tangcoy met, Corpuz promised that he will pay, but to no avail.
duty to make delivery of, or to return the same;

Tangcoy filed a case for estafa with abuse of confidence against Corpuz.
(b) that there be misappropriation or conversion of such money or property by the
Corpuz  argued as follows:
offender or denial on his part of such receipt;

a. The proof submitted by Tangcoy (receipt) is inadmissible for being a mere (c) that such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the prejudice of another;
photocopy.
and

b. The information was defective because the date when the jewelry should be (d) that there is a demand made by the offended party on the offender.

returned and the date when crime occurred is different from the one testified to by No specific type of proof is required to show that there was demand. Demand need
Tangcoy.
not even be formal; it may be verbal. The specific word “demand” need not even be
c. Fourth element of estafa or demand is not proved.
used to show that it has indeed been made upon the person charged, since even a
d. Sole testimony of Tangcoy is not sufficient for conviction
mere query as to the whereabouts of the money [in this case, property], would be
 
tantamount to a demand. 

ISSUES and RULING

In Tubb v. People, where the complainant merely verbally inquired about the money
Can the court admit as evidence a photocopy of document without violating the entrusted to the accused, the query was tantamount to a demand.

best evidence rule (only original documents, as a general rule, is admissible as

evidence)?
May a sole witness be considered credible?

Yes.  Note first that settled is the rule that in assessing the credibility of witnesses,
Yes. The established doctrine is that when a party failed to interpose a timely SC gives great respect to the evaluation of the trial court for it had the unique
objection to evidence at the time they were offered in evidence, such objection opportunity to observe the demeanor of witnesses and their deportment on the
shall be considered as waived.
witness stand, an opportunity denied the appellate courts, which merely rely on the
Here, Corpuz never objected to the admissibility of the said evidence at the time it records of the case.

was identified, marked and testified upon in court by Tangcoy. Corpuz also failed to  The assessment by the trial court is even conclusive and binding if not tainted with
raise an objection in his Comment to the prosecution’s formal offer of evidence and arbitrariness or oversight of some fact or circumstance of weight and influence,
even admitted having signed the said receipt.
especially when such finding is affirmed by the CA. Truth is established not by the
Is the date of occurrence of time material in estafa cases with abuse of number of witnesses, but by the quality of their testimonies, for in determining the
confidence?
value and credibility of evidence, the witnesses are to be weighed not numbered.

No.   It is true that the gravamen of the crime of estafa with abuse of confidence
under Article 315, paragraph 1, subparagraph (b) of the RPC is the appropriation or
conversion of money or property received to the prejudice of the owner  and that Non-imprisonment for debt
the time of occurrence is not a material ingredient of the crime. Hence, the Lozano v. Martinez
exclusion of the period and the wrong date of the occurrence of the crime, as FACTS:  Petitioners were charged with violation of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22
reflected in the Information, do not make the latter fatally defective.
(Bouncing Check Law). They moved seasonably to quash the informations on the
Further, the following satisfies the sufficiency of information:
ground that the acts charged did not constitute an offense, the statute being
1. The designation of the offense by the statute;
unconstitutional. The motions were denied by the respondent trial courts, except in
2. The acts or omissions complained of as constituting the offense;

9
one case, wherein the trial court declared the law unconstitutional and dismissed Besides, we must bear in mind that checks can not be categorized as mere
the case. The parties adversely affected thus appealed.
contracts. It is a  commercial instrument  which, in this modem day and age, has
become a convenient substitute for money; it forms part of the banking system and
ISSUES: 
therefore not entirely free from the regulatory power of the state.

1. Does BP 22 is violate the constitutional provision on non-imprisonment due to 3. There is no substance in the claim that the statute in question denies equal
debt?
protection of the laws or is discriminatory, since it penalizes the drawer of the
2. Does it impair freedom of contract?
check, but not the payee. It is contended that the payee is just as responsible for
3. Does it contravene the equal protection clause?
the crime as the drawer of the check, since without the indispensable participation
of the payee by his acceptance of the check there would be no crime. This
HELD:
argument is tantamount to saying that, to give equal protection, the law should
punish both the swindler and the swindled. The petitioners’ posture ignores the
1. The enactment of BP 22 is a  valid exercise of the police power  and is not well-accepted meaning of the clause “equal protection of the laws.” The clause
repugnant to the constitutional inhibition against imprisonment for debt. The does  not preclude classification  of individuals, who may be accorded different
gravamen of the offense punished by BP 22 is the act of making and issuing a treatment under the law as long as the classification is  not unreasonable or
worthless check or a check that is dishonored upon its presentation for payment. It arbitrary.

is  not the non-payment of an obligation  which the law punishes. The law is not
intended or designed to coerce a debtor to pay his debt. The thrust of the law is to
prohibit, under pain of penal sanctions, the making of worthless checks and putting Bill of attainder
them in circulation. Because of its deleterious effects on the public interest, the People v. Ferrer
practice is proscribed by the law. The law punishes the act not as an offense
against property, but an offense against public order.
FACTS:
On March 5, 1970 a criminal complaint for violation of section 4 of the Anti-
Unlike a promissory note, a check is not a mere undertaking to pay an amount of Subversion Act was filed against the respondent Feliciano Co, as he became an
money. It is an order addressed to a bank and partakes of a representation that the officer of the Communist Party of the Philippines, an outlawed and illegal
drawer has funds on deposit against which the check is drawn, sufficient to ensure organization aimed to overthrow the government.

payment upon its presentation to the bank. There is therefore an element of

certainty or assurance that the instrument will be paid upon presentation. For this Co moved to quash on the ground that the Anti-Subversion Act is a bill of attainder.

reason, checks have become widely accepted as a medium of payment in trade

and commerce. Although not legal tender, checks have come to be perceived as
convenient substitutes for currency in commercial and financial transactions. The
basis or foundation of such perception is confidence. If such confidence is shaken,
the usefulness of checks as currency substitutes would be greatly diminished or
may become nil. Any practice therefore tending to destroy that confidence should
Meanwhile, on May 25, 29170, another criminal complaint was filed with before Nilo
Tayag and fiver others with subversion, as they were tagged as officers of the
KABATAANG MAKABAYAN, a subversive organization instigating and inciting the
people to organize and unite for the purpose of overthrowing the Government of
the Republic of the Philippines.

be deterred for the proliferation of worthless checks can only create havoc in trade
circles and the banking community.
Tayag also moved to quash the complaint on the grounds that (1) it is a bill of
attainder; (2) it is vague; (3) it embraces more than one subject not expressed in the
The effects of the issuance of a worthless check transcends the private interests of title thereof; and (4) it denied him the equal protection of the laws.

the parties directly involved in the transaction and touches the interests of the
community at large. The mischief it creates is not only a wrong to the payee or
holder, but also an injury to the public. The harmful practice of putting valueless ISSUE:  Whether RA 1700 otherwise known as Anti-Subversion Act is a bill of
commercial papers in circulation, multiplied a thousand fold, can very wen pollute attainder.

the channels of trade and commerce, injure the banking system and eventually hurt
the welfare of society and the public interest.
RULING:  No, the Supreme Court said it is only when a statute applies either to
named individuals or to easily ascertainable members of a group in such a way as
2. The freedom of contract which is constitutionally protected is freedom to enter to inflict punishment on them without a judicial trial does it become a bill of
into “lawful” contracts. Contracts which contravene public policy are not lawful. attainder.

10
 German who does Application Support for Tradition Financial Services Ltd. in
In this case, when the act is viewed in its actual operation, it will be seen that it London (Tradition London).

does not specify the Communist Party of the Philippines or the member thereof for Tradition Group and Tullett are competitors in the inter-dealer broking business.

the purpose of punishment. What it does is simple to declare the party to be an Sometime in August 2008, in line with Tradition Group's motive of expansion and
organized conspiracy for the overthrow of the Government for the purposes of the diversification in Asia, petitioners Ient and Schulze were tasked with the
prohibition.
establishment of a Philippine subsidiary of Tradition Asia to be known as Tradition
Financial Services Philippines, Inc. (Tradition Philippines).[9] Tradition Philippines
The term "Communist Part of the Philippines" issues solely for definitional was registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on September
purposes. In fact the act applies not only to the Communist Party of the Philippines 19, 2008

but also to "any organisation having the same purpose and their successors." Its Jaime Villalon (Villalon), who was formerly President and Managing Director of
focus is not on individuals but on conduct.
Tullett

Mercedes Chuidian (Chuidian)... formerly a member of Tullett's Board of Directors

Ex-post facto laws John and Jane Does

US v. Diaz Conde Issues:

Facts of the Case: On December 30, 1915, Bartolome Oliveros and Engracio Liaco On October 15, 2008, Tullett, through one of its directors, Gordon Buchan, filed a
borrowed from Vicente Diaz-Conde and Apolinaria R. De Conde the sum of P300. Complaint-Affidavit... against the officers/employees of the Tradition Group for
They obligated themselves to pay the defendants 5% per month, payable within violation of the Corporation Code.

the first ten days beginning on January 1916.

Villalon and Chuidian were charged with using their former positions in Tullett to
On May 1, 1916, Act No. 2655 (Usury Law) took effect.
sabotage said company by orchestrating the mass resignation of its entire
brokering staff in order for them to join Tradition Philippines.

Issue: Whether or not the defendants violated Act No. 2655.

With respect to Villalon, Tullett claimed that the former held several meetings
between August 22 to 25, 2008 with members of Tullett's Spot Desk and brokering
Held: No. If a contract is legal at its inception, it cannot be rendered illegal by any staff in order to convince them to leave the company. Villalon likewise supposedly
subsequent legislation. The obligation of the contract is the law which binds the intentionally failed to renew the contracts of some of the brokers. On August 25,
parties to perform their agreement if it is not contrary to the law of the land, morals 2008, a meeting was also allegedly held in Howzat Bar in Makati City where
or public order. That law must govern and control the contract in every aspect in petitioners and a lawyer of Tradition Philippines were present. At said meeting, the
which it is intended to bear upon it, whether it affect its validity, construction, or brokers of complainant Tullett were purportedly induced, en masse, to sign
discharge.
employment contracts with Tradition Philippines and were allegedly instructed by
In the present case, making Act No. 2655 applicable to the act complained of Tradition Philippines' lawyer as to how they should file their resignation letters.

which had been done before the law was adopted, a criminal act, would give it an On August 26, 2008, Villalon allegedly informed Mr. Barry Dennahy, Chief Operating
ex post facto operation.
Officer of Tullett Prebon in the Asia-Pacific, through electronic mail that all of
Tullett's brokers had resigned.

An ex post facto law, is a law that makes an action, done before the passage of the Subsequently, on September 1, 2008, in another meeting with Ient and Tradition
law, and which was innocent when done, criminal. Ex post facto laws are absolutely Philippines' counsel, indemnity contracts in favor of the resigning employees were
prohibited unless its retroactive effect is favorable to the defendant.
purportedly distributed by Tradition Philippines.

According to Tullett, respondents Villalon and Chuidian... violated Sections 31 and

The decision of the lower court is revoked and the complaint dismissed.
34 of the Corporation Code which made them criminally liable under Section 144.
As for petitioners Ient and Schulze, Tullett asserted that they conspired with Villalon
and Chuidian in the latter's acts of disloyalty against the company.

Construction and interpretation Villalon and Chuidian filed their respective Counter-Affivadits.

Villalon claimed that the DOJ had previously proclaimed that Section 31 is not a
1. Liberally in favor of the accused penal provision of law but only the basis of a cause of action for civil liability. Thus,
Ient v. Tullett Prebon he concluded that there was no probable cause that he violated the Corporation
Facts:
Code nor was the charge of conspiracy properly substantiated.

Petitioner Ient is a British national and the Chief Financial Officer of Tradition Asia Chuidian claimed that she left Tullett simply to seek greener pastures.

Pacific Pte. Ltd. (Tradition Asia) in Singapore.[4] Petitioner Schulze is a Filipino/

11
She argued that Section 144 as a penal provision should be strictly construed every violation of that law. Consequently, there is no compelling reason for the
against the State and liberally in favor of the accused and Tullett has failed to Court to construe Section 144 as similarly employing the term "penalized" or
substantiate its charge of bad faith on her part.
"penalty" solely in terms of criminal liability.

In her Counter-Affidavit,[17] petitioner Schulze denied the charges leveled against The Corporation Code was intended as a regulatory measure, not primarily as a
her.
penal statute. Sections 31 to 34 in particular were intended to impose exacting
she concluded that a charge of conspiracy which has for its basis Article 8 of the standards of fidelity on corporate officers and directors but without unduly
Revised Penal Code cannot be made applicable to the provisions of the impeding them in the discharge of their work with concerns of litigation.

Corporation Code.

Ient alleged in his Counter-Affidavit that the charges against him were merely filed 2. Spanish text of the RPC prevails over the English Text
to harass Tradition Philippines and prevent it from penetrating the Philippine People v. Abilong
market.
FACTS:

Tullett filed a petition for review with the Secretary of Justice to assail the foregoing That on or about the 17th day of September, 1947, in the City of Manila,
resolution of the Acting City Prosecutor of Makati City.
Philippines, Florentino Abilong, the accused, being then a convict

Ient and Schulze moved for reconsideration of the foregoing Resolution by the sentenced and ordered to serve destierro during which he should not
Secretary of Justice.
enter any place within the radius of 100 kilometers from the City of Manila for

Ient and Schulze brought the matter to the Court of Appeals via a petition for attempted robbery, evaded the service of said sentence by going beyond
certiorari under Rule 65
the limits made against him and commit vagrancy.

The main bone of disagreement among the parties in this case is the applicability of
Section 144 of the Corporation Code to Sections 31 and 34 of the same statute ISSUE:

such that criminal liability attaches to violations of Sections 31 and 34.

Is Art. 157 applicable to sentence of destierro?

Ruling:

In a Resolution... dated February 17, 2009, State Prosecutor Cresencio F. Delos HELD:

Trinos, Jr. (Prosecutor Delos Trinos), Acting City Prosecutor of Makati City, Yes.  One evades the service of his sentence of destierro when he enters the
dismissed the criminal complaints.
prohibited area specified in the judgment of conviction.

On the issue of conspiracy, Prosecutor Delos Trinos found that since Villalon and
Chuidian did not commit any acts in violation of Sections 31 and 34 of the Counsel for the appellant contends that a person like the accused evading a
Corporation Code, the charge of conspiracy against Schulze and Ient had no basis.
sentence of destierro is not criminally liable under the provisions of the Revised
Dated April 23, 2009, then Secretary of Justice Raul M. Gonzalez reversed and set Penal Code, particularly article 157 of the said Code for the reason that said article
aside Prosecutor Delos Trinos's resolution and directed the latter to file the 157 refers only to persons who are imprisoned in a penal institution and completely
information for violation of Sections 31 and 34 in relation to Section 144 of the deprived of their liberty. He bases his contention on the word "imprisonment" used
Corporation Code against Villalon, Chuidian, Harvey, Schulze, and Ient before the in the English text of said article

proper court.

Undeniably, respondents Villalon, Chuidian and Harvey occupied positions of high We agree with the Solicitor General that inasmuch as the Revised Penal Code was
responsibility and great trust as they were members of the board of directors and originally approved and enacted in Spanish, the Spanish text governs. It is clear
corporate officers of complainant.
that the word "imprisonment" used in the English text is a wrong or erroneous
the consolidated petitions are GRANTED
translation of the phrase "sufriendo privacion de libertad" used in the Spanish text.
Principles:
It is equally clear that although the Solicitor General impliedly admits destierro as
The provision of Section 144 of the Corporation Code is also applicable in the case not constituting imprisonment, it is a  deprivation of liberty, though partial, in the
at bar as the penal provision provided therein is made applicable to all violations of sense that as in the present case, the appellant by his sentence of destierro was
the Corporation Code, not otherwise specifically penalized.
deprived of the liberty to enter the City of Manila.

After a meticulous consideration of the arguments presented by both sides, the

Court comes to the conclusion that there is textual ambiguity in Section 144; In conclusion we find and hold that the appellant is guilty of evasion of service of
moreover, such ambiguity remains even after an examination of its legislativ... e sentence under article 157 of the Revised Penal Code (Spanish text), in that during
history and the use of other aids to statutory construction, necessitating the the period of his sentence of destierro by virtue of final judgment wherein he was
application of the rule of lenity in the case at bar.
prohibited from entering the City of Manila, he entered said City. 

