Criminal Law

2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS Executive Committee Oyer-all Chairperson Chairperson for Academics Chairperson for Hotel Operations + Vice-Chait for Operations Vice-Chair for Secretariat Vice-Chair for Finance Vice-Chair for Electronic Data Processing Vice-Chair for Logistics Vice-Chair for Membership MARIA REGGIELEENE S, DIONISIO LYAN DAVID M. JUANICO. TYRONE LEWIS D. ONG DANIEL P. ANG RODOLFO A. SABULAO JR. CLARISA G. BELO JOSE MANUEL P. PENAFLOR, PATRICK STEPHEN M. CUA MAICAH MARIE A. PAMFILO. Subject Committee Political Law Labor Law and Social Legislation Civit Law Taxation Law Commercial Law Criminal, Law Remedial Law Legal and Judicial Ethics ALDRIN JAMES L, GUANZON MARITONI B. MOLINA, RICHARD ARMAND C. ANGELES: DANIEL RADJIT D. PINEDA CARL RON F. VILLAMIL CARMELA J. LUNA, APRIL JOY G: ONG HANNA NAZRIA S. MACAPINTAL San Beda College of Law Administration ATTY. VIRGILIO B. JARA. College Dean Centralized Bar Operations Advisers ATTY. MARCIANO. Vice Dean and G. DELSON * Adviser ATTY. RISEL G, CASTILLO-TALEON Prefect for Student Affairs and Co-Adviser ATTY. FRANCESCA LOURDES M. SENGA. Administrative Officer Centralized Bar Operations Core Group Dorothy Jean Actan, Ceska Arla Agile, Kates Jatine Agu, Edrése Grace Agu, Alyssa Truty Anes, Donna Queen Ariis Noveame anogon, Mattn Alec Bautista, Loree Jogele Bury, Frances Buendla, Boenvel Castito, Pam Lovie Chus, Felson Dalaguete, Parca Derecho, Erika Mire Garé, Steven Mark Gayados, aote Romeo Valentina ikon Go, Guemnavere Hao, Christine Ina isto Franco Lacanéalo, Mary Zecle Lin, Mark Elson Magda, Kittel Marj, Ly Joy Navaro, Marve Pagcallwangan,Jamalea ia Palce ina Katina Pineda, Mark Lavent Queron, Graham Eaion Rage, Mar Joy Regia, Zaire anda Reyes, oul Slador, Emo San Diego, 4, Dania! ate Santos, Carlo Viel Sapian, Art Ares Safran, Jenifer Sexon, Renaldo Sioco, Angelica Sy, Kalo PacloTamondong. Manz (aryl Ti, a, Nizar Alan Tuquero, Von Acelph Undog. Ma. Felicia Eriesa Valrano, Rainier Albert Vilanuava, Glenda Agito Yano, Erviquez, Luis Mari Grana, Mark Gregory fable, Ciclda Esgueta, Neco Holla, Kent Joseph Limpot, Joanna Mungeal, Dane! Banachea, Atm Gem SeRoran Stor Sarmiento, Hannah Caceres, Maré Cae FloresCRIMINAL LAW SUBJECT COMMITTEE Subject Chair CARMELA J. LUNA Assistant Subject Chair KERWIN REY B. MAYOR Subject Committee EDP ALEXANDRA T. DESAMPARADO. Subject Heads SHARIR. ANDE, Book One MARY GRACE O. NIPAL and ANNE P. CORTEZ, Book Two JADE ROXANNE R. LO, Special Penal Laws Subject Committee Members XYLENE D. DOLOR, CHRISTIAN JASON O. DALUDADO, HAZEL MARIE Y. MALLARI, IVAN JAPETH V. SALMASAN, KEIRVIN ANTHONY B. VIADO, FELIZARDO L, ROMANO, CHRISTIAN PAUL L. ADVINCULA, DEZERY M. PERLEZ, FRISIAN GAIL B. DESCALLAR, JEAN CLAUDETTE L. GALVEZ, ALYSSA R. ZARRAGA Advisers, JUSTICE MARID V. LOPEZ ATTY. EIREENE XINA M, ACOSTA.UNDERTAKING This publication is the intellectual property of the San Beda College of Law Centralized Bar Operations. Any unauthorized reproduction, use, sale or purchase hereof is a violation of intellectual property laws. i hereby recognize the right of the San Beda College of Law Centralized Bar Operations to prosecute any action in accordance with [aw to protect the infringement of such intellectual property rights. As such, | will neither unlawfully reproduce nor cause the unlawful reproduction of this material without the prior consent of the San Beda College of Law Centralized Bar Operations.Summary of Doctrines......... Book One Article-4(1) REQUIREMENT OF INTENT IN INTENTIONAL FELONY MUST REFER TO MALICIOUS INTENT Artemio Villareal v. Peopte of the Philippines G.R..No. 151258, December 01, 2014 Sereno, C.. Article 6 INTENT TO:KILL IS A STATE ONLY THROUGH EXTERNAL Gary Fantastico and Rolando Villanye the Philippines * DRE GR. No. 190912, January 1262045} PERALTA, J. Conspiracy THROUGH CONSPIRACY, AN AccUSED ck EVEN WITHOUT HAVING ACTUAL GARNA| People of the Philippines and WAA\v. Court’ G.R. No. 183652, February 25; 2015: Peralta, J. sabe ED WITH RAPE SNITHATHE Victim G.R. No, 207629 October 22, 201% Leonardo-De Castro, J. =. PHYSICAL PARTICIPATION AT THE "ALWAYS NECESSARY IN CONSPIRACY Joel Yongco and Julieto kandjat\ -Peopie ol tthe, G.R. No, 209373, July 30, 204°" Velasco, Jr, J MERE PRESENCE DOES NOT SIGNIFY CONSPIRACY, NEITHER DOES IT INDICATE THE LACK THEREOF Leopoldo Quintos y Delamor v. