People vs Tibayan
o contracted at the time the check
was issued
o Lack of or insufficiency of funds to
cover the check
o The payee was not informed by
the offender and the payee did
not know that the offender had no
funds
o Anent the third requisite, it must
be proven that the accused had
guilty knowledge of the fact that
the drawer of the check had no
funds in the bank at the time
accused indorsed it
o Prosecution failed to prove the
same. In fact, Juaquico attempted
to look for the source of checks
o Nevertheless, Chan is still held
civilly liable
Beltran vs People
 Beltran was legally married to Felix;
however he had illicit relations with
another woman, prompting latter to
file concubinage against her husband.
 Beltran argues that the trial for
concubinage be suspended, as the
petition for declaration of nullity of
their marriage is also pending before
the court.
 RTC: denied to defer proceedings
 SC: Affirmed
o Parties to the marriage should not
be permitted to judge for
themselves its nullity. Only a
judicial declaration of nullity of
marriage would suffice.
o Family Code prohibits any other
basis than a final judgment for
remarriage
People vs Pascua
 Prosecution claimed that twin sisters
Anna and Liza were raped by their
neighbor Pascua. Pascua would
allegedly call them inside his house
and have sex. Afterwards, Pascua
would threaten them should they tell
of the deed; furthermore, Pascua
would give loose change to the twins.
 In his defense, Pascua argued that it
was them looking for sex in exchange
for money. If anything, he should only
be liable for simple seduction
 RTC: Rape
 CA: Rape
 SC: Rape
o The money given by Pascua was
not intended to lure them for
money. If anything is was for the
purpose of buying their silence to
ensure that nobody discovered his
dastardly acts
o Also even if there was no force,
intimidation was used on the
victim and she submitted to the
rapist’s lust for fear of her
personal safety.
Taguinod vs People
 Ang: Taguinod tried to cut in on a
vehicle queue in the Rockwell parking
lot; Ang did not concede to Taguinod.
 Consequently, the rearview mirrors of
their two vehicles bumped each other.
 Afterwards, Taguinod rammed Ang’s
vehicle from the rear.
 Taguinod: it was Ang who accelerated
backwards.
 A complaint of malicious mischief
was nevertheless filed against
Taguinod
 MeTC: Malicious mischief
 RTC: Malicious mischief
 CA: Malicious mischief
 SC: Malicious mischief
o Offender deliberately caused
damage to the property of another
o Does not constitute arson or other
crimes involving destruction
o The act of damaging another’s
property be committed merely for
the sake of damaging it
o Act be motivated by hate, revenge,
and other evil motive.