There is no provision in the Corporation Code using similarly emphatic language

that evinces a categorical legislative intent to treat as a criminal offense each and 3.Retroactive application when favorable to the accused
12
4. Prescribed but undeserved penalties
Cahulogan v. People
Facts: On April 18, 2011, an Information6  was filed before the RTC charging
petitioner with the crime of Fencing, the accusatory portion of which reads:
That on or about January 14, 2011 [,] at about 4:00 o'clock [sic] in the afternoon, at
Bugo, Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above-named accused, without the knowledge and consent
of the owner thereof, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously buy,
receive, possess, keep, acquire, conceal, sell or dispose of, or in any manner deal,
Two Hundred Ten (210) cases of Coca Cola products worth Php52,476.00 owned
by and belonging to the offended party  Johnson Tan  which accused know, or
should be known to him, to have been derived from the proceeds of the crime of
Theft, to the damage and prejudice of said owner in the aforesaid sum of
Php52,476.00.
Aggrieved, petitioner appealed16 to the CA.
Contrary to Presidential Decree No. 1612, otherwise known as Anti-Fencing Law of
1979.7
The prosecution alleged that private complainant Johnson Tan (Tan), a
businessman engaged in transporting Coca-Cola products, instructed his truck
driver and helper, Braulio Lopez (Lopez) and Loreto Lariosa (Lariosa), to deliver 210
cases of Coca-Cola products (subject items) worth P52,476.00 to Demins Store.
The next day, Tan discovered that contrary to his instructions, Lopez and Lariosa
delivered the subject items to petitioner's store. Tan then went to petitioner and
informed him that the delivery to his store was a mistake and that he was pulling
out the subject items. However, petitioner refused, claiming that he bought the
same from Lariosa for P50,000.00, but could not present any receipt evidencing
such transaction. Tan insisted that he had the right to pull out the subject items as
Lariosa had no authority to sell the same to petitioner, but the latter was adamant in
retaining such items. Fearing that his contract with Coca-Cola will be terminated as
a result of the wrongful delivery, and in order to minimize losses, Tan negotiated
with petitioner to instead deliver to him P20,000.00 worth of empty bottles with
cases, as evidenced by their Agreement8 dated January 18, 2011. Nonetheless, Tan
felt aggrieved over the foregoing events, thus, prompting him to secure an
authorization to file cases from Coca-Cola and charge petitioner with the crime of
Fencing. He also claimed to have charged Lariosa with the crime of Theft but he
had no update as to the status thereof.9
"Time and again, it has been held that an appeal in criminal cases opens the entire
Upon arraignment, petitioner pleaded not guilty,10  but chose not to present any
evidence in his defense. Rather, he merely submitted his memorandum,
11  maintaining that the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable
doubt.12
appealed from, increase the penalty, and cite the proper provision of the penal
The RTC Ruling
In a Judgment13  dated October 4, 2013, the RTC found petitioner guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of the crime charged, and accordingly, sentenced him to suffer
the penalty of imprisonment for the indeterminate period often (10) years and one
(1) day of prision mayor, as minimum, to fifteen (15) years of reclusion temporal, as
maximum.14
The RTC found that the prosecution had successfully established the presence of
all the elements of the crime of Fencing, considering that Lariosa stole the subject
items from his employer, Tan, and that petitioner was found to be in possession of
the same. The RTC noted that under the circumstances of the case, petitioner
would have been forewarned that the subject items came from an illegal source
since Lariosa: (a) sold to him the subject items at a discount and without any
corresponding delivery and official receipts; and (b) did not demand that such items
be replaced by empty bottles, a common practice in purchases of soft drink
products.15
The CA Ruling
In a Decision17  dated November 6, 2015, the CA affirmed petitioner's conviction.
18  It held that Lariosa's act of selling the subject items to petitioner without the
authority and consent from Tan clearly constituted theft. As such, petitioner's
possession of the stolen items constituted  prima facie  evidence of Fencing - a
presumption which he failed to rebut.19
Undaunted, petitioner moved for reconsideration20 which was, however, denied in a
Resolution21 dated June 8, 2016; hence, this petition.
The Issue Before the Court
The issue for the Court's resolution is whether or not the CA correctly upheld
petitioner's conviction for the crime of Fencing.
The Court's Ruling
The petition is without merit.
case for review, and it is the duty of the reviewing tribunal to correct, cite, and
appreciate errors in the appealed judgment whether they are assigned or
unassigned. The appeal confers the appellate court full jurisdiction over the case
and renders such court competent to examine records, revise the judgment
law."22
Guided by this consideration, the Court finds no reason to overturn petitioner's
conviction for the crime of Fencing.
13
Section 2 of PD 1612 defines Fencing as "the act of any person who, with intent to
gain for himself or for another, shall buy, receive, possess, keep, acquire, conceal,
sell or dispose of, or shall buy and sell, or in any other manner deal in any article,
item, object or anything of value which he knows, or should be known to him, to
have been derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft."23 The same
Section also states that a Fence "includes any person, firm, association,
corporation or partnership or other organization who/which commits the act of
fencing."24
The essential elements of the crime of fencing are as follows: (a) a crime of robbery
or theft has been committed; (b) the accused, who is not a principal or an
accomplice in the commission of the crime of robbery or theft, buys, receives,
possesses, keeps, acquires, conceals, sells or disposes, or buys and sells, or in
any manner deals in any article, item, object or anything of value, which has been
derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft; (c) the accused knew or
should have known that the said article, item, object or anything of value has been
derived from the proceeds of the crime of robbery or theft; and (d) there is, on the
part of one accused, intent to gain for oneself or for another.25 Notably, Fencing is
a  malum prohibitum, and PD 1612 creates a  prima facie  presumption of Fencing
from evidence of possession by the accused of any good, article, item, object or
anything of value, which has been the subject of robbery or theft; and prescribes a
higher penalty based on the value of the property.26
effects under the system of penalties native to the Code would also necessarily
In this case, the courts  a quo  correctly found that the prosecution was able to
establish beyond reasonable doubt all the elements of the crime of Fencing, as it
was shown that: (a) Lariosa sold to petitioner the subject items without authority
and consent from his employer, Tan, for his own personal gain, and abusing the
trust and confidence reposed upon him as a truck helper;27 (b) petitioner bought the
subject items from Lariosa and was in possession of the same; (c) under the
circumstances, petitioner should have been forewarned that the subject items
came from an illegal source, as his transaction with Lariosa did not have any
accompanying delivery and official receipts, and that the latter did not demand that
such items be replaced with empty bottles, contrary to common practice among
dealers of soft drinks;28 and (d) petitioner's intent to gain was made evident by the
fact that he bought the subject items for just P50,000.00, lower than their value in
the amount of P52,476.00. "[T]he Court finds no reason to deviate from the factual
findings of the trial court, as affirmed by the CA, as there is no indication that it
overlooked, misunderstood or misapplied the surrounding facts and circumstances
of the case. In fact, the trial court was in the best position to assess and determine
the credibility of the witnesses presented by both parties, and hence, due
deference should be accorded to the same."29
the latter as it provides for harsher penalties:
Anent the proper penalty to be imposed on petitioner, pertinent portions of Section
3 of PD 1612 read:
penalty applicable to an accessory is obviously light under the rules prescribed in
Section 3. Penalties. - Any person guilty of fencing shall be punished as hereunder
indicated:
forth in Article 60 thereof. Noting, however, the reports from law enforcement
a) The penalty of  prision mayor, if the value of the property involved is more than
12,000 pesos but not exceeding 22,000 pesos; if the value of such property
exceeds the latter sum, the penalty provided in this paragraph shall be imposed in
its maximum period, adding one year for each additional 10,000 pesos; but the
total penalty which may be imposed shall not exceed twenty years. In such cases,
the penalty shall be termed reclusion temporal and the accessory penalty pertaining
thereto provided in the Revised Penal Code shall also be imposed.
x x x x
Notably, while the crime of Fencing is defined and penalized by a special penal law,
the penalty provided therein is taken from the nomenclature in the Revised Penal
Code (RPC). In  Peralta v. People,30  the Court discussed the proper treatment of
penalties found in special penal laws vis-a-vis Act No. 4103,31otherwise known as
the "Indeterminate Sentence Law," viz.:
Meanwhile, Sec. 1 of Act No. 4103, otherwise known as the Indeterminate
Sentence Law (ISL), provides that if the offense is ostensibly punished under a
special law, the minimum and maximum prison term of the indeterminate sentence
shall not be beyond what the special law prescribed. Be that as it may, the Court
had clarified in the landmark ruling of People v. Simon that the situation is different
where although the offense is defined in a special law, the penalty therefor is taken
from the technical nomenclature in the RPC. Under such circumstance, the legal
apply to the special law.32
Otherwise stated, if the special penal law adopts the nomenclature of the penalties
under the RPC, the ascertainment of the indeterminate sentence will be based on
the rules applied for those crimes punishable under the RPC.33
Applying the foregoing and considering that there are neither mitigating nor
aggravating circumstances present in this case, the Court finds it proper to
sentence petitioner to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for an indeterminate
period of four (4) years, two (2) months, and one (1) day of prision correccional, as
minimum, to fifteen (15) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum.
At this point, the Court notes that as may be gleaned from its whereas clauses, PD
1612 was enacted in order to provide harsher penalties to those who would acquire
properties which are proceeds of the crimes of Robbery or Theft, who prior to the
enactment of said law, were punished merely as accessories after the fact of the
said crimes.34 This rationale was echoed in Dizon-Pamintuan v. People35 where the
Court held that while a Fence may be prosecuted either as an accessory of
Robbery/Theft or a principal for Fencing, there is a preference for the prosecution of
Before P.D. No. 1612, a fence could only be prosecuted for and held liable as
an accessory, as the term is defined in Article 19 of the Revised Penal Code. The
Articles 53, 55, and 57 of the Revised Penal Code, subject to the qualification set
agencies that "there is rampant robbery and thievery of government and private
14
properties" and that "such robbery and thievery have become profitable on the part
of the lawless elements because of the existence of ready buyers, commonly
known as fence, of stolen properties," P.D. No. 1612 was enacted to "impose heavy
penalties on persons who profit by the effects of the crimes of robbery and theft."
Evidently, the accessory in the crimes of robbery and theft could be prosecuted as
such under the Revised Penal Code or under P.D. No. 1612. However, in the latter
case, he ceases to be a mere accessory but becomes a  principal  in the crime of
fencing. Elsewise stated, the crimes of robbery and theft, on the one hand, and
fencing, on the other, are separate and distinct offenses. The state may thus
choose to prosecute him either under the Revised Penal Code or P.D. No. 1612,
although the preference for the latter would seem inevitable considering that
fencing is a malum prohibitum, and P.D. No. 1612 creates a presumption of fencing
and prescribes a higher penalty based on the value of the property.36
5. Suppletory application of RPC to Special Penal Laws
While PD 1612 penalizes those who acquire properties which are proceeds of
Robbery or Theft, its prescribed penalties are similar to the latter crime in that they
are largely dependent on the value of the said properties. In fact, a reading of
Section 3 of PD 1612 and Article 309 of the RPC (which provides for the prescribed
penalties for the crime of Theft) reveals that both provisions use the same
graduations of property value to determine the prescribed penalty; in particular, if
the value: (a) exceeds P22,000.00, with additional penalties for each additional
P10,000.00; (b) is more than P12,000.00 but not exceeding P22,000.00; (c) is more
than P6,000.00 but not exceeding P12,000.00; (d) is more than P200.00 but not
exceeding P6,000.00; (e) is more than P50.00 but not exceeding P200.00; and (f)
does not exceed P5.00. However, with the recent enactment of Republic Act No.
10951,37 which adjusted the values of the property and damage on which various
penalties are based, taking into consideration the present value of money, as
opposed to its archaic values when the RPC was enacted in 1932,38 the graduation
of values in Article 309 was substantially amended, without any concomitant
adjustment for PD 1612. This development would then result in instances where a
Fence, which is theoretically a mere accessory to the crime of Robbery/Theft, will
be punished more severely than the principal of such latter crimes. This
incongruence in penalties therefore, impels an adjustment of penalties.
is a special law; moreover, she is not a signatory of the checks and had no
However, while it may be the most expeditious approach, a short cut by judicial fiat
is a dangerous proposition, lest the Court dare trespass on prohibited judicial
legislation.39  As the Court remains mindful of the fact that the determination of
penalties is a policy matter that belongs to the legislative branch of the
government, it finds it prudent to instead, furnish both Houses of Congress, as well
as the President of the Republic of the Philippines, through the Department of
Justice, pursuant to Article 540  of the RPC, copies of this ruling in order to alert
them on the aforestated incongruence of penalties, all with the hope of arriving at
the proper solution to this predicament.
of the second sentence in Article 10, are applicable to special laws.  It submits
WHEREFORE, the petition is DENIED. The Decision dated November 6, 2015 and
the Resolution dated June 8, 2016 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No.
01126-MIN finding petitioner Ireneo Cahulogan  GUILTY  beyond reasonable doubt
of the crime of Fencing defined and penalized under Presidential Decree No. 1612,
otherwise known as the "Anti-Fencing Law," are AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION,
sentencing him to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for the indeterminate period of
four (4) years, two (2) months, and one (1) day of prision correccional, as minimum,
to fifteen (15) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum.
Pursuant to Article 5 of the Revised Penal Code, let a copy of this Decision be
furnished the President of the Republic of the Philippines, through the Department
of Justice, the President of the Senate, and the Speaker of the House of
Representatives.
SO ORDERED.
Ladonga v. People
FACTS: 
Evangelina and Adronico Ladonga and spouse, conspiring and knowing fully well
that they did not have sufficient funds deposited with the United Coconut Planters
Bank (UCPB), drew and issue UCPB Check No. 284743 postdated July 7, 1990 in
the amount of P9,075.55), payable to Alfredo Oculam, and thereafter, without
informing the latter that they did not have sufficient funds deposited with the bank
to cover up the amount of the check, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and
feloniously pass on, indorse, give and deliver the said check to Alfredo by way of
rediscounting of the aforementioned checks; however, upon presentation of the
check to the drawee bank for encashment, the same was dishonored for the reason
that the account of the accused had already been closed, to the damage and
prejudice of Alfredo.
The RTC rendered a joint decision finding the Ladonga spouses guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of violating B.P. Blg. 22.  Adronico applied for probation which
was granted. On the other hand, petitioner brought the case to the Court of
Appeals, arguing that the RTC erred in finding her criminally liable for conspiring
with her husband as the principle of conspiracy is inapplicable to B.P. Blg. 22 which
participation in the issuance thereof.
ISSUE:  
a.) Whether conspiracy is applicable in violations of Batas Pambansa Bilang 22, by
invoking art. 10 of RPC?
b.) Whether or not the cases cited by the CA in affirming in toto the conviction of
petitioner as conspirator applying the suppletory character of the RPC to special
laws like BP 22 is applicable?
RULING:  
A.) YES.  Some provisions of the Revised Penal Code, especially with the addition
that  B.P. Blg. 22  does not provide any prohibition regarding the applicability in a
suppletory character of the provisions of the Revised Penal Code to it.
Article 10 of the RPC reads as follows: ART. 10.  Offenses not subject to the
provisions of this Code. – Offenses which are or in the future may be punishable
under special laws are not subject to the provisions of this Code.  This Code shall
15
be supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should specially provide the Simon then seek the reversal of the judgement

contrary.

The article is composed of two clauses.  The first provides that offenses which in ISSUE:

the future are made punishable under special laws are not subject to the provisions Was the conviction of Simon correct?

of the RPC, while the second makes the RPC supplementary to such laws

B.)    B.P. Blg. 22  does not expressly proscribe the suppletory application of the RULING:

provisions of the RPC.  Thus, in the absence of contrary provision in B.P. Blg. 22, To sustain a conviction for selling prohibited drugs, the sale must be clearly and
the general provisions of the RPC which, by their nature, are necessarily applicable, unmistakably established. To sell means to give, whether for money or any other
may be applied suppletorily.  Indeed, in the recent case of Yu vs. People the Court material consideration. It must, therefore, be established beyond doubt that
applied suppletorily the provisions on subsidiary imprisonment under Article 39 of appellant actually sold and delivered two tea bags of marijuana dried leaves to Sgt.
the RPC to B.P. Blg. 22.
Lopez, who acted as the poseur-buyer, in exchange for two twenty-peso bills.

The suppletory application of the principle of conspiracy in this case is analogous After careful review, the Court held that there were 2 tea bags of marijuana that was
to the application of the provision on principals under Article 17 in U.S. vs. Ponte.  sold and there were 2 other tea bags of marijuana confiscated. Thus, Simon should
For once conspiracy or action in concert to achieve a criminal design is shown, the be charged of selling for the 2 tea bags of marijuana only.

act of one is the act of all the conspirators, and the precise extent or modality of However, there is an overlapping error in the provisions on the penalty of reclusion
participation of each of them becomes secondary, since all the conspirators are perpetua  by reason of its dual imposition, that is, as the maximum of the penalty
principals.  BUT In the present case, the prosecution failed to prove that petitioner where the marijuana is less than 750 grams, and also as the minimum of the
performed any overt act in furtherance of the alleged conspiracy.  Conspiracy must penalty where the marijuana involved is 750 grams or more. The same error has
be established, not by conjectures, but by positive and conclusive evidence. Thus, been committed with respect to the other prohibited and regulated drugs provided
Petitioner Evangeline Ladonga is ACQUITTED of the charges against her under B.P. in said Section 20. To harmonize such conflicting provisions in order to give effect
Blg. 22  for failure of the prosecution to prove her guilt beyond reasonable doubt.  to the whole law, the court hereby hold that the penalty to be imposed where the
No pronouncement as to costs.
quantity of the drugs involved is less than the quantities stated in the first
paragraph shall range from  prision correccional  to  reclusion temporal, and
People v. Simon not reclusion perpetua. This is also concordant with the fundamental rule in criminal
FACTS:
law that all doubts should be construed in a manner favorable to the accused.

Accused Martin Simon was charged with a violation of Section 4, Article II of
Republic Act No. 6425 or the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972. He sold tea bags of
marijuana to a Narcotics Command (NARCOM) poseur-buyer. The confiscated 4
tea bags, weighing a total of 3.8 grams, when subjected to laboratory examination,
were found positive for marijuana.
provisions of the amended Section 20 of said law to arrive at  prision
Simon denied the accusation against him, claiming that on the day of question, he
was picked up by the police at their house while watching TV. He was told that he
was a pusher so he attempted to alight from the jeep but he was handcuffed
instead. When they finally reached the camp, he was ordered to sign some papers
and, when he refused, he was boxed in the stomach eight or nine times by Sgt.
Pejoro. He was then compelled to affix his signature and fingerprints on the
documents presented to him. He denied knowledge of the marked money or the 4
teabags of dried marijuana leaves, and insisted that the marked money came from
the pocket of Pejoro. Moreover, the reason why he vomited blood was because of
the blows he suffered at the hands of Pejoro.
prescribed by the Code for the offense.”
The court held that Republic Act No. 6425, as now amended by Republic Act No.
7659, has unqualifiedly adopted the penalties under the Revised Penal Code in
their technical terms, hence with their technical signification and effects. In fact, for
purposes of determining the maximum of said sentence, the court have applied the
correccional and Article 64 of the Code to impose the same in the medium period.
Such offense, although provided for in a special law, is now in effect punished by
and under the Revised Penal Code. Correlatively, to determine the minimum, the
court applied first part of the aforesaid Section 1 which directs that “in imposing a
prison sentence for an offense punished by the Revised Penal Code, or its
amendments, the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence
the  maximum  term of which shall be that which, in view of the attending
circumstances, could be properly imposed  under the rules of said Code,  and
the  minimum  which shall be within the range of the  penalty next lower to that

Dr. Evelyn Gomez-Aguas, a resident physician of Romana Pangan District Hospital, Thus, in the case at bar, appellant should be begrudged the benefit of a minimum
declared that she treated appellant for three days due to abdominal pain, but her sentence within the range of  arresto mayor,  the penalty next lower to  prision
examination revealed that the cause for this ailment was appellant’s peptic ulcer. correccional  which is the maximum range have fixed through the application of
She did not see any sign of slight or serious external injury, abrasion or contusion Articles 61 and 71 of the Revised Penal Code. For, with fealty to the law, the court
on his body.
may set the minimum sentence at 6 months of arresto mayor, instead of 6 months
Simon was sentenced to suffer the penalty of life imprisonment, to pay a fine of and 1 day of prision correccional.

twenty thousand pesos and to pay the costs.

16
 Facts: Romana Silvestre, wife of Domingo Joaquin by her second marriage,
cohabited with her codefendant Martin Atienza.
Mendoza v. People On May 16,  1930,... Domingo Joaquin, filed with the justice of the peace for that
FACTS:
municipality, a sworn complaint for adultery... the two defendants begged... the
The trial court convicted accused Danilo Mendoza, petitioner herein, for homicide municipal president  of Paombong... to speak to the complainant... urging  him to
wherein the victim was Alfonso Nisperos. Petitioner does not seek acquittal but withdraw the complaint

merely prays that the privileged mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense Domingo Joaquin acceded to it... and... the justice of the peace of  Paombong
be considered in his favor.
dismissed the adultery case commenced against the accused

Herein petitioner narrated the antecedent facts as follows:

About November 20, 1930, the accused Romana Silvestre met her son by her
That during a drinking spree, he had an altercation with a certain Willy Baluyot.
former marriage,  Nicolas de la Cruz, in the barrio of Santo Nino, and under pretext
Feeling bad, he slammed the table with a pitcher containing water. Then he left.
of asking him for some nipa  leaves

At a distance, he heard the victim calling him. When they were close to each other, On the night of November 25,  1930, while Nicolas de la Cruz and his wife, Antonia
the victim blamed him for his conduct. He apologized but the victim started de  la Cruz, were... gathered together

stabbing him with a knife.

Martin Atienza told said couple to take their furniture out of the house because he
He tried to parry the attack as he retreated. That moment, his back was against the was going to set fire to  it.

wall. He then grappled for the knife which he was able to wrench from the victim. Upon being asked... why he  wanted to set fire to the house, he... answered that
They rolled over on the ground. At that point, he repeatedly stabbed the victim with that was the  only way he could be revenged upon the people of Masocol who, he
his own knife.
said, had instigated the charge of adultery against him and his codefendant

On the other the hand, the prosecution, to prove that the petitioner was the Alarmed at  what Martin Atienza had said, the couple left the  house at once to
aggressor presented Loreta Nisperos, mother of the victim.
communicate with the barrio lieutenant,  Buenaventura Ania,... as to what they had
Loreta said:
just heard Martin  Atienza  say; but they had hardly gone a hundred arms' length
Alfonso Nisperos, stepped out of their house. When he returned, he told her that he when they heard cries of "Fire!  Fire!" Turning back they saw their home in flames

saw a person near their cow tied to a tamarind tree.

The  fire destroyed ... about  forty-eight houses.

Alfonso then went out again to check on the person he saw. After a short while, Tomas Santiago... and Tomas Gonzalez,... saw Martin Atienza... going away from
Loreta suddenly heard Alfonso screaming “Mother, help me!”
the house where the fire started, and Romana Silvestre leaving it.

She rushed to her son. She found him lying, face down, with petitioner on top of With respect to the accused-appellant Romana Silvestre, the only evidence  of
him, stabbing him with a knife.
record against her  are:... that Romana Silvestre listened to  her co-defendant's
She then approached petitioner, pleading to him not to kill her son. But instead of threat without raising a protest, and did not give the  alarm when the latter... set  fire
heeding her plea, he suddenly attacked her with his knife, hitting her right arm. to the house.  Upon the strength of these  facts, the court below found her guilty of
Petitioner then dashed away from the scene.
arson as accomplice.

ISSUE:
Issues:

Whether or not the petitioner is entitled to the privileged mitigating circumstance of which previous or simultaneous acts complicate Romana Silvestre in the crime of
incomplete self-defense
arson  committed by her co-defendant Martin  Atienza?

RULING:
Ruling:

No, the petitioner cannot be accorded with privileged mitigating circumstance of Article 14 of  the Penal  Code,  considered  in connection with article 13,  defines
incomplete self-defense.
an  accomplice to be one who does not take a direct part in the commission of the
Unlawful aggression on the part of the victim should be clearly established to make act, who does not force or induce other to commit it, nor cooperates in the...
the claim of self-defense, whether complete or incomplete, acceptable.
commission of the act by another act without which it would not have been
In the case at bar, the court found that there was no unlawful aggression on the accomplished, yet cooperates in the execution of the act by previous or 
part of the victim. This element being absent, petitioner cannot be accorded the simultaneous actions

privileged mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense.

In the case of the accused-appellant Romana Silvestre, there is no evidence of
moral or... material cooperation, and none of an agreement to commit the crime in
question. Her mere presence and silence while they are simultaneous acts, do not
II. General Principles constitute cooperation,  for it does not appear that they  encouraged or  nerved
Martin Atienza to commit the... crime of arson; and as for her failure to give the
Omission alarm, that being a subsequent act it does not make her liable as an accomplice.

People v. Silvestre and Atienza

17
Mere passive presence at the scene of another's crime, mere  silence and  failure to Contention of the Accused: According to Teresa, there was no illicit affair between
give the alarm, without evidence of agreement  or conspiracy, do... not constitute her and Talingdan. She loved her husband. Contrary to the testimony of Corazon,
the cooperation required by  article 14 of the Penal  Code for complicity  in  the they never quarreled nor did the former maltreat her. She never left home for so
commission of the crime witnessed passively, or with regard to which one has kept long. And she was cooking for supper, and not Corazon, on the night of the murder.
silent;
She contends that her in-laws used her daughter to testify against her because
Principles:
they don’t want Teresa from the start. She even added that Bernardo had some
Mere passive presence at the scene of another's crime, mere  silence and  failure to enemies during his lifetime. Talingdan said that he escorted the Mayor as a
give the alarm, without evidence of agreement  or conspiracy, do... not constitute bodyguard, while the other three accused also claimed that they were at a certain
the cooperation required by  article 14 of the Penal  Code for complicity  in  the Mrs. Bayongan’s house during the night of the murder.

commission of the crime witnessed passively, or with regard to which one has kept
silent.
Contention of the People: The sworn statement of the 13-year old Corazon was
true. She knew the accused because they live nearby their place. Besides, the
People v. Talingdan accused-appellants testimonies are indefensible and futile. Moreover, her mother
Facts: Bernardo Bagabag was murdered in his own house in Abra on June 24, claimed to have no suspect in mind during the investigation in their house although
1967 by Talingdan, Tobias, Berras, Bides and Teresa Domogma, his alleged wife she was in conspiracy with the other four accused.

[whom cannot be charged with parricide because no certificate or proof of marriage

could be presented by the prosecution]. The murder was witnessed by Corazon Ruling: The court affirmed the decision held by the trial court with costs. There are
[12], the eldest child of Bernardo and Teresa. She testified to the crime committed two aggravating circumstances present, treachery and evident premeditation, with
by the accused-appellants.
no mitigating circumstances to offset the accused-appellants. Talingdan, Tobias,
Berras, and Bides are guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder and are sentenced
Story: [I want to include this so that you could get the whole thing; it is your option to DEATH to be executed in accordance with law. Teresa Domogma is guilty as
to write it or not on your record books. This is the summary of Corazon’s accessory to the same murder, and is hereby sentenced to suffer the indeterminate
testimony.] Prior to the violent incident, Bernardo and Teresa have had several penalty of 5 years prision correccional as minimum to 8 years of prision mayor as
conflicts in their married life. She would often withdraw from their house. The maximum, with the accessory penalties of the law.

longest even for more than 3 weeks. It was suspected that Teresa is having an illicit
affair with Talingdan, a policeman who lives nearby. Two days before the crime,
Teresa was slapped several times by Bernardo after a violent quarrel. She sought
the help of Talingdan who challenged Bernardo to come down, but the latter
refused. Then, Talingdan left after shouting "If I will find you someday, I will kill you."
Two days before the commission of the crime, Corazon overheard her mother’s
meeting with the other accused-appellants about their plot to kill her father as one
of them said, “Shall he elude a bullet?” Corazon was then driven away by her
What about Teresa’s conviction? Teresa was more or less passive in her attitude
regarding her co-appellants' conspiracy, known to her. After Bernardo was killed,
she became active in her cooperation with them. These subsequent acts of her
constitute "concealing or assisting in the escape of the principal in the crime"
which makes her liable as an accessory --- paragraph 3 of Article 19 of the Revised
Penal Code. [Please check Art 19 on your PRC and write it down if you wish. I
strongly recommend it so.]

mother saying, “You tell your father that we will kill him.” On the night of the murder,
Corazon was cooking food for supper when she saw her mother talking with the Deliberate Intent
other accused-appellants in their “batalan” armed with long guns. After a while, Manuel v. People
Teresa went inside the room to put her baby to sleep. After eating supper alone, Facts:

Corazon told her father about the persons outside but he ignored her. He went to Eduardo Manuel married Rubylus Gaña on July 28, 1975. He met Tina Gandalera in
the kitchen and sat on the floor near the door then he was fired. Talingdan and 1996. Eduardo proposed marriage on several occasions, assuring her that he was
Tobias fired their guns again. Bides threatened to kill Corazon if she would ask for single. Eduardo even brought his parents to Baguio City to meet Tina’s parents, and
help. Corazon confessed to her father’s relatives the identities of the murderers was assured by them that their son was still single. Tina finally agreed to marry
during his burial. The trial court found them guilty of the offense and so the five Eduardo. They were married on April 22, 1996 before Judge Antonio C. Reyes. It
accused appealed to their conviction.
appeared in their marriage contract that Eduardo was “single”. However, starting
1999, Manuel started making himself scarce and went to their house only twice or
Crime Committed: Murder 
thrice a year. Tina was jobless, and whenever she asked money from Eduardo, he
[and the sentence of life imprisonment with indemnity to the offended party, the would slap her. In January 2001, Eduardo took all his  clothes, left, and did not
heirs of the deceased Bernardo Bagabag, in the amount of P12,000]
return. Worse, he stopped giving financial support. In August 2001, Tina became

18
curious and made inquiries from the NSO in Manila where she learned that Eduardo honesty and good faith. The elements for abuse of rights are: (a) there is a legal
had been previously married.
right or duty; (b) exercised in bad faith; and (c) for the sole intent of prejudicing or
For his part, Eduardo testified that he met Tina sometime in 1995 in a bar where injuring another.

she worked as a GRO. He fell in love with her and married her. He informed Tina of
his previous marriage to Rubylus Gaña, but she nevertheless agreed to marry him.
Their marital relationship was in order until this one time when he noticed that she
had a “love-bite” on her neck. He then abandoned her. Eduardo further testified
that he declared he was “single” in his marriage contract with Tina because he
believed in good faith that his first marriage was invalid. He did not know that he
had to go to court to seek for the nullification of his first marriage before marrying
Tina. He insisted that he married Tina believing that his first marriage was no longer
In the present case, the Eduardo courted Tina and  proposed  to marry her. He
assured her that he was single. He even brought his parents to Tina’s house where
he and his parents made the same  assurance  – that he was single. Thus, Tina
agreed to marry the him, who even stated in the certificate of marriage that he was
single. She lived with Eduardo and dutifully performed her duties as his wife,
believing all the while that he was her lawful husband. For two years or so until
Eduardo heartlessly abandoned her, Tina had no inkling that he was already
married to another before they were married.

valid because he had not heard from Rubylus for more than 20 years.
Thus, Tina was an innocent victim of the petitioner’s chicanery and heartless
The lower court found Eduardo guilty of bigamy. He was sentenced to an deception, the fraud consisting not of a single act alone, but a continuous series of
indeterminate penalty of from six (6) years and ten (10) months, as minimum, to ten acts. Day by day, he maintained the appearance of being a lawful husband to the
(10) years, as maximum, and directed to indemnify the private complainant Tina private complainant, who changed her status from a single woman to a married
Gandalera the amount of P200,000.00 by way of moral damages, plus costs of suit. woman, lost the consortium, attributes and support of a single man she could have
Eduardo appealed the decision to the CA. He alleged that he was not criminally married lawfully and endured mental pain and humiliation, being bound to a man
liable for bigamy because when he married the private complainant, he did so in who it turned out was not her lawful husband.

good faith and without any malicious intent. He maintained that at the time that he The Court rules that the Eduardo’s collective acts of fraud and deceit before, during
married the private complainant, he was of the honest belief that his first marriage and after his marriage with Tina were willful, deliberate and with malice and caused
no longer subsisted. The CA rendered judgment affirming the decision of the RTC.
injury to the latter. That she did not sustain any physical injuries is not a bar to an
Issue:
award for moral  damages. The Court thus declares that the petitioner’s acts are
Whether or not the CA erred in affirming the lower court’s decision in awarding a against public policy as they undermine and subvert the family as a social
moral damage when it has no basis in fact and in law.
institution, good morals and the interest and general welfare of society.

Ruling:

Moral  damages  include physical suffering, mental anguish, fright, serious  anxiety, People v. Puno
besmirched reputation, wounded feelings, moral shock, social humiliation, and
similar injury. Though incapable of pecuniary computation, moral damages may be Facts:

recovered if they are the proximate result of the defendant’s wrongful act or
omission. An award for moral  damages  requires the  confluence  of the
following  conditions: first, there must be an injury, whether physical, mental or
psychological, clearly sustained by the  claimant; second, there must be culpable
act or omission factually established; third, the wrongful act or omission of the
January 13, 1988 in QC, at around 5:00 pm: the accused Isabelo Puno, who is the
personal driver of Mrs. Sarmiento's husband (who was then away in Davao
purportedly on account of local election there) arrived at Mrs. Sarmiento's
bakeshop in Araneta Ave, QC

defendant is the proximate cause of the injury sustained by the  claimant; and He told Mrs. Sarmiento that her own driver Fred had to go to Pampanga on an
fourth, the award of  damages  is predicated on any of the cases stated in Article emergency so Isabelo will temporarily take his place

2219 or Article 2220 of the Civil Code. Indeed, bigamy is not one of those When it was time for Mrs. Sarmiento to go home to Valle Verde in Pasig, she got
specifically mentioned in Article 2219 of the Civil Code in which the offender may into her husband's Mercedes Benz with Isabelo driving

be ordered to pay moral  damagesto the private complainant/offended party. After the car turned right on a corner of Araneta Ave, it stopped and a young man,
Nevertheless, the petitioner is liable to the private complainant for accused Enrique Amurao, boarded the car beside the driver

moral damages under Article 2219 in relation to Articles 19, 20 and 21 of the Civil Enrique pointed a gun at Mrs. Sarmiento as Isabelo told her that he needs to "get
Code.
money" from her

According to Article 19, “every person must, in the exercise of his rights and in the Mrs. Sarmiento had P7,000 on her bag which she handed to the accused

performance of his act with justice, give everyone his due, and observe honesty But the accused said that they wanted P100,000 more

and good faith.” This provision contains what is commonly referred to as the The car sped off north towards the North superhighway where Isabelo asked Mrs.
principle of abuse of rights, and sets certain standards which must be observed not Sarmiento to issue a check for P100,000

only in the exercise of one’s rights but also in the performance of one’s duties. The Mrs. Sarmiento drafted 3 checks: two P30,000 checks and one P40,000 check

standards are the following: act with justice; give everyone his due; and observe
19
Isabelo then turned the car around towards Metro Manila; later, he changed his Facts:

mind and turned the car again towards Pampanga

Caliso was arraigned and tried for rape with homicide, but the Regional Trial Court
According to her, Mrs. Sarmiento jumped out of the car then, crossed to the other (RTC), Branch 21, in Kapatagan, Lanao del Norte found him guilty of murder for the
side of the superhighway and was able to flag down a fish vendor's van, her dress killing of AAA,[1] a mentally-retarded 16-year old girl, and sentenced him... to death
had blood because according to her, she fell down on the ground and was injured in its decision dated August 19, 2002.[2] The appeal of the conviction was brought
when she jumped out of the car
automatically to the Court. On June 28, 2005,[3] the Court transferred the records
The defense does not dispute the above narrative of the complainant except that to the Court of Appeals (CA) for intermediate review... pursuant to the ruling in
according to Isabelo, he stopped the car at North Diversion and freely allowed Mrs. People v. Mateo.[4] On October 26, 2007,[5] the CA, although affirming the
Sarmiento to step out of the car
conviction, reduced the penalty to reclusion perpetua and modified the civil
He said he even slowed the car down as he drove away, until he saw that his awards. Now, Caliso is before us in a final... bid to overturn his conviction.

employer had gotten a ride

Issues:

He claimed that she fell down when she stubbed her toe while running across the The decisive question that seeks an answer is whether the identification of the
highway
perpetrator of the crime by an eyewitness who did not get a look at the face of the
Issue:
perpetrator was reliable and positive enough to support the conviction of appellant
Whether or not the accused can be convicted of kidnapping for ransom as charged
Delfin

Whether or not the said robbery can be classified as "highway robbery" under PD Caliso (Caliso).

No. 532 (Anti-Piracy and Anti-Highway Robbery Law of 1974)

Ruling:

Holding:
The appeal is meritorious.

No.
In every criminal prosecution, the identity of the offender, like the crime itself, must
No.
be established by proof beyond reasonable doubt. Indeed, the first duty of the
Ratio:
Prosecution is not to prove the crime but to prove the identity of the criminal, for
There is no showing whatsoever that appellants had any motive, nurtured prior even if the commission of... the crime can be established, there can be no
to or at the time they committed the wrongful acts against complainant, other than conviction without proof of identity of the criminal beyond reasonable doubt.

the extortion of money from her under the compulsion of threats or intimidation.

The identification of a malefactor, to be positive and sufficient for conviction, does
For this crime to exist, there must be indubitable proof that the actual intent of the not always require direct evidence from an eyewitness; otherwise, no conviction will
malefactors was to deprive the offended party of her liberty
be possible in crimes where there are no eyewitnesses. Indeed, trustworthy
In the case, the restraint of her freedom of action was merely an incident in the circumstantial evidence can... equally confirm the identification and overcome the
commission of another offense primarily intended by the offenders
constitutionally presumed innocence of the accused. Thus, the Court has
This does not constitute kidnapping or serious illegal detention
distinguished two types of positive identification in People v. Gallarde,[21] to wit: (a)
Jurisprudence reveals that during the early part of the American occupation of our that by direct evidence,... through an eyewitness to the very commission of the act;
country, roving bands were organized for robbery and pillage and since the then and (b) that by circumstantial evidence, such as where the accused is last seen
existing law against robbery was inadequate to cope with such moving bands of with the victim immediately before or after the crime. The Court said:... xxx Positive
outlaws, the Brigandage Law was passed (this is the origin of the law on highway identification pertains essentially to proof of identity and not per se to that of being
robbery)
an eyewitness to the very act of commission of the crime.

PD No. 532 punishes as highway robbery only acts of robbery perpetrated by although a witness may not have actually seen the very act of commission of a
outlaws indiscriminately against any person or persons on Philippine highways and crime,... he may still be able to positively identify a suspect or accused as the
not acts of robbery committed against only a predetermined or particular victim
perpetrator of a crime as for instance when the latter is the person or one of the
The mere fact that the robbery was committed inside a car which was persons last seen with the victim immediately before and right after the commission
casually operating on a highway does not make PD No 532 applicable to the of the crime.

case
Amegable asserted that she was familiar with Caliso because she had seen him
This is not justified by the accused's intention
pass by in her barangay several times prior to the killing. Such assertion indicates
Accused-appellants convicted of robbery (indeterminate sentence of 4 years and 2 that she was obviously assuming that the killer was no other than Caliso. As
months or prision correccional, as minimum, to 10 years of prision mayor. Accused matters stand, therefore,... Caliso's conviction hangs by a single thread of
to pay Mrs. Sarmiento P7,000 as actual damages and P20,000 as moral damages.)
evidence, the direct evidence of Amegable's identification of him as the perpetrator
of the killing. But that single thread was thin, and cannot stand sincere scrutiny. In
People v. Delfin every criminal prosecution, no less than moral certainty is... required in establishing
the identity of the accused as the perpetrator of the crime. Her identification of
20
Caliso as the perpetrator did not have unassailable reliability, the only means by
which it might be said to be positive and sufficient. The test to determine the
moral... certainty of an identification is its imperviousness to skepticism on account
of its distinctiveness. To achieve such distinctiveness, the identification evidence
should encompass unique physical features or characteristics, like the face, the
voice, the dentures, the... distinguishing marks or tattoos on the body, fingerprints,
DNA, or any other physical facts that set the individual apart from the rest of
humanity.
Mistake of Fact
A witness' familiarity with the accused, although accepted as basis for a positive
identification, does not always pass the test of moral certainty due to the possibility
of mistake.
•      August 14, 1908 About 10 pm: Ah Chong, a cook was suddenly awakened by
No matter how honest Amegable's testimony might have been, her identification of
Caliso by a sheer look at his back for a few minutes could not be regarded as
positive enough to generate that moral certainty about Caliso being the perpetrator
of the killing, absent other... reliable circumstances showing him to be AAA's killer.
Her identification of him in that manner lacked the qualities of exclusivity and
uniqueness, even as it did not rule out her being mistaken. Indeed, there could be
so many other individuals in the community... where the crime was committed
whose backs might have looked like Caliso's back. Moreover, many factors could
have influenced her perception, including her lack of keenness of observation, her
emotional stress of the moment, her proneness to suggestion from others, her...
excitement, and her tendency to assume. The extent of such factors are not part of
the records; hence, the trial court and the CA could not have taken them into
consideration. But the influence of such varied factors could not simply be ignored
or taken for granted, for it is... even a well-known phenomenon that the members of
the same family, whose familiarity with one another could be easily granted, often
inaccurately identify one another through a sheer view of another's back. Certainly,
an identification that does not preclude a reasonable... possibility of mistake cannot
be accorded any evidentiary force.[23]
ISSUE: W/N defendant can be held criminally responsible who, by reason of a
Amegable's recollection of the perpetrator wearing short pants bearing the number
"11" did not enhance the reliability of her identification of Caliso. For one, such
pants were not one-of-a-kind apparel, but generic. Also, they were not offered in
evidence. Yet, even if they had... been admitted in evidence, it remained doubtful
that they could have been linked to Caliso without proof of his ownership or
possession of them in the moments before the crime was perpetrated.
HELD:  trial court should be reversed, and the defendant acquitted of the crime
Nor did the lack of bad faith or ill motive on the part of Amegable to impute the
killing to Caliso guarantee the reliability and accuracy of her identification of him.
The dearth of competent additional evidence that eliminated the possibility of any
human error in Amegable's... identification of Caliso rendered her lack of bad faith
or ill motive irrelevant and immaterial, for even the most sincere person could easily
be mistaken about her impressions of persons involved in startling occurrences
such as the crime committed against AAA. It is neither... fair nor judicious,
therefore, to have the lack of bad faith or ill motive on the part of Amegable raise
her identification to the level of moral certainty.
liability, even though the wrongful act committed be different from that which he
In the absence of proof beyond reasonable doubt as to the identity of the culprit,
the accused's constitutional right to be presumed innocent until the contrary is
proved is not overcome, and he is entitled to an acquittal,[26] though his innocence
may be... doubted.[27] The constitutional presumption of innocence guaranteed to
every individual is of primary importance, and the conviction of the accused must
rest not on the weakness of the defense he put up but on the strength of the
evidence for the
Prosecution.
US v. Ah Chong
FACTS:
some trying to force open the door of the room. He sat up in bed and called out
twice, "Who is there?" He heard no answer and was convinced by the noise at the
door that it was being pushed open by someone bent upon forcing his way into the
room.  The defendant, fearing that the intruder was a robber or a thief, leaped to his
feet and called out. "If you enter the room, I will kill you." At that moment he was
struck just above the knee by the edge of the chair (thought to be an unlawful
aggression) which had been placed against the door.  Seizing a common kitchen
knife which he kept under his pillow, the defendant struck out wildly at the intruder
who, it afterwards turned out, was his roommate, Pascual who is a house boy or
muchacho who in the spirit of mischief was playing a trick on him
•    Seeing that Pascual was wounded, he called to his employers and ran back to
his room to secure bandages to bind up Pascual's wounds.
•    There had been several robberies not long prior to the date of the incident, one
of which took place in a house where he was employed as cook so he kept a knife
under his pillow for his personal protection.
•    trial court held it as simple homicide
mistake as to the facts, does an act for which he would be exempt from criminal
liability if the facts were as he supposed them to be, but which would constitute the
crime of homicide or assassination if the actor had known the true state of the facts
at the time when he committed the act.
 
NO.
•      GR: acts constituting the crime or offense must be committed with malice or
with criminal intent in order that the actor may be held criminally liable
EX: it appears that he is exempted from liability under one or other of the express
provisions of article 8 of the code
•    Article 1 RPC of the Penal Code is as follows:
Crimes or misdemeanors are voluntary acts and ommissions punished by law.
o      A person voluntarily committing a crime or misdemeanor shall incur criminal
had intended to commit.
o    voluntary act is a free, intelligent, and intentional act
o    "malice" signifying the intent 
21
o    Actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea - "the act itself does not make man guilty YES.

unless his intention were so

Ø    ignorantia facti excusat, but this applies only when the mistake is committed
o    “ Actus me incito factus non est meus actus” - an act done by me against my without fault or carelessness

will is not my act

Ø    appellants found no circumstances whatsoever which would press them to
•      GR: courts have recognized the power of the legislature to forbid, in a limited immediate action. The person in the room being then asleep, appellants had ample
class of cases, the doing of certain acts, and to make their commission criminal time and opportunity to ascertain his identity without hazard to themselves, and
WITHOUT regard to the intent of the doer
could even effect a bloodless arrest if any reasonable effort to that end had been
•      EX: intention of the lawmaker to make the commission of certain acts criminal made, as the victim was unarmed.

without regard to the intent of the doer is clear and beyond question the statute will Ø   "No unnecessary or unreasonable force shall be used in making an arrest, and
not be so construed
the person arrested shall not be subject to any greater restraint than is necessary
•      ignorantia facti excusat applies only when the mistake is committed without for his detention."

fault or carelessness
Ø    a peace officer cannot claim exemption from criminal liability if he uses
•    defendant at the time, he acted in good faith, without malice, or criminal intent, unnecessary force or violence in making an arrest

in the belief that he was doing no more than exercising his legitimate right of self- Ø  The crime committed by appellants is not merely criminal negligence, the killing
defense; that had the facts been as he believed them to be he would have been being intentional and not accidental. In criminal negligence, the injury caused to
wholly exempt from criminal liability on account of his act; and that he can not be another should be unintentional, it being simply the incident of another act
said to have been guilty of negligence or recklessness or even carelessness in performed without malice.

falling into his mistake as to the facts, or in the means adopted by him to defend Ø  2 requisites in order that the circumstance may be taken as a justifying one:

himself from the imminent danger which he believe threatened his person and his offender acted in the performance of a duty or in the lawful exercise of a right-
property and the property under his charge.
present

injury or offense committed be the necessary consequence of the due performance

People v. Oanis of such duty or the lawful exercise of such right or office.-not present

FACTS:
Ø   According to article 69 of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty lower by 1 or 2
Ø   Captain Godofredo Monsod, Constabulary Provincial Inspector at Cabanatuan, degrees than that prescribed by law shall, in such case, be imposed.

Nueva Ecija, received from Major Guido a telegram of the following tenor:
"Information received escaped convict Anselmo Balagtas with bailarina and Irene in
Cabanatuan get him dead or alive." Captain Monsod accordingly called for his first Malum Prohibitum as exception to the requirement of mens Rea
sergeant and asked that he be given four men.
Padilla v. Dizon
Ø    The same instruction was given to the chief of police Oanis who was likewise Facts:

called by the Provincial Inspector.

Respondent Baltazar R. Dizon acquitted, in his decision, the tourist and accused,
Ø   Defendants Oanis and Galanta then went to the room of Irene, and an seeing a Lo Chi Fai, saying that Lo Chi Fai had no willful intention to violate the law. He also
man sleeping with his back towards the door where they were, simultaneously or directed the release to Lo Chi Fai of at least the amount of US$3,000.00 under
successively fired at him with their .32 and .45 caliber revolvers. Awakened by the Central Bank Circular No. 960.

gunshots, Irene saw her paramour already wounded, and looking at the door where Lo Chi Fai was caught by Customs guard at the Manila International Airport while
the shots came, she saw the defendants still firing at him. Shocked by the entire attempting to smuggle foreign currency and foreign exchange instruments out of
scene. Irene fainted; it turned out later that the person shot and killed was not the the country.

notorious criminal Anselmo Balagtas but a peaceful and innocent citizen named An information was filed against Lo Chi Fai with the RTC for violation of Sec. 6,
Serapio Tecson, Irene's paramour.
Central Bank Circular No. 960 with a penal sanction provided by Sec. 1, PD NO.
Ø  According to Appellant Galanta, when he and chief of police Oanis arrived at the 1883.

house, the latter asked Brigida where Irene's room was. Brigida indicated the place, Sec. 6, Central Bank Circular No. 960 provides that no person shall take out or
and upon further inquiry as to the whereabouts of Anselmo Balagtas, she said that transmit or attempt to take out or transmit foreign exchange in any form out of
he too was sleeping in the same room.
the Philippines without an authorization by the Central Bank. Tourists and non-
ISSUE: W/N they may, upon such fact, be held responsible for the death thus resident visitors may take out or send out from the Philippine foreign exchange
caused to Tecson
in amounts not exceeding such amounts of foreign exchange brought in by
them. Tourists and non-resident temporary visitors bringing with them more
HELD:    appellants are hereby declared guilty of murder with the mitigating than US$3,000.00 or its equivalent in other foreign currencies shall declare
circumstance

22
 their foreign exchange in the form prescribed by the Central Bank at points of (Corazon Teng) referred Magno to LS Finance and Management Corporation (LS
entries upon arrival in the Philippines.
Finance for brevity) advising its Vice-President, Joey

Sec. 1, P.D. No. 1883 provides that any person who shall engage in the trading Gomez, that Mancor was willing and able to supply the pieces of equipment
or purchase and sale of foreign currency in violation of existing laws or rules needed if LS Finance could accommodate petitioner and provide him credit
and regulations of the Central Bank shall be guilty of the crime of facilities.

blackmarketing of foreign exchange and shall suffer the penalty of reclusion on condition that petitioner has to put up a warranty deposit equivalent to thirty per
temporal (minimum of 12 years and 1 day and maximum of 20 years) and a fine centum (30%) of the total value of the pieces of equipment to be purchased,
of no less than P50,000.00.
amounting to P29,790.00.

At the trial, Lo Chi Fai tried to establish that he was a businessman from Hongkong, unknown to petitioner, it was Corazon Teng who advanced the deposit in question,
that he had come to the Philippines 9 to 10 times to invest in business in the on condition that the same would be paid as... a short term loan at 3% interest.

country with his business associates, and that he and his business associates petitioner and LS Finance entered into a leasing agreement

declared all the money they brought in and all declarations were handed to and After the documentation was completed, the equipment... were delivered to
kept by him.
petitioner who in turn issued a postdated check and gave it to Joey Gomez who,
Because of the revolution taking place in Manila during that time, Lo Chi Fai was unknown to the petitioner, delivered the same to Corazon Teng.

urged by his business associates to come to Manila to bring the money out of the Issues:

Philippines.
four counts of the aforestated charges subject of... the petition... petitioner could
Commissioner of Customs, Alexander Padilla, then filed a complaint against not pay LS Finance the monthly rentals, thus it pulled out the garage equipments. It
Baltazar R. Dizon for acquitting Lo Chi Fai.
was then on this occasion that petitioner became aware that Corazon Teng was the
Issue:
one who advanced the warranty deposit. Petitioner with his wife went to see

Whether or not respondent Baltazar R. Dizon is guilty of gross incompetence or Corazon Teng and promised to pay the latter but the payment never came and
gross ignorance of the law in holding that the accused, Lo Chi Fai, for violation of when the four (4) checks were deposited they were returned for the reason
Central Bank Circular No. 960, the prosecution must establish that the accused had "account closed."

the criminal intent to violate the law.

Ruling:

Held:
finding the accused-appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of
Yes.
violations of B.P. Blg. 22 and sentencing the accused to imprisonment for one year
Ratio:
in each Criminal Case Nos. Q-35693, Q-35695 and Q-35696 and to pay to
Baltazar R. Dizon ignored the fact that the foreign currency and foreign currency complainant the respective... amounts reflected in subject checks

instruments found in the possession of Lo Chi Fai when he was apprehended at the As the transaction did not ripen into a purchase, but remained a lease with rentals
airport and the amounts of such foreign exchange did not correspond to the foreign being paid for the loaned equipment, which were pulled out by the Lessor (Mancor)
currency declarations presented by Lo Chi Fai at the trial, and that these currency when the petitioner failed to continue paying possibly... due to economic
declarations were declarations belonging to other people. 
constraints or business failure, then it is lawful and just that the warranty deposit
In invoking the provisions of the Central Bank Circular No. 960 to justify the release should not be charged against the petitioner.

of US$3,000.00 to Lo Chi Fai, Baltazar R. Dizon again diplayed gross incompetence To argue that after the termination of the lease agreement, the warranty deposit
and gross ignorance of law. There is nothing in the Central Bank Circular which should be refundable in full to Mrs. Teng by petitioner when he did not cash out the

could be taken as authority for the trial court to release the said amount of US "warranty deposit" for his official or personal use, is to stretch the nicety of the
Currency to Lo Chi Fai.
alleged law (B.P. No. 22) violated.

It would have been different if this predicament was not communicated to all the
Magno v. CA parties he dealt with regarding the lease agreement the financing of which was...
Facts:
covered by L.S. Finance Management.

Petitioner was in the process of putting up a car repair shop sometime in April the appealed decision is REVERSED and the accused-petitioner is hereby
1983, but he did not have complete equipment... he lacked funds with which... to ACQUITTED of the crime charged.

purchase the necessary equipment to make such business operational. Thus, Principles:

petitioner, representing Ultra Sources International Corporation, approached the noble objective of the law is tainted with materialism and opportunism in the
Corazon Teng, (private complainant) Vice President of Mancor Industries highest degree.

(hereinafter referred to as Mancor) for his needed... car repair service equipment of
which Mancor was a distributor. (Rollo, pp. 40-41)

Garcia v. CA
23
FACTS:
Guevarra was the owner of a lady’s diamond ring with white gold mounting, solitaire
2-karat diamond as well as 4 brills. It was stolen from her house. On a relevant Ysidoro v. People
date, while she was talking to Garcia, an owner of a restaurant, she recognized the FACTS:

ring on the latter’s finger and asked how she acquired the same. Garcia averred This case is about a municipal mayor charged with illegal diversion of food intende
that she bought it from her comadre. Guevarra made Garcia know that the ring was d for those suffering from malnutrition to the beneficiaries of reconsideration project
stolen from her place days before. It was ascertained the ring was indeed s affecting the homes of victims of calamities.

Guevarra’s but despite written demands, Garcia refused to return the ring.
Polinio told Garcia that the SFP still had sacks of rice and boxes of sardines in its st
HELD: oreroom. And since she had already distributed food to the mother volunteers, wha
One who has lost or has been unlawfully deprived of a movable may recover the t remained could be given to the CSAP beneficiaries.

same from the person in possession of the same and the only defense the latter Garcia and Polinio went to petitioner Arnold James M. Ysidoro, the Leyte Municipal
may have is if he has acquired it in good faith at a public sale in which case the  Mayor, to seek his approval. After explaining the situation to him, Ysidoro approved
owner cannot obtain its return without reimbursing the price paid therefore.  the release and signed the withdrawal slip for four sacks of rice and two boxes of s
Guevarra who was unlawfully deprived of the ring
 ardines worth P3,396.00 to CSAP.

was entitled to recover it from de Garcia who was found in possession of the same. She also pointed out that the Supplemental Feeding Implementation Guidelines for 
The only exception provided by law is when the possessor acquired the property Local Government Units governed the distribution of SFP goods. Thus, Ysidoro co
through a public sale, in which case, the owner cannot recover without mmitted technical malversation when he approved the distribution of SFP goods to 
reimbursement.
the CSAP beneficiaries.

Cuenca v. People
FACTS:  Appeal from a decision of the Court of Appeals affirming that the CFI of
Manila, convicting appellant Ernesto Cuenca, who at the time of arrest of arrest on
The evidence shows that on November 8, 2000 the Sangguniang Bayan of Leyte en
acted Resolution 00-133 appropriating the annual general fund for 2001. This appro
priation was based on the executive budget which allocated P100,000.00 for the S
FP and P113,957.64 for the Comprehensive and Integrated Delivery of Social Servi
ces which covers the CSAP housing projects.

January 3, 1963 was on duty at the Philippine Savings Bank as a special watchman The Sandiganbayan held that Ysidoro applied public property to a pubic purpose ot
and security guard of the Bataan Veterans Security Agency to which the firearm, her than that for which it has been appropriated by law or ordinance.

and Ithaca .45 pistol, of the crime of illegal possession of firearm and seven rounds ISSUE 1:

of ammunition and sentencing him to imprisonment for one year and to pay the Whether or not he approved the diversion of the subject goods to a public purpose 
costs. Appellant's main argument for defense was that in his employment with the different from their originally intended purpose

above-mentioned security agency made him to believe that the license to possess RULING 1:

the firearm in question was with the owner of the agency,  Jose Forbes.
The crime of technical malversation as penalized under Article 220 of the Revised P
enal Code has three elements: a) that the offender is an accountable public officer; 
ISSUE: Whether or not appellant is guilty of the crime charged owing to the failure b) that he applies public funds or property under his administration to some public 
of Jose Forbes to comply with his duty to obtain such license, before he issued use; and c) that the public use for which such funds or property were applied is diff
said firearm and ammunition to his aforementioned employee.
erent from the purpose for which they were originally appropriated by law or ordina
nce.

HELD:  The Court ruled in the negative. The appellant is not guilty of the crime The creation of the two items shows the Sanggunian’s intention to appropriate sepa
charged. It should be noted that the Bataan Veterans Security Agency is duly rate funds for SFP and the CSAP in the annual budget.

licensed to operate as such. Consequently, it may legally engage the services of
competent persons to discharge the duties of special watchmen and security
guards and provide them, as such, with the corresponding firearms and
ammunitions. The agency is this supposed to obtain the license necessary
therefore. Had it done so, there would be no question about the absence of any
criminal liability on the part of the appellant herein for the possession of the firearm
Since the municipality bought the subject goods using SFP funds, then those good
s should be used for SFP’s needs, observing the rules prescribed for identifying the
 qualified beneficiaries of its feeding programs. The target clientele of the SFP acco
rding  to  its  manual  are:  1)  the  moderately  and  severely  underweight  pre-
school children aged 36 months to 72 months; and 2) the families of six members 
whose total monthly income is P3,675.00 and below.

and ammunition in question. Petition is therefore GRANTED. 

Ysidoro disregarded the guidelines when he approved the distribution of the goods 
to those providing free labor for the rebuilding of their own homes. This is technical 
malversation. If Ysidoro could not legally distribute the construction materials appro
People v. Dela Rosa
24
priated for the CSAP housing beneficiaries to the SFP malnourished clients neither  A person, object or thing omitted from an enumeration must be held to have been o
could he distribute the food intended for the latter to CSAP beneficiaries.
mitted intentionally.

STATCON AID:
The maxim operates only if and when the omission has been clearly established, an
*  E x p r e s s i o  u n i u s  e s t  e x c l u s i o n  a l t e r i u s  – d in such a case what is omitted in the enumeration may not, by construction, be in
 The express mention of one person, thing or consequence implies the exclusion of  cluded therein.

all others.

T h r u  t h e  r u l e :  E x p r e s s u m  f a c i t  c e s s a r e  t a c i t u m  – Negligence or lack of foresight

 what is expressed puts an end to that which is implied where a statute, by its terms People v. Pugay
, is expressly limited to certain matters, it may not, by interpretation or construction,  FACTS OF THE CASE:

be extended to other matters
The accused are pronounced by the RTC of Cavite guilty beyond reasonable doubt
> It can be seen here that the appropriation of the general funds were expressly me for the crime of murder of Bayani Miranda and sentencing them to a prison term
ant for the 2 different beneficiaries, and should not be construed to be a general ap ranging from 12 years (prison mayor) as mimimum to 20 years (prison temporal) as
propriation of public funds interchangeably with the two. No matter if the funds are  maximum and for samson to be sentenced to reclusion perpetua.

used for a public purpose, it should be noted that these funds were explicitly allocat
ed for 2 very different purposes, which therefore clearly satisfies the 3rd element in t Miranda and the accused Pugay are friends. Miranda used to run errands for Pugay
echnical malversation.
and they used to sleep together. On the evening of May 19, 1982 a town fiesta was
ISSUE 2:
held in the public plaza of Rosario Cavite. Sometime after midnight accused Pugay
Whether or not the goods he approved for diversion were in the nature of savings th and Samson with several companions arrived (they were drunk), and they started
at could be used to augment the other authorized expenditures of the municipality
making fun of Bayani Miranda. Pugay after making fun of the Bayani, took a can of
RULING 2:
gasoline and poured its contents on the latter, Gabion (principal witness) told Pugay
The subject goods could not be regarded as savings. The SFP is a continuing progr not to do the deed. Then Samson set Miranda on fire making a human torch out of
am  that  ran  throughout  the  year.  Consequently,  no  one  could  say  in  mid- him. They were arrested the same night and barely a few hours after the incident
June 2001 that SFP had already finished its project, leaving funds or goods that it n gave their written statements.

o longer needed. The fact that Polinio had already distributed the food items neede
d by the SFP beneficiaries for the second quarter of 2001 does not mean that the re ISSUES OF THE CASE:

maining food items in its storeroom constituted unneeded savings. Since the requir
ements of hungry mouths are hard to predict to the last sack of rice or can of sardin Is conspiracy present in this case to ensure that murder can be the crime? If not
es, the view that the subject goods were no longer needed for the remainder of the  what are the criminal responsibilities of the accused?

year was quite premature.

STATCON AID:
There is no:

* Words construed in their ordinary sense > General rule: In the absence of legisl CONSPIRACY- is determined when two or more persons agree to commit a felony
ative intent, words and phrases should be given their plain, ordinary, and common u and decide to commit it. Conspiracy must be proven with the same quantum of
sage meaning.
evidence as the felony itself, more specifically by proof beyond reasonable doubt. It
ISSUE 3:
is not essential that there be proof as to the existence of a previous agreement to
Whether or not good faith is a valid defense for technical malversation
commit a crime. It is sufficient if, at the time of commission of the crime, the
RULING 3:
accused had the same purpose and were united in its executed.

Criminal intent is not an element of technical malversation. The law punishes the ac Since there was no animosity between miranda and the accused, and add to the
t of diverting public property earmarked by law or ordinance for a particular public p that that the meeting at the scene of the incident was purely coincidental, and the
urpose to another public purpose. The offense is mala prohibita, meaning that the p main intent of the accused is to make fun of miranda.

rohibited act is not inherently immoral but becomes a criminal offense because posi Since there is no conspiracy that was proven, the respective criminal responsibility
tive law forbids its commission based on considerations of public policy, order, and  of Pugay and Samson arising from different acts directed against miranda is
convenience. It is the commission of an act as defined by the law, and not the char individual NOT collective and each of them is liable only for the act that was
acter or effect thereof, that determines whether or not the provision has been violat committed by him. 

ed. Hence, malice or criminal intent is completely irrelevant.

STATCON AID:
**Conspiracy may be implied from concerted action of the assailants in confronting
* Doctrine of casus omissus
the victim.

25
Criminal Responsibilities:
Petitioner sought reconsideration but as of the filing of this petition, the motion
PUGAY: Having failed to exercise diligence necessary to avoid every undesirable remained unresolved.

consequence arising from any act committed by his companions who at the same
time were making fun of the deceased. - GUILTY OF RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE ISSUES:
RESULTING TO HOMICIDE

1. Whether petitioner forfeited his standing to seek relief from his petition for
SAMSON:Since there are  NO  sufficient evidence that appears in the record certiorari when the MTC ordered his arrest following his non-appearance at the
establishing qualifying circumstances (treachery, conspiracy). And granted the arraignment in Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Slight Physical Injuries for injuries
mitigating circumstance that he never INTENDED to commit so grave a wrong. - sustained by respondent; and

GUILTY OF HOMICIDE

2. Whether petitioner’s constitutional right under the Double Jeopardy Clause bars
HELD:
further proceedings in Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Homicide and Damage to
JUDGEMENT OF THE LOWER COURT WAS AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATIONS. Property for the death of respondent Ponce’s husband.

JUDGEMENT FOR GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT FOR MURDER WAS

LOWERED TO THE ABOVE JUDGEMENTS.
RULING:

The accused negative constitutional right not to be "twice put in jeopardy of

Ivler v. San Pedro punishment for the same offense" protects him from, among others, post-
FACTS:
conviction prosecution for the same offense, with the prior verdict rendered by a
court of competent jurisdiction upon a valid information.

Following a vehicular collision in August 2004, petitioner Jason Ivler (petitioner) was
charged before the Metropolitan Trial Court of Pasig City (MTC), with two separate
offenses: (1) Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Slight Physical Injuries for injuries
sustained by respondent Evangeline L. Ponce (respondent Ponce); and (2) Reckless
Imprudence Resulting in Homicide and Damage to Property for the death of
respondent Ponce’s husband Nestor C. Ponce and damage to the spouses Ponce’s
Petitioner adopts the affirmative view, submitting that the two cases concern the
same offense of reckless imprudence. The MTC ruled otherwise, finding that
Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Slight Physical Injuries is an entirely separate
offense from Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Homicide and Damage to Property
"as the [latter] requires proof of an additional fact which the other does not."

vehicle.

The two charges against petitioner, arising from the same facts, were prosecuted
Petitioner posted bail for his temporary release in both cases. On 2004, petitioner under the same provision of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, namely, Article
pleaded guilty to the charge on the first delict and was meted out the penalty of 365 defining and penalizing quasi-offenses.

public censure. Invoking this conviction, petitioner moved to quash the Information
for the second delict for placing him in jeopardy of second punishment for the The provisions contained in this article shall not be applicable. Indeed, the notion
same offense of reckless imprudence.
that quasi-offenses, whether reckless or simple, are distinct species of crime,
separately defined and penalized under the framework of our penal laws, is nothing
The MTC refused quashal, finding no identity of offenses in the two cases.
new.

The petitioner elevated the matter to the Regional Trial Court of Pasig City (RTC), in The doctrine that reckless imprudence under Article 365 is a single quasi-offense
a petition for certiorari while Ivler sought from the MTC the suspension of by itself and not merely a means to commit other crimes such that conviction or
proceedings in criminal case, including the arraignment his arraignment as a acquittal of such quasi-offense bars subsequent prosecution for the same quasi-
prejudicial question.
offense, regardless of its various resulting acts, undergirded this Court’s unbroken
chain of jurisprudence on double jeopardy as applied to Article 365.

Without acting on petitioner’s motion, the MTC proceeded with the arraignment
and, because of petitioner’s absence, cancelled his bail and ordered his arrest.
These cases uniformly barred the second prosecutions as constitutionally
impermissible under the Double Jeopardy Clause.

Seven days later, the MTC issued a resolution denying petitioner’s motion to
suspend proceedings and postponing his arraignment until after his arrest. Our ruling today secures for the accused facing an Article 365 charge a stronger
and simpler protection of their constitutional right under the Double Jeopardy
26
Clause. True, they are thereby denied the beneficent effect of the favorable
sentencing formula under Article 48, but any disadvantage thus caused is more
than compensated by the certainty of non-prosecution for quasi-crime effects
qualifying as "light offenses" (or, as here, for the more serious consequence
prosecuted belatedly). If it is so minded, Congress can re-craft Article 365 by
extending to quasi-crimes the sentencing formula of Article 48 so that only the
On the morning of their second day, the neophytes were made to present comic
plays, play rough basketball, and recite the Aquila Fraternity’s principles. Whenever
they would give a wrong answer, they would be hit on their arms or legs. Late in the
afternoon, the Aquilans revived the initiation rites proper and proceeded to torment
them physically and psychologically. The neophytes were subjected to the same
manner of hazing that they endured on the first day of initiation.

most severe penalty shall be imposed under a single prosecution of all resulting
acts, whether penalized as grave, less grave or light offenses. This will still keep After a while, accused alumni fraternity members Fidelito Dizon (Dizon) and Artemio
intact the distinct concept of quasi-offenses. Meanwhile, the lenient schedule of Villareal (Villareal) demanded that the rites be reopened. The head of initiation rites,
penalties under Article 365, befitting crimes occupying a lower rung of culpability, Nelson Victorino (Victorino), initially refused. Upon the insistence of Dizon and
should cushion the effect of this ruling.
Villareal, however, he reopened the initiation rites. The fraternity members, including
Dizon and Villareal, then subjected the neophytes to "paddling" and to additional
rounds of physical pain. 

Transferred Intent Lenny received several paddle blows. After their last session of physical beatings,
Villareal v. People Lenny could no longer walk that he had to be carried to the carport. The initiation
FACTS: 
for the day was officially ended. They then slept at the carport. 

In February 1991, seven freshmen law students (including Leonardo "Lenny" Villa) After an hour of sleep, the neophytes were suddenly roused by Lenny’s shivering
of the Ateneo de Manila University School of Law signified their intention to join the and incoherent mumblings. Initially, Villareal and Dizon dismissed these rumblings,
Aquila Legis Juris Fraternity (Aquila Fraternity).
as they thought he was just overacting. When they realized, though, that Lenny was
really feeling cold, some of the Aquilans started helping him. They removed his
On the night of February 8, 1991, the neophytes were "briefed" and brought to the clothes and helped him through a sleeping bag to keep him warm. When his
Almeda Compound in Caloocan City for the commencement of their initiation. The condition worsened, the Aquilans rushed him to the hospital. Lenny was
rites were scheduled to last for three days.
pronounced dead on arrival. 

The neophytes were subjected to traditional forms of Aquilan "initiation rites." Consequently, a criminal case for homicide was filed against the 35 Aquilans. 

These rites included: 

1. Indian Run – which required the neophytes to run a gauntlet of two parallel rows The  trial court  rendered judgment holding the 26 accused guilty beyond
of Aquilans, each row delivering blows to the neophytes; 
reasonable doubt of the crime of homicide. The criminal case against the remaining
nine accused commenced anew.

2. Bicol Express – which obliged the neophytes to sit on the floor with their backs
against the wall and their legs outstretched while the Aquilans walked, jumped, or The  CA  set aside the finding of conspiracy by the trial court and modified the
ran over their legs; 
criminal liability of each of the accused according to individual participation. One
accused had by then passed away, so the following Decision applied only to the
remaining 25 accused: 

3.  Rounds  – in which the neophytes were held at the back of their pants by the
"auxiliaries" (the Aquilans charged with the duty of lending assistance to neophytes 1. Nineteen of the accused-appellants were acquitted, as their individual guilt was
during initiation rites), while the latter were being hit with fist blows on their arms or not established by proof beyond reasonable doubt. 

with knee blows on their thighs by two Aquilans; and

2. Four of the accused-appellants were found guilty of the crime of slight physical
injuries. 

4. Auxies’ Privilege Round – in which the auxiliaries were given the opportunity to 3. Two of the accused-appellants – Fidelito Dizon and Artemio Villareal – were
inflict physical pain on the neophytes. 
found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of homicide under Article 249
of the Revised Penal Code. 

They survived their first day of initiation. 

27
ISSUES: 
3) NO. The Court cannot sustain the CA in finding the accused Dizon guilty of
homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code on the basis of the
1) Whether or not the CA committed grave abuse of discretion, amounting to lack existence of intent to kill.  Animus interficendi cannot and should not be inferred
or excess of jurisdiction, when it set aside the finding of conspiracy by the trial unless there is proof beyond reasonable doubt of such intent. Instead, the Court
court and adjudicated the liability of each accused according to individual adopts and reinstates the finding of the trial court in part, insofar as it ruled that
participation (NO) 
none of the fraternity members had the specific intent to kill Lenny Villa.

2) Whether or not the CA committed grave abuse of discretion when it pronounced

Tecson, Ama, Almeda, and Bantug guilty only of slight physical injuries (YES) 
Aberration ictus
People v. Guillen
Facts:

3) Whether or not accused Dizon is guilty of homicide (NO) 

On the dates mentioned in this decision, Julio Guillen y Corpus, although not
affiliated with any particular political group, had voted for the defeated candidate in
HELD: 
the presidential elections held in 1946, Manuel A. Roxas, the successful candidate,
assumed the office of

1) NO. Grave abuse of discretion cannot be attributed to a court simply because it President of the Commonwealth and subsequently President of the Philippine
allegedly misappreciated the facts and the evidence. Mere errors of judgment are Republic. According to Guillen, he became disappointed in President Roxas for his
correctible by an appeal or a petition for review under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, alleged failure to redeem the pledges and fulfill the promises made by him during
and not by an application for a writ of certiorari. Pursuant to the rule on double the presidential election campaign; and... his disappointment was aggravated
jeopardy, the Court is constrained to deny the Petition contra Victorino et al. – the when, according to him, President Roxas, instead of looking after the interest of his
19 acquitted fraternity members. 
country, sponsored and campaigned for the approval of the so-called "parity"
measure. Hence he determined to assassinate the President.

A verdict of acquittal is immediately final and a re-examination of the merits of such After he had pondered for some time over the ways and means of assassinating
acquittal, even in the appellate courts, will put the accused in jeopardy for the same President Roxas, the opportunity presented itself on the night of March 10, 1947,
offense. 
when at a popular meeting held by the Liberal Party at Plaza de Miranda, Quiapo,
Manila, attended by a big crowd,... President Roxas, accompanied by his wife and
2) YES. The CA committed grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or daughter and surrounded by a number of ladies and gentlemen prominent in
excess of jurisdiction in finding Tecson, Ama, Almeda, and Bantug criminally government and politics, stood on a platform erected for that purpose and
liable for slight physical injuries.
delivered his speech expounding and trying to convince his thousands of listeners
of... the advantages to be gained by the Philippines, should the constitutional
Article 4(1) of the Revised Penal Code dictates that the perpetrator shall be liable amendment granting American citizens the same rights granted to Filipino nationals
for the consequences of an act, even if its result is different from that be adopted.

intended. Thus, once a person is found to have committed an initial felonious act, he thought of two hand grenades which were given him by an Anerican soldier in
such as the unlawful infliction of physical injuries that results in the death of the the early days of the liberation of Manila in exchange for... two bottles of whiskey.

victim, courts are required to automatically apply the legal framework governing the he decided to carry out his plan at the pro-parity meeting held at Plaza de Miranda
destruction of life. This rule is  mandatory, and not subject to discretion. The on the night of March 10, 1947.

accused cannot be held criminally liable for physical injuries when actual death hen he reached Plaza de Miranda, Guillen was carrying two hand grenades
occurs.
concealed in a paper bag which also contained peanuts. He buried one of the hand
grenades (Exh. "D"), in a plant pot located close to the platform, and when he
Attributing criminal liability solely to Villareal and Dizon – as if only their acts, in and decided to carry out his evil purpose he... stood on the chair on which he had been
of themselves, caused the death of Lenny Villa – is contrary to the CA’s own sitting and, from a distance of about seven meters, he hurled the grenade at the
findings. From proof that the death of the victim was the cumulative effect of the President when the latter had just closed his speech, was being congratulated
multiple injuries he suffered, the only logical conclusion is that criminal by .Ambassador Romulo and was about to leave the platform.

responsibility should redound to all those who have been proven to have directly General Castaneda, who was on the platform, saw the smoking, hissing, grenade
participated in the infliction of physical injuries on Lenny. 
and, without losing his presence of mind, kicked it away from the platform, along
the stairway, and towards an open space where the general thought the grenade

28
was likely to do the least harm; and,... covering the President with his body, In the case of People vs. Mabug-at, supra, this court held that the qualifying
shouted to the crowd that everybody should lie down.
circumstance of treachery may be properly considered, even when the victim of the
The grenade fell to the ground and exploded in the middle of a group of persons attack was not the one whom the... defendant intended to kill, if it appears from the
who were standing close to the platform.
evidence that neither of the two persons could in any manner put up defense
It was found... that the fragments of the grenade had seriously injured Simeon against the attack, or become aware of it.

Varela (or Barrela) who died on the following day as a result of mortal wounds In this connection, it should be stated that, although there is abundant proof that, in
caused by the fragments of the grenade (Exhibits F and "F-1) Alfredo Eva, Jose violation of the provisions of Article 148 of the Revised Penal Code, the accused
Fabio, Pedro Carrillo and Emilio Maglalang.
Guillen has committed among others the offense of assault upon a person in
Angel Garcia, who was one of the spectators at that meeting, saw how a person authority, for in fact his efforts... were directed toyjards the execution of his main
who was standing next to him hurled an object at the platform and-, after the... purpose of eliminating President Roxas for his failure to redeem his electoral
explosion, ran away towards a barber shop located near the platform at Plaza de campaign promises, by throwing at him in his official capacity as the Chief
Miranda
Executive of the nation the hand grenade in question, yet, in view of the... failure of
Manuel Robles volunteered the information that the person with whom Angel the prosecution to insert in the information the appropriate allegation charging
Garcia was wrestling was Julio Guillen
Guillen with the commission of said offense, we shall refrain from making a finding
Julio Guillen was, within two hours after the occurrence, found in his home at 1724 to that effect.

Juan Luna Street, Manila, brought to the police headquarters and identified by The sentence of the trial court being correct, we have no alternative but to affirm it,
Angel Garcia, as the same person who hurled towards the... platform the object and we hereby do so by a unanimous vote.

which exploded and -whom Garcia tried to hold when he was running away.
Principles:

Issues:
He is therefore liable for all the consequences of his wrongful act; for in accordance
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder and... multiple frustrated with article 4 of the Revised Penal Code, criminal liability is incurred by any...
murder... the appellant guilty of murder for the death of Simeon Varel... the... person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from
appellant guilty of the complex crime of murder and multiple frustrated murder
that which he intended.

Ruling:
Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code provides as follows:

when Guillen attended that meeting, carrying with him two hand grenades, to put "Art. 48. Penalty for Complex Crimes. When a single act constitutes two or more
into execution his preconceived plan to assassinate President Roxas,... he knew grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is a necessary means for
fully well that, by throwing one of those two hand grenades in his possession at committing the other, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be imposed, the
President Roxas, and causing it to explode, he could not prevent the persons who same to be applied in its... maximum period."

were around his main and intended victim from being killed or at least injured, due In the case of People vs. Mabug-at, supra, this court held that the qualifying
to the highly explosive... nature of the bomb employed by him to carry out his evil circumstance of treachery may be properly considered, even when the victim of the
purpose.
attack was not the one whom the... defendant intended to kill, if it appears from the
He stated that he performed the act voluntarily; that his purpose was to kill the evidence that neither of the two persons could in any manner put up defense
President, but that it did not make any difference to... him if there were some against the attack, or become aware of it.

people around the President when he hurled that bomb, because the killing of
those who surrounded the President was tantamount to killing the President, in Error in personae
view of the fact that those persons, being loyal to the President, were identified with People v. Sabalones
the latter.
Fact: Beronga, Sabalones, Alegarbes, and Cabanero were convicted after a
In throwing hand grenade at the President with the intention of killing him, the shooting incident in Cebu in 1985 which led to the death of Glenn Tiempo and
appellant acted with malice.
Alfredo Nardo, and fatal injuries of Nelson Tiempo, Rey Bolo and Rogelio Presores.
We think it is the above-quoted article and not paragraph 1 of article 49 that is The victims were asked to bring the car of a certain Stephen Lim who also attended
applicable. The ease before us is clearly governed by the first clause of article 49 a wedding party. Nelson Tiempo drove the car with Rogelio Presores. Alfredo Nardo
because by a single act, that of throwing a highly explosive hand grenade at drove the owner-type jeep along with Glenn Tiempo and Rey Bolo to aid the group
President Roxas, the accused... committed two grave felonies, namely: (1) murder, back to the party after parking the car at Lim’s house. When they reached the gate,
of which Simeon Varela was the victim; and (2) multiple attempted murder, of which they were met with a sudden burst of gunfire. The accused were identified as the
President Roxas, Alfredo Eva, Jose Fabio, Pedro Carrillo and Emilio Maglalang gunmen. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court. Sabalones
were the injured parties.
and Beronga appealed.

The killing of Simeon Varela was attended by the qualifying circumstance of

treachery.

29
 the consummated felony. Because there are no mitigating or aggravating
Crime Committed: Two counts of murder, and three counts of frustrated murder 
conspiracy between the two accused. It does not matter that the prosecution has
failed to show who was between the two who actually pulled the trigger that killed
Contention of the People: Prosecution witnesses Edwin Santos and Rogelio the child. They are liable as co-conspirators since the act of a conspirator becomes
Presores testified about the shooting and identified the faces of the accused. the act of another regardless of the precise degree of participation in the act. 

Presores was riding in the car that is behind the jeep. He positively identified
Sabalones as one of the gunmen. When the gunmen fired at the car, driver Nelson Also there was a presence of treachery, because of the circumstances that the
Tiempo immediately maneuvered and arrived at Major Juan Tiempo’s house from crime was done at night time and that the accused hid themselves among the
which they have escaped death.
bamboo. Evident premeditation is also an aggravating circumstance [the accused
had planned to kill the victim some days before].

Contention of the Accused: Accused-appellants Sabalones and Beronga denied

their presence during the commission of the crime. Sabalones presented numerous
witnesses who stated that he was sound asleep when the incident took place
[since he got tired watching over his brother’s wake]. While Beronga testified that
he attended a cock-derby in Cebu, and was fetched by his wife at 7 pm, arrived
home by 10:30 pm to sleep. Sabalones even escaped from place to place to flee
from the wrath of Maj. Juan Tiempo, the father of the two victims. The defense
even pointed out errors from the testimonies of the witnesses arguing that the place
where the incident happened is dim and not lighted.
deceased in the sum of P1,000, with costs.
People v. Opera
Practer Intentionem
People v. Albuquerque
The judgment appealed from finds the appellants Gines Alburquerque guilty of the
crime of homicide committed on the person of Manuel Osma and sentences him to
eight years and one day of  prision mayor, and to indemnify the heirs of the

RULING: The appeal is DENIED. Costs against appellants.

The appellant herein, who is a widower of fifty-five years of age and father of nine
living children, has been suffering from partial paralysis for some time, walks
Issue 1: Whether the prosecution witnesses and evidences are credible?
dragging one leg and has lost control of the movement of his right arm. He has
Yes. RTC findings were binding to court with appreciated testimonies of two been unable to work since he suffered the stroke of paralysis. One of his daughters
witnesses. There was positive identification by survivors who saw them when they was named Maria and another, are married, while still another one is a nun. With
peered during lulls in gunfire. The place was well-lit, whether from post of car’s the exemption of the other married daughter and the nun, of all of them, including
headlights. The extrajudicial confession has no bearing because the conviction was the appellant, live with Maria upon whom they depend for support.

based on positive identification. It is binding though to the co-accused because it is

used as cirmustancial evidence corroborated by one witness. The inconcistencies Among the daughters living with Maria, one named Pilar became acquainted and
are minor and inconsequential which strengthen credibility of testimony. had intimate relations later with the deceased Manuel Osma about the end of the
Furthermore, in aberratio ictus [mistake in blow], mistake does not diminish year 1928. It was then that the appellant became acquainted with the deceased
culpability; same gravity applies, more proper to use error in personae. Alibi cannot who frequently visited Pilar in his house. The relations between Pilar and the
prevail over positive identification by the prosecution witnesses. 
deceased culminated in Pilar's giving birth to a child. The appellant did not know
that his daughter's relations with the deceased had gone to such extremes, that he
Issue 2: Whether the alibis are acceptable?
had to be deceived with the information that she had gone to her godfather's house
No. It was still quite near the crime scene. It is overruled by positive identification. in Singalong, when in fact she had been taken to the Chinese Hospital for delivery.
Using the case of People v. Nescio, Alibi is not credible when the accused- The appellant learned the truth only when Pilar returned home with her child.

appellant is only a short distance from the scene of the crime. Furthermore, flight
indicates guilt. 
Naturally the appellant was deeply affected by this incident, since which time he
has appeared sad and worried not only because of the dishonor it brought upon his
Issue 3:Whether the correct penalty is imposed?
family but also because the child meant an added burden to Maria upon whom they
No. Under Article 248 of the RPC, the imposable penalty is reclusion temporal in its all depended for support. For some time the appellant wrote letters, that at times
maximum period, to death. There being no aggravating or mitigating circumstance, were hostile and threatening and at other times entreating the deceased to
aside from the qualifying circumstance of treachery, the appellate court correctly legitimize his union with Pilar by marrying her, or at least, to support her and his
imposed reclusion perpetua for murder. The CA erred in computing the penalty for child. Although the deceased agreed to give the child a monthly allowance by way
each of the three counts of frustrated murder. Under Article 50 of the RPC, the of support, he never complied with his promise.

penalty for frustrated felony is next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for
30
The appellant was in such a mood when he presented himself one day at the office
where the deceased worked and asked leave of the manager thereof to speak to
Osma. They both went downstairs. What happened later, nobody witnessed. But
the undisputed fact is that on that occasion the appellant inflicted a wound at the
base of the neck of the deceased, causing his death.
sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of from one (1) year of prision
After excluding the improbable portions thereof, the court infers from the testimony
of the appellant that he proposed to said deceased to marry his daughter and that,
upon hearing that the latter refused to do so, he whipped out his penknife. Upon
seeing the appellant's attitude, the deceased tried to seize him by the neck
whereupon the said appellant stabbed him on the face with the said penknife. Due
to his lack of control of the movement of his arm, the weapon landed on the base
of the neck of the deceased.
At about 2:00am of September 13, 1952, the bus, operated by its owner defendant
The trial court found that the appellant did not intend to cause so grave an injury as
the death of the deceased. We find that his conclusion is supported by the
evidence. In his testimony the appellant emphatically affirmed that he only wanted
to inflict a wound that would leave a permanent scar on the face of the deceased,
or one that would compel him to remain in the hospital for a week or two but never
intended to kill him, because then it would frustrate his plan of compelling him to
marry or, at least, support his daughter. The appellant had stated this intention in
some of his letters to the deceased by way of a threat to induce him to accept his
proposal for the benefit of his daughter. That the act of the appellant in stabbing the
deceased resulted in the fatal wound at the base of his neck, was due solely to the
fact hereinbefore mentioned that appellant did not have control of his right arm on
account of paralysis and the blow, although intended for the face, landed at the
base of the neck.
That same day, the charred bodies of the four passengers inside the bus were
Therefore, the mitigating circumstance of lack of intention to cause so grave an
injury as the death of the deceased as well as those of his having voluntarily
surrendered himself to the authorities, and acted under the influence of passion
and obfuscation, should be taken into consideration in favor of the appellant.
After trial, the CFI Cavite awarded P1,000 to the plaintiffs plus P600 as attorney's
Under the facts above stated, we cannot entertain the appellant's contention that
he acted in legitimate self-defense inasmuch as he provoked and commenced the
aggression by whipping out and brandishing his penknife.
Issue:  W/N the proximate cause of the death of Bataclan was the overturning of
The defense likewise claims that, at all events, article 49 of the Revised Penal
Code, which refers to cases where the crime committed is different from that
intended by the accused, should be applied herein. This article is a reproduction of
article 64 of the old Code and has been interpreted as applicable only in cases
where the crime befalls a different person (decisions of the Supreme Court of Spain
of October 20, 1897, and June 28,1899), which is not the case herein.
of the gasoline from the tank was not unnatural or unexpected.
The facts as herein proven constitute the crime of homicide defined and penalized
in article 249 of the Revised Penal Code with  reclusion temporal. In view of the
concurrence therein of three mitigating circumstances without any aggravating
circumstance, the penalty next lower in degree, that is  prision mayor, should be
imposed.
Wherefore, pursuant to the provisions of Act No. 4103, the appellant is hereby
correccional to eight (8) years and (1) day of prision mayor, affirming the judgment
appealed from in all other respects, with the costs. So ordered.
Street, Abad Santos, Vickers, and Butte, JJ., concur.
Causation
Bactalan v. Medina
Facts:
Mariano Medina and driven by its regular chauffeur, Conrado Saylon, left the town
of Amadeo, Cavite. While on its way to Pasay City, one of the front tires burst and
the vehicle began to zig-zag until it fell into a canal or ditch on the right side of the
road and turned turtle.
Some of the passengers managed to leave the bus but the three passengers
seated beside the driver, named Bataclan, Lara and the Visayan and the woman
behind them named Natalia Villanueva, could not get out of the overturned bus. No
evidence to show that the freed passengers, including the driver and the conductor,
made any attempt to pull out or extricate and rescue the four passengers trapped
inside the vehicle.
After half an hour, came about ten men, one of them carrying a lighted torch,
approach the overturned bus, and almost immediately, a fierce fire started, burning
and all but consuming the bus, including the four passengers trapped inside it. 
removed and duly identified that of Juan Bataclan. By reason of his death, his
widow, Salud Villanueva, in her name and in behalf of her five minor children,
brought the present suit to recover from Mariano Medina compensatory, moral, and
exemplary damages and attorney's fees in the total amount of P87,150.
fee, plus P100, the value of the merchandise being carried by Bataclan to Pasay
City for sale and which was lost in the fire. Both plaintiffs and defendants appealed
the case to CA which endorsed the case to SC. 
the bus or the fire that burned the bus, including the 4 passengers left inside. 
Held:
The Court held that the proximate cause was the overturning of the bus because
when the vehicle turned not only on its side but completely on its back, the leaking
The coming of the men with a lighted torch was in response to the call for help,
made not only by the passengers, but most probably, by the driver and the
conductor themselves, and that because it was dark (about 2:30 in the morning),
the rescuers had to carry a light with them, and coming as they did from a rural
area where lanterns and flashlights were not available. 
31
In other words, the coming of the men with a torch was to be expected and was a coma after the... operation... ue to financial constraints, Aro was taken out of the
natural sequence of the overturning of the bus, the trapping of some of its hospital against the doctor's orders and eventually, died the next day.

passengers and the call for outside help. 

Issues:

Moreover, the burning of the bus can also in part be attributed to the negligence of D... as will be explained hereunder.

the carrier, through its driver and its conductor. According to the witness, the driver Death Caused in a Tumultuous Affray to that of Homicide, as will be explained
and the conductor were on the road walking back and forth. They, or at least, the hereunder.

driver should and must have known that in the position in which the overturned bus ntent only to inflict slight physical injuries on Aro, they should only be meted the
was, gasoline could and must have leaked from the gasoline tank and soaked the corresponding penalty therefor in its maximum period,[28] pursuant to Article 49
area in and around the bus. 
of... the RPC

The leaked gasoline can be smelt and directed even from a distance, and yet Ruling:

neither the driver nor the conductor would appear to have cautioned or taken steps Death Caused in a Tumultuous Affray to that of Homicide, as will be explained
to warn the rescuers not to bring the lighted torch too near the bus.
hereunder.

In addition, the case involves a breach of contract of transportation because the there was no tumultuous affray between groups of persons in the course of which
Medina Transportation failed to carry Bataclan safely to his destination, Pasay City. Aro died. On the contrary, the evidence clearly established that there were only two
There was likewise negligence on the part of the defendant, through his agent, the (2) persons, Wacoy and Quibac, who picked on one defenseless individual, Aro,
driver Saylon. There is evidence to show that at the time of the blow out, the bus and attacked... him repeatedly, taking turns in inflicting punches and kicks on the
was speeding and that the driver failed to changed the tires into new ones as poor victim. There was no confusion and tumultuous quarrel or affray, nor was there
instructed by Mariano Medina. 
a reciprocal aggression in that fateful incident.

The driver had not been diligent and had not taken the necessary precautions to if the victim dies because of a deliberate act of the malefactors, intent to kill is
insure the safety of his passengers. Had he changed the tires, specially those in conclusively presumed.[30] In such... case, even if there is no intent to kill, the
front, with new ones, as he had been instructed to do, probably, despite his crime is Homicide because with respect to crimes of personal violence, the penal
speeding, the blow out would not have occurred.
law looks particularly to the material results following the unlawful act and holds the
Ratio:
aggressor responsible for all the consequences... thereof.

Proximate cause is that cause, which, in natural and continuous sequence, Principles:

unbroken by any efficient intervening cause, produces the injury, and without which WHEN TO APPLY ARTICLE 49 IN RELATION TO HOMICIDE (ART. 249)

the result would not have occurred.

Jurisprudence instructs that such provision should only apply where the crime
Comprehensively, 'the proximate legal cause is that acting first and producing the committed is different from that intended and where the felony committed befalls a
injury, either immediately or by setting other events in motion, all constituting a different person (error in personae); and not to cases where more serious
natural and continuous chain of events, each having a close causal connection with consequences not intended by the... offender result from his felonious act (praeter
its immediate predecessor, the final event in the chain immediately effecting the intentionem),[29] as in this case.

injury as a natural and probable result of the cause which first acted, under such
circumstances that the person responsible for the first event should, as an ordinary
prudent and intelligent person, have reasonable ground to expect at the moment of People v. Iligan
his act or default that an injury to some person might probably result therefrom.
FACTS:
At around 2 in the morning Esmeraldo Quinones and his companions Zaldy Asis
and Felix Lukban were walking home from barangay Sto. Domingo after attending
Wacoy v. People a barrio fiesta. On the way they met the accused Fernando Iligan and his nephew
Facts:
Edmundo Asis and Juan Macandog. Edmundo Asis pushed them aside prompting
Wacoy and Quibac were charged with the crime of Homicide... he saw Wacoy kick Zaldy Asis to box him. Felix quickly said that they had no desire to fight. Upon
Aro's stomach twice, after which, Wacoy picked up a rock to throw at Aro but was seeing his nephew fall,

restrained from doing so. As Aro stood up, Quibac punched him... on the stomach, Fernando Iligan drew from his back a bolo and hacked Zaldy but missed. Terrified
causing him to collapse and cry in pain. Thereafter, Aro was taken to the hospital.
the trio ran, pursued by the three accused. They ran for a good while and even
Aro was diagnosed to be suffering from "blunt abdominal trauma with injury to the passed the house of Quinones, when they noticed that they were no longer being

jejunum... he sustained a perforation on his ileum... that... caused intestinal chased the three decided to head back to Quinones house. On the way back the
bleeding, and that his entire abdominal peritoneum was filled with air and fluid three accused suddenly emerged from the road side, Fernando Iligan then hacked
contents from the bile. However, Aro suffered cardiac arrest during the operation, Quinones Jr.

and while he was revived through cardiopulmonary resuscitation, he lapsed into a

32
on the forehead with his bolo causing him to fall down. Felix and Zaldy ran. Upon ISSUE: WON Urbano’s action was the proximate cause of the death of Javier.

returning they saw that Quinones Jr. was already dead with his head busted.
RULING:  NO. Pursuant to this provision “an accused is criminally responsible for
The postmortem examination report and the death certificate indicates that the acts committed by him in violation of law and for all the natural and logical
victim died of “ shock and massive cerebral hemorrhages due to vehicular consequences resulting therefrom. The rule is that the death of the victim must be
accident.”
the direct, natural, and logical consequence of the wounds inflicted upon him by the
accused

ISSUE: The petitioner reiterates his position that the proximate cause of the death of
Whether or not the accused are liable for the victim’s death given that it was due to Marcelo Javier was due to his own negligence, that Dr. Mario Meneses found no
a vehicular accident and not the hacking.
tetanus in the injury, and that Javier got infected with tetanus when after two weeks
he returned to his farm and tended his tobacco plants with his bare hands exposing
HELD: YES. the wound to harmful elements like tetanus germs.

We are convinced beyond peradventure that indeed after Quinones, Jr. had fallen Consequently, Javier’s wound could have been infected with tetanus after the
from the bolo hacking perpetrated by Iligan, he was run over by  a vehicle.  This hacking incident. Considering the circumstance surrounding Javier’s death, his
finding, however, does not in any way exonerate Iligan from liability for the death of 
wound could have been infected by tetanus 2 or 3 or a few but not 20 to 22 days
Quinones Jr. This being under ART 4 of the RPC which states that criminal liability before he died. The medical findings, however, lead us to a distinct possibility that
shall be incurred by any person committing a felony although the wrongful act done the infection of the wound by tetanus was an efficient intervening cause later or
be different from that which he intended.
between the time Javier was wounded to the time of his death. The infection was,
The essential requisites of Art 4 are: that an intentional felony has been committed therefore, distinct and foreign to the crime.

and that the wrong done to the aggrieved party be the direct natural and logical And if an independent negligent act or defective condition sets into operation the
consequence
instances which result in injury because of the prior defective condition, such
of the felony committed by the offender. subsequent act or condition is the proximate cause.

It is held that the essential elements are present in this case. The intentional felony CA’s decision was SET ASIDE and petioner is ACQUITED of the crime of homicide.

committed was the hacking of the head of Quinones the fact that it was considered Doctrine:  Proximate legal cause is that acting first and producing the injury, either
superficial by the physician is immaterial. The location of the wound intended to do immediately or by setting other events in motion, all constituting a natural and
away with him.
continuous chain of events, each having a close causal connection with its
The  hacking  incident  happened  on  the  national  highway  where  vehicles  pass  any immediate predecessor, the final event in the chain immediately effecting the injury
moment, the hacking blow received by Quinones weakened him and was run over as a natural and probable result of the cause which first acted, under such
by a vehicle. The hacking by Iligan is thus deemed as the proximate cause of the circumstances that the person responsible for the first event should, as an ordinarily
victim’s death.
prudent and intelligent person, have reasonable ground to expect at the moment of
Iligan is held liable for homicide absent any qualifying circumstances.
his act or default that an injury to some person might probably result therefrom.

People v. Abarca
FACT:

Urbano v. Intermediate Appellate Court One day in 1984, Francisco Abarca, through a peephole, caught his wife having
FACTS: Marcelino Javier opened the irrigation of a canal by means of cutting grass sexual intercourse with one Khingsley Paul Koh inside the Abarca residence. The
which caused the flooding of the storage area of the petitioner. Petitioner got angry two also caught Abarca  looking at them and so Koh grabbed his pistol and
and demanded Javier to pay for the soaked palay. Javier refused and a quarrel thereafter Abarca fled. One hour later, Abarca, armed with an armalite, went to the
between them ensued. Urbano unsheathed his bolo and hacked Javier hitting him gambling place where Koh usually stays and then and there shot Koh  multiple
on the right hand and left leg. Javier went to the hospital for the treatment of the times. Koh died instantaneously. However, two more persons were shot in the
wounds. Two weeks after, Javier returned to his farm and tended to his tobacco adjacent room. These two other persons survived due to timely medical
plants.
intervention.

Then, on a fateful day of November 14, Javier was rushed to the hospital. Doctors Eventually after trial, Abarca was convicted of the complex crime of  murder with
findings showed that he was suffering from tetanus infection. The next day, Javier frustrated double murder.

died.
ISSUE: Whether or not the judgment of conviction is correct.

RTC and CA found the petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of homicide. HELD: No. Abarca is entitled to the provisions of Article 247 of the Revised Penal
Petitioner raised the case to the SC arguing that the cause of the death of Javier Code which provides:

was due to his own negligence.

33
Any legally married person who, having surprised his spouse in the act of
committing sexual intercourse with another person, shall kill any of them or
both of them in the act or immediately thereafter, or shall inflict upon them any
serious physical injury, shall suffer the penalty of destierro.
Article 247 prescribes the following elements: (1) that a legally married person
surprises his spouse in the act of committing sexual intercourse with another
person; and (2) that he kills any of them or both of them in the act or immediately
thereafter. These elements are present in this case.
killed had the police not promptly intervened.
and thereafter, a heated exchange of words ensued. In the following day, when
Ruben and his three year old daughter went to the store to buy food, Edgardo
together with his brother Esmeraldo and Ismael Rivera emerged from their house
and ganged up on him. Esmeraldo and Ismael mauled Ruben with fist blows. And
as he fell to the ground, Edgardo hit him three times with a hollow block on the
parietal area. The Rivera brothers fled when policemen came. The doctor declared
that the wounds were slight and superficial, though the victim could have been

Even though one hour had already lapsed from the time Abarca caught his wife
with Koh and the time he killed Koh, the killing was still the direct by-product of Issues:
Abarca’s rage. Therefore, Abarca is not liable for the death of Koh.
(1) WON there was intent to kill.

However, Abarca is still liable for the injuries he caused to the two other persons he
shot in the adjacent room but his liability shall not be for frustrated murder. In the (2) WON the Court of Appeals was correct in modifying the crime from frustrated to
first place, Abarca has no intent to kill the other two persons injured. He was not attempted murder.

also committing a crime when he was firing his gun at Koh – it being under Art. 247.
Abarca was however negligent because he did not exercise all precaution to make (3) WON the aggravating circumstance of treachery was properly applied.

sure no one else will be hurt. As such, he shall be liable for  less serious physical
injuries through simple negligence for the injuries suffered by the two other persons Held:
who were in the adjacent room when the incident happened.
(1) Yes. The Court held that there was intent to kill as Esmeraldo and Ismael
pummeled the victim with fist blows, while Edgardo hit him three times with a
III. STAGES OF EXECUTION hollow block. Even though the wounds sustained by the victim were merely
superficial and could not have produced his death, intent to kill is presumed.

Consummated crimes
US v. Eduave (2) Yes. The Court of Appeals was correct since based on Art. 6 of the RPC, there is
FACTS:
an attempt when the offender commences the commission of the felony directly by
Defendant Protasio Eduave is the querido of the victim’s mother. Eduave attacked overt acts and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the
the victim from behind using a bolo creating a gash 8 1/2 inches long and 2 inches felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous
deep because the latter accused defendant of having commiting rape against said desistance.

victim. Upon thinking that he has already killed the victim, he threw the body into
the bushes and left.
(3) Yes. The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack, which
ISSUE/S:
gives no opportunity for the victim to repel it or defend himself. In the present case,
What is the crime committed by Eduave?
the sudden attack to the victim caused him to be overwhelmed and had no chance
HELD:
to defend himself and retaliate. Thus, there was treachery.

Accused is guilty of frustrated murder. The fact that Eduave attacked the victim
from behind, in a vital portion of the body, shows treachery qualifying it as murder.
The crime was not consummated because the elements of the crime’s execution
and accomplishment were not complete as the victim did not die. Neither was the
crime an attempted one because the accused’s actions has already passed the
subjective phase, that is, there was no external force preventing defendant from
performing all the acts of execution necessary to commit the felony. Consequently,
the victim did not die because an external element has prevented such death after
Eduave has performed all the necessary acts of execution that would have caused
the death of the victim.
with more cartons of detergent. Thereafter, Valenzuela hailed a taxi and started
Rivera v. People
Facts:
As Ruben Rodil went to a nearby store to buy food, Edgardo Rivera mocked him for
being jobless and dependent on his wife for support. Ruben resented the rebuke
Stages of execution in relation to specific felonies
1. Theft
Valenzuela v. People
Facts: While a security guard was manning his post the open parking area of a
supermarket, he saw the accused, Aristotel Valenzuela, hauling a push cart loaded
with cases of detergent and unloaded them where his co-accused, Jovy Calderon,
was waiting. Valenzuela then returned inside the supermarket, and later emerged
loading the boxes of detergent inside. As the taxi was about to leave the security
guard asked Valenzuela for the receipt of the merchandise. The accused reacted by
fleeing on foot, but were subsequently apprehended at the scene. The trial court
convicted both Valenzuela and Calderon of the crime of consummated theft.
34
Valenzuela appealed before the Court of Appeals, arguing that he should only be es nor by the voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ri
convicted of frustrated theft since he was not able to freely dispose of the articles pen into a concrete offense. In the case of robbery, it must be shown that the offe
stolen. The CA affirmed the trial court’s decision, thus the Petition for Review was nder clearly intended to take possession, for the purpose of gain, of some per
filed before the Supreme Court.
sonal property belonging to another. In the instant case, it may only be inferred a
s a logical conclusion that his evident intention was to enter by means of force said 
Issue: Whether or not petitioner Valenzuela is guilty of frustrated theft. store against the will of its owner. That his final objective, once he succeeded in ent
ering the store, was to rob, to cause physical injury to the inmates, or to commit an
Held: No. Article 6 of the RPC provides that a felony is consummated when all the y other offense, there is nothing in the record to justify a concrete finding.

elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present. In the crime
of theft, the following elements should be present – (1) that there be taking of
personal property; (2) that said property belongs to another; (3) that the taking be
done with intent to gain; (4) that the taking be done without the consent of the
owner; and (5) that the taking be accomplished without the use of violence against
or intimidating of persons or force upon things. The court held that theft is
produced when there is deprivation of personal property by one with intent to gain.
It must be borne in mind (I Groizard, p. 99) that in offenses not consummated, as 
the material damage is wanting, the nature of the action intended (accion fin) ca
nnot exactly be ascertained, but the same must be inferred from the nature of t
he acts executed (accion medio).  The relation existing between the facts submitt
ed for appreciation and the offense which said facts are supposed to produce must
 be direct; the intention must be ascertained from the facts and therefore it is neces
sary, in order to avoid regrettable instances of injustice.

Thus, it is immaterial that the offender is able or unable to freely dispose the
property stolen since he has already committed all the acts of execution and the
deprivation from the owner has already ensued from such acts. Therefore, theft
cannot have a frustrated stage, and can only be attempted or consummated.
2. Illegal Trespass
Under article 280 of the Revised Penal Code, the Court is of the opinion  that the fa
ct under consideration does not constitute attempted robbery but attempted trespa
ss to dwelling. Against the accused must be taken into consideration the aggravati
ng circumstances of nighttime and former convictions, — inasmuch as the record s
hows that several final judgments for robbery and theft have been rendered against 
him — and in his favor, the mitigating circumstance of lack of instruction.

People v. Lamahang
FACTS:
3. Physical Injuries, Homicide, and Murder
The defendant Aurelio Lamahang is  on appeal from a decision finding him guilty of  People v. Trinidad
attempted robbery.

At early dawn on March 2, 1935, policeman Jose Tomambing, who was patrolling hi
s beat on Delgado and C.R. Fuentes streets of the City of Iloilo, caughtthe accused  Martinez v. CA
in the act of making an opening with an iron bar on the wall of a store of cheap goo Facts:
ds located on the last named street.
The spouses Romeo Martinez and Leonor Suarez are the registered owners of two
At that time the owner of the store, Tan Yu, was sleeping inside with another China (2) parcels of land located in Lubao, Pampanga. The disputed property was
man.
originally owned by one Paulino Montemayor, who secured a "titulo real" over it
The accusedhad only succeeded in breaking one board and in unfastening another  way back in 1883. After the death of Paulino Montemayor the said property passed
from the wall, when the policeman showed up, who instantly arrested him and plac to his successors-in-interest, Maria Montemayor and Donata Montemayor, who in
ed him under custody.
turn, sold it, as well as the first parcel, to a certain Potenciano Garcia.

Because Potenciano Garcia was prevented by the then municipal president of

ISSUE:
Lubao, Pedro Beltran, from restoring the dikes constructed on the contested
WON the accused was erroneously declared guilty of attempted robbery
property, Garcia filed a civil case with the Court of First Instance against Beltran to
 
restrain the latter in his official capacity from molesting him in the possession of
RULING:
said second parcel, and on even date, applied for a writ of preliminary injunction,
YES, he was erroneously declared guilty of attempted robbery. The accused is then which was issued against said municipal president. The Court declared permanent
 held guilty of attempted trespass to dwelling, committed by means of force, with th the preliminary injunction.

e aforesaid aggravating and mitigating circumstances and sentenced to three mont On April 17, 1925. Potenciano Garcia applied for the registration of both parcels of
hs and one day of arresto mayor.
land in his name, and the Court of First Instance of Pampanga, sitting as land
registration court, granted the registration.

RATIONALE:
Thereafter, the ownership of these properties changed hands until eventually they
It is necessary to prove that said beginning of execution, if carried to its complete t were acquired by the spouses.

ermination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacl
35
To avoid any untoward incident, the disputants agreed to refer the matter to the Iloilo, to drain the water therein and prepare the ground for planting the next day, he
Committee on Rivers and Streams, which, after conducting an ocular inspection, heard a shout from afar telling him not to open the dike, Nacionales continued
reported that the parcel was not a public river but a private fishpond owned by the opening the dike, and the same voice shouted again, “Don’t you dare open the
herein spouses.
dike.Then he looked up, he saw Isidoro Mondragon coming towards him.
The Secretary of Public Works and Communications, ordered another investigation Nacionales informed appellant that he was opening the dike

of the said parcel of land, directing the spouses to remove the dikes they had because he would plant the next morning. Without much ado, Mondragon tried to
constructed, threatening that the dikes would be demolished should the spouses hit the complainant who dodged the blow. Thereupon, appellant drew his bolo and
fail to comply therewith within 30 days.
struck complainant on different parts of his body. Complainant blacked out,
Issue: unsheathed his own bolo, and hacked appellant on the head and forearm and
Whether the spouses are purchasers for value and in good faith on the parcel between the middle and ring fingers in  order to defend himself. The appellant
alleged to be a public river.
retreated, and the complainant did not pursue him but went home instead. The
Held: following day, the complainant was treated Dr. Alfredo Jamandre, Municipal Health
No, they are not.
Officer of Miagao, Iloilo with number of wounds (jaw, below the right eye, left arm
There is no weight in the spouses' argument that, being a purchaser for value and and fingers).

in good faith of Lot No. 2, the nullification of its registration would be contrary to the
law and to the applicable decisions of the Supreme Court as it would destroy the The Court of Appeals concluded that the petitioner had the intention to kill the
stability of the title which is the core of the system of registration. Appellants cannot offended party when the petitioner answered in the affirmative the question as
be deemed purchasers for value and in good faith as in the deed of absolute to whether he would do everything that he could do to stop the offended party from
conveyance executed in their favor.
digging the canal because he needed the water

Before purchasing a parcel of land, it cannot be contended that the spouses did
not know exactly the condition of the land that they were buying and the obstacles ISSUE: Whether Mondragon is guilty of the  crime of frustrated homicide or less
or restrictions thereon that may be put up by the government in connection with serious physical injury.

their project of converting Lot No. 2 in question into a fishpond. Nevertheless, they
willfully and voluntarily assumed the risks attendant to the sale of said lot. One who HELD:

buys something with knowledge of defect or lack of title in his vendor cannot claim In view of the foregoing, the decision of the Court of Appeals appealed from should
that he acquired it in good faith.
be, as it is hereby, modified in the sense that the petitioner is declared guilty of the
offense of less serious physical injuries and he is sentenced to suffer the penalty of
The ruling that a purchaser of a registered property cannot go beyond the record to three months and fifteen days of arresto mayor, with costs.

make inquiries as to the legality of the title of the registered owner, but may rely on
the registry to determine if there is no lien or encumbrances over the same, cannot   SC hold  that the facts brought out in the  decision of the Court of Appeals in
be availed of as against the law and the accepted principle that rivers are parts of the present case do not justify a finding that the petitioner had the intention to kill
the public domain for public use and not capable of private appropriation or the offended party. On the contrary, there are facts brought out by the  decision
acquisition by prescription.
appealed from which indicates that the petitioner had no  intention to kill, namely:
the petitioner started the assault on the offended party by just going him fist blows;
Mondragon v. People the wounds inflicted on

FACTS:
the offended party were of slight nature, indicating no homicidal urge on the part of
The petitioner, Isidoro Mondragon, was prosecuted in the Court of First Instance of the petitioner; the petitioner retreated and went away when the offended party
Iloilo of the crime of  frustrated homicide. After trial the Court of First Instance of started hitting him with a bolo, thereby indicating that if the petitioner had intended
Iloilo found him guilty of the crime of attempted homicide and sentenced him to an to kill the offended party he would have held his ground and kept on hitting the
indeterminate prison term of from 4 months and 21 days of arresto mayor  to 2 offended party with his bolo to kill him.

years, 4 months and ! day of prision correccional, with the accessory penalties of
the law and the costs. Mondragon appealed to the Court of Appeals, and the latter The element of intent to kill not having been duly established, and considering that
court affirmed the decision of the Court of First Instance of Iloilo in all its parts, with the injuries suffered by the offended party were not necessarily fatal and could be
costs.
healed in less than 30 days, SC hold that the offense that was committed by the
petitioner is only that of less serious physical injuries.

At about 5 in the afternoon of July 11, 1954, while complainant Serapion

Nacionales was opening the dike of his ricefield situated in Antandan, Miagao,
36
  The offense of less serious physical injuries, as defined in Article 265 of the and panty.  He ordered her to lie down on the floor and then mounted her. He made
Revised Penal Code, is punishable by arresto mayor or imprisonment of from 1 her hold his penis and insert it in her vagina. Still poked with a knife, she did as told
month and 1 day to  6 months. The facts as found by the Court of Appeals do but since she kept moving, only a portion of his penis entered her.  He then laid
not show any aggravating or mitigating circumstance that may e considered in the down on his back and commanded her to mount him. Still only a small part of his
imposition of the penalty on the petitioner. SC, therefore, sentence the petitioner to penis was inserted into her vagina. When he had both his hands flat on the floor.
suffer the penalty of 
She dashed out to the next room and locked herself in. When he pursued her and
three months and fifteen days of arresto mayor.
climbed the partition, she ran to another room then another then she jumped out
through a window.

People v. Sy Pio •      Still naked, she darted to the municipal building, 18 meters in front of the
boarding house and knocked on the door. When there was no answer, she ran
4. Robbery around the building and knocked on the back door.  When the policemen who were
People v. Salvilla inside the building opened the door, they found her naked sitting on the stairs
Facts:
crying. Pat. Donceras, took off his jacket and wrapped it around her. Pat. Donceras
The accused Bienvenido Salvilla together with his co-accused armed with and two other policemen rushed to the boarding house  where they heard and saw
homemade guns and hand grenade robbed Rodita Habiero in the latter’s office.  In somebody running away but failed to apprehend him due to darkness.  She was
the office of Rodita; her two daughters Mary and Mimmie were also inside.  One of taken to Eastern Samar Provincial Hospital where she was physically examined.

the accused asks Mary to get the paper bag which contained money.  All accused •    Her vulva had no abrasions or discharges.

held victims as hostage when the police and military authorities had surrounded the •    RTC: frustrated rape

lumber yard.  After the negotiation fails to proceed, the police makes their move in
assaulting the robbers thus Mary and Mimmie are injured as well the accused also ISSUE: W/N there is frustrated rape.

got an injury.

HELD: NO. RTC MODIFIED. guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape
Issue:
and sentenced to reclusion perpetua as well as to indemnify the victim in the
Whether or not the crime of robbery was consummated
amount of P30,000

•      Correlating Art. 335 and Art. 6, there is no debate that the attempted and
Held:
consummated stages apply to the crime of rape. 

Yes.
•    Requisites of a frustrated felony are: 

o      (1) that the offender has performed all the acts of execution which would
Ratio:
produce the felony

From the moment the offender gained possession of the thing, even if the culprit o      (2) that the felony is not produced due to causes independent of the
had no opportunity to dispose of the same, the unlawful taking is complete.
perpetrator's will

•      attempted crime the purpose of the offender must be thwarted by a foreign

5. Rape force or agency which intervenes and compels him to stop prior to the moment
People v. Orita when he has performed all of the acts which should produce the crime as a
FACTS:
consequence, which acts it is his intention to perform

•      March 20, 1983 Early Morning: Cristina S. Abayan, 19-year old freshman o    If he has performed all of the acts which should result in the consummation of
student at the St. Joseph's College, arrived at her boarding house after her the crime and voluntarily desists from proceeding further, it can not be an attempt.

classmates brought her home from a party.  She knocked at the door of her
boarding house when a frequent visitor of another boarder held her and poked a
knife to her neck.  Despite pleading for her release, he ordered her to go upstairs
with him.  Since the door which led to the 1st floor was locked from the inside, they
used the back door to the second floor. With his left arm wrapped around her neck
and his right hand poking a "balisong" to her neck, he dragged her up the stairs.
When they reached the second floor, he commanded herwith the knife poked at her
•    in the crime of rape, from the moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his
victim he actually attains his purpose and, from that moment also all the essential
elements of the offense have been accomplished.  Any penetration of the female
organ by the male organ is sufficient. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ,
without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant
conviction. Necessarily, rape is attempted if there is no penetration of the female
organ

neck, to look for a room. They entered Abayan's room. He then pushed her hitting •    The fact is that in a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted even on
her head on the wall.  With one hand holding the knife, he undressed himself. He the sole basis of the victim's testimony if credible. Dr. Zamora did not rule out
then ordered her to take off her clothes. Scared, she took off her T-shirt, bra, pants penetration of the genital organ of the victim.

37
 FACTS: In December 1993, Norberto Cruz (Norberto) and his wife went to La Union
People v. Campuhan to sell plastic and glass wares. Along with them is AAA and BBB. Upon reaching
FACTS:
their destination, they set up a tent in order that they will have a place to sleep.

•      April 25, 1996 4 pm: Ma. Corazon P. Pamintuan, mother of 4-year old Crysthel At around 1 AM, AAA was awakened when she felt that somebody was on top of
Pamintuan, went to the ground floor of their house to prepare Milo chocolate drinks her. The person was Norberto who was mashing her breast and touching her
for her 2 children.  There she met Primo Campuhan, helper of Conrado Plata Jr., private parts. He fought back and kicked Norberto twice. He was not able to
brother of Corazon, who was then busy filling small plastic bags with water to be pursue his lustful desires; he offered AAA money and told her not to tell the incident
frozen into ice in the freezer located at the second floor.
to her mother. Thirty minutes later, when AAA retured to her tent, she again saw
•      Then she heard Crysthel cry, "Ayo'ko, ayo'ko!" so she went upstairs and saw Norberto touching private parts of BBB.

Primo Campuhan inside her children's room kneeling before Crysthel whose
pajamas or "jogging pants" and panty were already removed, while his short pants
were down to his knees and his hands holding his penis with his right hand
contending that there were many people around who were preparing for the
•      Horrified, she cursed "P - t - ng ina mo, anak ko iyan!" and boxed him several
times. He evaded her blows and pulled up his pants. He pushed Corazon aside
Later that day, they reported the incident to the police. Norberto was summoned to
the police station which resulted to an argument. He deined the allegations
“simbang gabi”, and that once AAA and BBB would scream, the policemen in the
municipal hall could hear them.

who she tried to block his path. Corazon then ran out and shouted for help thus RTC found Norberto guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes of ATTEMPTED
prompting Vicente, her brother, a cousin and an uncle who were living within their RAPE and ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS. CA promulgated its decision affirming the
compound, to chase the Campuhan who was apprehended.  They called the conviction of the petitioner for attempted rape in Criminal Case No. 2388, but
barangay officials who detained. 
acquitting him of the acts of lasciviousness.

•    Physical examination yielded negative results as Crysthel ‘s hymen was intact
ISSUE: WON accused was guilty of attempted rape.

•      Campuhan: Crysthel was in a playing mood and wanted to ride on his back RULING:  NO. There is an attempt, according to Article 6 of the  Revised Penal
when she suddenly pulled him down causing both of them to fall down on the floor.
Code, when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt
•    RTC: guilty of statutory rape, sentenced him to the extreme penalty of death
acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the
•    Thus, subject to automatic review
felony by reason of some cause or accident other than this own spontaneous
desistance.

ISSUE: W/N it was a consummated statutory rape

In attempted rape, therefore, the concrete felony is rape, but the offender does not
perform all the acts of execution of having carnal knowledge. If the slightest
HELD: NO. MODIFIED. guilty of ATTEMPTED RAPE and sentenced to an penetration of the female genitalia consummates rape, and rape in its attempted
indeterminate prison term of eight (8) years four (4) months and ten (10) days of stage requires the commencement of the commission of the felony directly by overt
prision mayor medium as minimum, to fourteen (14) years ten (10) months and acts without the offender performing all the acts of execution that should produce
twenty (20) days of reclusion temporal medium as maximum. Costs de oficio.
the felony, the only means by which the overt acts performed by the accused can
be shown to have a causal relation to rape as the intended crime is to make a clear
•    People v. De la Peña: labia majora must be entered for rape to be consummated
showing of his intent to lie with the female.

•    Primo's kneeling position rendered an unbridled observation impossible

The petitioner climbed on top of the naked victim, and was already touching her
•      Crysthel made a categorical statement denying penetration but her vocabulary genitalia with his hands and mashing her breasts when she freed herself from his
is yet as underdeveloped
clutches and effectively ended his designs on her. It is obvious that the fundamental
•      Corazon narrated that Primo had to hold his penis with his right hand, thus difference between attempted rape and acts of lasciviousness is the offender’s
showing that he had yet to attain an erection to be able to penetrate his victim
intent to lie with the female.

•      the possibility of Primo's penis having breached Crysthel's vagina is belied by The intent to penetrate is manifest only through the showing of the penis capable of
the child's own assertion that she resisted Primo's advances by putting her legs consummating the sexual act touching the external genitalia of the female Without
close together and that she did not feel any intense pain but just felt "not happy" such showing, only the felony of acts of lasciviousness is committed.

about what Primo did to her. Thus, she only shouted "Ayo'ko, ayo'ko!" not "Aray The intent to commit rape should not easily be inferred against the petitioner, even
ko, aray ko!
from his own declaration of it, if any, unless he committed overt acts directly
•      no medical basis to hold that there was sexual contact between the accused leading to rape. In People v. Bugarin, the Court said that The accused was held
and the victim
liable only for acts of lasciviousness because the intent to commit rape “is not
apparent from the act described,” and the intent to have sexual intercourse with her
was not inferable from the act of licking her genitalia.

Cruz v. People
38
The Court FINDS and PRONOUNCES petitioner NORBERTO o    Chito: He only slept and at about 6 to 6:30, Joseph told him that something had
CRUZ y BARTOLOMEguilty of ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS. happened and asked him to follow him to Room 310 carrying his gray bag and
Doctrine: The intent to penetrate is manifest only through the showing of the since no one was there they went to Room 401 where Renato Alagadan was. He
penis capable of consummating the sexual act touching the external genitalia left his grey bag at Room 306 the day before.

of the female. Without such showing, only the felony of acts of lasciviousness •      handkerchief and Malou’s night dress both contained chloroform, a volatile
is committed. poison which causes first degree burn exactly like what Malou sustained on that
part of her face where the chemical-soaked cloth had been pressed

Baleros v. People •    RTC: guilty of attempted rape

FACTS:
•    CA: Affirmed

•      Martina Lourdes Albano (Malou), a medical student of the University of Sto.

Tomas, stayed at Room 307 with her maid Marvilou.
ISSUE: W/N Chito is guilty of attempted rape

•    December 12 10:30 pm: Malou slept.  Her maid Marvilou slept on a folding bed
right in front of her bedroom door.
HELD: NO. REVERSED and SET ASIDE. ACQUITTING Renato D. Baleros, Jr. of the
•    December 13, 1991 1:00 am: Chito left the fraternity party with Robert Chan and charge for attempted rape. GUILTY of light coercion and is accordingly sentenced
Alberto wearing a barong tagalog, with t-shirt inside, with short pants with stripes to 30 days of arresto menor and to pay a fine of P200.00, with the accessory
lent by Perla Duran and leather shoes.
penalties thereof and to pay the costs.

•    December 13, 1991 1:30 am: Chito arrived at the Building wearing a white t-shirt
with fraternity symbols and black shorts with the brand name “Adidas” from a
party.  He requested permission from S/G Ferolin to go up to Room 306 leased by
Ansbert Co but at that time only Joseph Bernard Africa was there.  Although Chito
could not produce the required written authorization, he let him in because he will
be a tenant in the coming summer break.  Joseph was awaken by Chito’s knock so
•    Under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, rape is committed by a man who
has carnal knowledge or intercourse with a woman under any of the following
circumstances: (1) By using force or intimidation; (2) When the woman is deprived
of reason or otherwise unconscious; and (3) When the woman is under twelve years
of age or is demented. 

he glanced the alarm clock and let him.  He saw him wearing dark-colored shorts •    Under Article 6, in relation to the aforementioned article of the same code, rape
and white T-shirt.
is attempted when the offender commences the commission of rape directly by
•      December 13, 1991 1:50 am: Renato Baleros, Jr. y David (Chito) forcefully overt acts and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the
covered the face of Martina Lourdes T. Albano with a piece of cloth soaked in crime of rape by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous
chemical with dizzying effects.  This awakened Malou.  She struggled but could not desistance.

move because she was tightly held and pinned down on the bed.  She kicked him o    whether or not the act of the petitioner, i.e., the pressing of a chemical-soaked
and got her right hand free to squeeze his sex organ causing him to let her go.  She cloth while on top of Malou, constitutes an overt act of rape.

went for the bedroom door and woke up Marvilou.  She also intercommed S/G
Ferolin saying: "may pumasok sa kuarto ko pinagtangkaan ako".  Malou proceed to
Room 310 where her classmates Christian Alcala, Bernard Baptista, Lutgardo
Acosta and Rommel Montes were staying and seeked help.  She saw her bed in a
mess and noticed that her nightdress was stained with blue.  Aside from the
window with grills which she had originally left opened, another window inside her
o      Overt or external act has been defined as some physical activity or deed,
indicating the intention to commit a particular crime, more than a mere planning or
preparation, which if carried out to its complete termination following its natural
course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the voluntary
desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete
offense

bedroom which leads to Room 306 was now open. 

•      Chito was fully clothed and that there was no attempt on his part to undress
•      December 13, 1991 3:30 pm: Christian and his roommates, Bernard and Malou, let alone touch her private part

Lutgardo were asked by the CIS people to look for anything not belonging to them •      Verily, while the series of acts committed by the petitioner do not determine
in their Unit when Rommel Montes went inside and found a grey bag.
attempted rape, they constitute unjust vexation punishable as light coercion under
o      Christian knew right away that it belonged to Chito.  It contained white t-shirt the second paragraph of Article 287 of the Revised Penal Code.

with fraternity symbol, a Black Adidas short pants, a handkerchief , 3 white T-shirts, o      As it were, unjust vexation exists even without the element of restraint or
an underwear and socks.
compulsion for the reason that this term is broad enough to include any human
•    Chito pleaded NOT Guilty
conduct which, although not productive of some physical or material harm, would
•      13 witnesses including Malou and her classmates, Joseph Bernard Africa, unjustly annoy or irritate an innocent person

Rommel Montes, Renato Alagadan and Christian Alcala

o    Malou: Chito was her classmate whom he rejected a week before

39
o    That Malou, after the incident in question, cried while relating to her classmates
what she perceived to be a sexual attack and the fact that she filed a case for
attempted rape proved beyond cavil that she was disturbed, if not distressed 
6. Arson
US v. Valdes
FACTS: Sometime in November 1919, a small boat was sent out to raise the
anchor. The crew of this boat consisted of the accused, Calixto Valdez and six
others among who was the deceased, Venancio Gargantel. During their work, the
accused began to abuse the men with offensive words. Gargantel complained,
saying that it would be better if he would not insult them. The accused took this as
a display of insubordination, thus, he moved towards Gargantel, with a big knife in
hand, threatening to stab him. At the instant when the accused had attained to
within a few feet of Gargantel, the latter, evidently believing himself in great and
immediate peril, threw himself into the water and disappeared beneath its surface
to be seen no more.
Issue:
As alleged in the information, that said Gargantel had died by drowning, as a
consequence of having thrown himself into the water and upon seeing himself
threatened and attacked by the accused. The Judgment rendered against the
accused. Having been convicted as the author of the homicide, the accused
alleged on appeal that he was only guilty of the offense of inflicting serious physical
injuries, or at most of frustrated homicide.
vagueness. The petitioner’s contention that it would not give a fair warning and
ISSUE: Whether or not the accused is liable for the death of Venancio Gargantel.
sufficient notice of what the law seeks to penalize cannot be plausibly argued. Void-
HELD: The Supreme Court disallowed the appeal of the accused, enunciated the
following doctrine: 
 ordinary intelligence can understand what conduct is prohibited by the statute. It
“ That even though the death of the injured person should not be considered as the
exclusive and necessary effect of the very grave wound which almost completely
severed his axillary artery , occasioning a hemorrhage impossible to stanch under
the circumstances in which that person was placed, nevertheless as the
persistence of the aggression of the accused compelled his adversary, in order to
escape the attack, to leap into the river, an act which the accused forcibly
compelled the injured person to do after having inflicted, among others, a mortal
wound upon him and as the aggressor by said attack manifested a determined
resolution to cause the death of the deceased, by depriving him of all possible help
and putting him in the very serious situation narrated in the decision appealed from,
the trial court, in qualifying the act prosecuted as consummated homicide, did not
commit any error of law, as the death of the injured person was due to the act of
the accused.”
The accused must, therefore, be considered the responsible author of the death of
Venancio Gargantel, and he was properly convicted of the offense of homicide. The
trial judge appreciated as an attenuating circumstance the fact that the offender
had no intention to commit so great a wrong as that committed. ( Par.3, Art 9 Penal
Code)
other situations in which its application might be unconstitutional. On its face
As a manner of incurring criminal liability
People v. Aguilos
People v. De la Cerna
Estrada v. Sandiganbayan
Facts:
Petitioner Joseph Estrada prosecuted An Act Defining and Penalizing the Crime of
Plunder, wishes to impress upon the Court that the assailed law is so defectively
fashioned that it crosses that thin but distinct line which divides the valid from the
constitutionally infirm. His contentions are mainly based on the effects of the said
law that it suffers from the vice of vagueness; it dispenses with the "reasonable
doubt" standard in criminal prosecutions; and it abolishes the element of mens rea
in crimes already punishable under The Revised Penal Code saying that it violates
the fundamental rights of the accused.
The focal point of the case is the alleged “vagueness” of the law in the terms it
uses. Particularly, this terms are: combination, series and unwarranted. Because of
this, the petitioner uses the facial challenge on the validity of the mentioned law.
Whether or not the petitioner possesses the locus standi to attack the validity of the
law using the facial challenge.
Ruling:
On how the law uses the terms combination and series does not constitute
for-vagueness doctrine is manifestly misplaced under the petitioner’s reliance since
can only be invoked against that specie of legislation that is utterly vague on its
face, wherein clarification by a saving clause or construction cannot be invoked.
Said doctrine may not invoked in this case since the statute is clear and free from
ambiguity. Vagueness doctrine merely requires a reasonable degree of certainty for
the statute to be upheld, not absolute precision or mathematical exactitude.
On the other hand, overbreadth doctrine decrees that governmental purpose may
not be achieved by means which sweep unnecessarily broadly and thereby invade
the area of protected freedoms. Doctrine of strict scrutiny holds that a facial
challenge is allowed to be made to vague statute and to one which is overbroad
because of possible chilling effect upon protected speech. Furthermore, in the area
of criminal law, the law cannot take chances as in the area of free speech. A facial
challenge to legislative acts is the most difficult challenge to mount successfully
since the challenger must establish that no set of circumstances exists. Doctrines
mentioned are analytical tools developed for facial challenge of a statute in free
speech cases. With respect to such statue, the established rule is that one to who
application of a statute is constitutional will not be heard to attack the statute on
the ground that impliedly it might also be taken as applying to other persons or
invalidation of statues results in striking them down entirely on the ground that they
might be applied to parties not before the Court whose activities are constitutionally
40
protected. It is evident that the purported ambiguity of the Plunder Law is more acquire ill-gotten wealth, it being sufficient to establish beyond reasonable doubt a
imagined than real.
pattern of overt or criminal acts indicative of the overall unlawful scheme or
The crime of plunder as a malum in se is deemed to have been resolve in the conspiracy.

Congress’ decision to include it among the heinous crime punishable by reclusion In a criminal prosecution for plunder, as in all other crimes, the accused always has
perpetua to death. Supreme Court holds the plunder law constitutional and petition in his favor the presumption of innocence guaranteed by the Bill of Rights, and
is dismissed for lacking merit.
unless the State succeeds in demonstrating by proof beyond reasonable doubt that
culpability lies, the accused is entitled to an acquittal.

Issues:
The “reasonable doubt” standard has acquired such exalted stature in the realm of
constitutional law as it gives life to the Due Process Clause which protects the
1. WON Plunder Law is unconstitutional for being vague
accused against conviction except upon proof of reasonable doubt of every fact
necessary to constitute the crime with which he is charged.

No. As long as the law affords some comprehensible guide or rule that would Not everything alleged in the information needs to be proved beyond reasonable
inform those who are subject to it what conduct would render them liable to its doubt. What is required to be proved beyond reasonable doubt is every element of
penalties, its validity will be sustained. The amended information itself closely the crime charged—the element of the offense.

tracks the language of law, indicating w/ reasonable certainty the various elements Relative to petitioner’s contentions on the purported defect of Sec. 4 is his
of the offense w/c the petitioner is alleged to have committed.
submission that “pattern” is a “very important element of the crime of plunder;” and
We discern nothing in the foregoing that is vague or ambiguous that will confuse that Sec. 4 is “two-pronged, (as) it contains a rule of evidence and a substantive
petitioner in his defense.
element of the crime, “ such that without it the accused cannot be convicted of
Petitioner however bewails the failure of the law to provide for the statutory plunder –

definition of the terms “combination” and “series” in the key phrase “a combination We do not subscribe to petitioner’s stand. Primarily, all the essential elements of
or series of overt or criminal acts. These omissions, according to the petitioner, plunder can be culled and understood from its definition in Sec. 2, in relation to
render the Plunder Law unconstitutional for being impermissibly vague and sec. 1 par. (d). Sec. 4 purports to do no more than prescribe a rule of procedure for
overbroad and deny him the right to be informed of the nature and cause of the the prosecution of a criminal case for plunder. Being a purely procedural measure,
accusation against him, hence violative of his fundamental right to due process.
Sec. 4 does not define or establish any substantive right in favor of the accused but
A statute is not rendered uncertain and void merely because general terms are only operated in furtherance of a remedy.

used herein, or because of the employment of terms without defining them.

What is crucial for the prosecution is to present sufficient evidence to engender that
A statute or act may be said to be vague when it lacks comprehensible standards moral certitude exacted by the fundamental law to prove the guilt of the accused
that men of common intelligence most necessarily guess at its meaning and differ beyond reasonable doubt.

in its application. In such instance, the statute is repugnant to the Constitution in

two (2) respects – it violates due process for failure to accord persons, especially 3. WON Plunder as defined in RA 7080 is a malum prohibitum, and if so, whether it
the parties targeted by it, fair notice of what conduct  to avoid; and, it leaves law is within the power of Congress to so classify it.

enforcers unbridled discretion in carrying out its provisions and becomes an

arbitrary flexing of the Government muscle.
No. It is malum in se which requires proof of criminal intent. Precisely because the
A facial challenge is allowed to be made to vague statute and to one which is constitutive crimes are mala in se the element of mens rea must be proven in a
overbroad because of possible “chilling effect” upon protected speech.  The prosecution for plunder. It is noteworthy that the amended information alleges that
possible harm to society in permitting some unprotected speech to go unpunished the crime of plunder was committed “willfully, unlawfully and criminally.” It thus
is outweighed by the possibility that the protected speech of other may be deterred alleges guilty knowledge on the part of petitioner.

and perceived grievances left to fester because of possible inhibitory effects of In support of his contention In support of his contention that the statute eliminates
overly broad statutes. But in criminal law, the law cannot take chances as in the the requirement of mens rea and that is the reason he claims the statute is void,
area of free speech.
petitioner cites the following remarks of Senator Tañada made during the
deliberation on S.B. No.733

2. WON the Plunder Law requires less evidence for providing the predicate crimes Senator Tañada was only saying that where the charge is conspiracy to commit
of plunder and therefore violates the rights of the accused to due process
plunder, the prosecution need not prove each and every criminal act done to further
the scheme or conspiracy, it being enough if it proves beyond reasonable doubt a
No. Sec. 4 (Rule of Evidence) states that: For purposes of establishing the crime of pattern of overt or criminal acts indicative of the overall unlawful scheme or
plunder, it shall not be necessary to prove each and every criminal act done by the conspiracy. As far as the acts constituting the pattern are concerned, however, the
accused in furtherance of the scheme or conspiracy to amass, accumulate or elements of the crime must be proved and the requisite mens rea must be shown.

41
The application of mitigating and extenuating circumstances in the Revised Penal classifying the offense committed as a correctional penalty, is Art 26 of the RPC
Code to prosecutions under the Anti-Plunder Law indicates quite clearly that mens which classifies fines not offenses.

rea is an element of plunder since the degree of responsibility of the offender is

determined by his criminal intent.
Also, if the SolGen’s interpretation of the law is accepted then it will lead to and
Finally, any doubt as to whether the crime of plunder is a malum in se must be absurd situation wherein a light felony as defined by Art 9 will have 2 prescriptive
deemed to have been resolved in the affirmative by the decision of Congress in periods, and 1 peso will mean the difference of 9 years and 10 months, and there is
1993 to include it among the heinous crimes punishable by reclusion perpetua to no reason for a law-maker to raise the prescriptive period for certain light offenses
death.
over other light offenses

The evil of a crime may take various forms. There are crimes that are, by their very
nature, despicable, either because life was callously taken or the victim is treated Therefore it is more sensible and to apply Art 9 over Art 26 since we are discussing
like an animal and utterly dehumanized as to completely disrupt the normal course the prescription of a crime not the penalty. An as this construction is more favorable
of his or her growth as a human being.
to the accused, it should be the one to be adopted.

There are crimes however in which the abomination lies in the significance and
implications of the subject criminal acts in the scheme of the larger socio-political HELD:

and economic context in which the state finds itself to be struggling to develop and
provide for its poor and underprivileged masses.
THE DECISION IS AFFIRMED WITH COSTS DE OFICIO. 

The legislative declaration in R.A. No.7659 that plunder is a heinous offense implies
that it is a malum in se. For when the acts punished are inherently immoral or STATUTORY CONSTRUCTION LESSON:

inherently wrong, they are mala in se and it does not matter that such acts are
punished in a special law, especially since in the case of plunder the predicate Headnotes or epigraphs- When a statute is divided into several subjects or articles,
crimes are mainly mala in se.
having respective appropriate headings, it must be presumed that the provisions of
each article are controlling upon the subject thereof and operate as a general rule
Held: PREMISES CONSIDERED, this Court holds that RA 7080 otherwise known as for settling such questions therein.

the Plunder Law, as amended by RA 7659, is CONSTITUTIONAL. Consequently,

the petition to declare the law unconstitutional is DISMISSED for lack of merit
Construction to avoid absurdity- If the words of the statute are susceptible of more
than one meaning, the absurdity of the result of one construction is a strong
argument against its adoption, and in favor of such sensible interpretation as will
Gravity (Art. 9) avoid such result.
People v. Yu Hai
FACTS OF THE CASE:

On October 22, 1954, the accused was charged in the Justice of the Peace Court
of Caloocan of a violation of Article 195, sub-paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal
Code, for having allegedly permitted the game of panchong or paikiu, a game of
hazard, and having acted as maintainer thereof. The accused moved to quash the
information on the ground that it charged more than one offense and that the
criminal action or liability therefore had already been extinguished; and the Justice
of the Peace of Court, in its order of December 24, 1954, sustained the motion to
quash on the theory that the offense charged was a light offense which, under
Article 90 of the Revised Penal Code, prescribed in two months. 

ISSUES OF THE CASE:

Did the court err in considering the offense committed as a light felony?

No, since the light offenses as defined in art 9 of the R.P.C states that “an offense
which penalty arresto menor or a fine not exceeding 200 pesos." The argument of
the SolGen on the matter is erroneous since the basis for his argument of
42