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 205298, September 10, 2014 Carpio, Acting C.J. Justifying Circumstances THERE CAN BE NO COMPLETE OR INCOMPLETE SELF-DEFENSE WITHOUT UNLAWFUL AGRESSION 23 24 26 26 27 28 SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSee” TE See PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. ALEX DE LOS SANTOS: G.R. No. 207818 July 23, 2014 REYES, J. ..... 7 siseteeittseseeees 29 HE WHO ALLEGES SELF-DEFENSE HAS THE BURDEN OF PROVING THE SAME Federico Sabay v. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 192150, October 1, 2014 Brion, cis 30 CESSATION OF UNLAWFUI ‘SELF-DEFENSE Sherwin Dela'Crisz v. Peoplesoptl G.R. No, 189405//Névember 19, 28 Peratta, J. - COLLEGE 31 Exempting Circul MINORITY AS AN'EXEMPTING CIRGUMSTA} BIRTH DATE AND:NOT.BY ONI People of the Philippines v. G.R. No. 200793, Juner4, 2074 © Leonardo-DeCastro; J.) 4 eS O:Bv-ONe's 32 Mitigating Circumstances ‘SELF-DEFENSE IS INAPPLICAB NOT START FROM THE'VICTI Alberto Almojuela y Villanueva ¥! F GAR No. 183202, June. 2014 "S i re 33 Aggravating Gircumstancas S81) ite NO TREACHERY WHEN THE KitCINGIS:NORPREMEDITATED People of the Philippines v. Jenny Likirah GR. No. 201858, June 4, 2014 Reyes, J. ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH DOES NOT QUALIFY ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE TO MURDER People of the Philippines v. Reynaldo Torres G.R. No. 189850, September 22, 2014 Del Castillo, J... : ‘SAN BEDA COI LEGE OF Law. "+ 2046 Cenrtrauizeo BAR OPERATIONSComplex Crimes IN ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE IT MUST BE ESTABLISHED THAT THE KILLING WAS A MERE INCIDENT TO THE ROBBERY People of the Philippines vs Sonny Gatarin y Caballero @ “Jay-R” G.R.No. 198022, Aen 7, 2014 Peralta, J. ...... fata se 36 WHERE THE PERSON KIDNAPPED IS-KILLew IN THE COURSE OF THE DETENTION, THE KIDNAPPING AND MURDER OR HOMICIDE SHALL BE PUNISHED AS A SPECIAL COMPLEX cine People of the Philippines v. Armando, bron, Mariano Gariguez, na GR. No. 207949 July 23, oe Pertas-Bernabe, J. 38 FACTS WHICH:MUST BE PROVED FORA CONVICTION OF THE sPaciai COMPLEX CRIME OF ROBBERY WITH HPMIC i People of the Philippines v. Mark Jason Chavez’ G.R. No. 207950, September 22, 201s Leonen, J. : 39 FACTS WHICH MUST BE PROVED TO SUSTAl COMPLEX CRIME OF DIRECT:ASSAULT WITH a People of the Philippines v. Ex-Mayor CarlosiEatonil G.R. No, 201565, October 13, 2014 one Leonardo-De Castro, J. 40 oe Probation at is COMMISSION OF ANOTHER OFFENSE Shawnee THEBROBATION ORDER INEFFECTIVE ro Neil V. Suyan v. Peoplé.of the Pai Officer, Dagupan City / GAR. No. 189644, July 2°201 SERENO, C J. pea cea and Parole a Extinction of Criminal Liability VIOLATION OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165 DOES NOT ENTAIL ANY CIVIL LIABILITY People of the Philippines v. Alfredo Morales y Lam G.R.No. 206832, January 21, 2015, PEREZ, J. ae : oe 42 EXEMPTICN FROM CIVIL LIABILITY MAY BE FROVED BY PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE ONLY IF THE ACQUITTAL IS BASED ON REASONABLE DOUBT ON THE GUILT OF THE ACCUSED Castillo v. Salvador GRNo. 191240, July 30, 2014 SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS.nes?” ~ T Peralta, J. DEATH OF AN ACCUSED PENDING HIS APPEAL EXTINGUISHES BOTH HIS CRIMINAL AND CIVIL LIABILITY EX DELICTO People of the Philippines v. Democrito Paras G.R. No. 192912, October 22, 2014 Leonardo-De Castro, J Book Two. Crimes Against the Fundamental Law of the State BARANGAY CAPTAIN AND CAFGU MEMBERS ARE CONSIDERED PUBLIC OFFICERS/EMPLOYEES IN RELAT agai OF VIOLATION OF DOMICILE ae % Edigardo Geroche, et al. v. People ork GR. No. 17908 November Be ne Peralta, J. : Crimes Against Public Order” EXERCISING ONE'S RIGHT AGAINST BE EQUATED TO DISOBEDIENCE " Edmund Sydeco y Sionzon vs. People of the Philippines G.R. No, 202692, November 12, 2014 , Velasco, Jr., J S eee & ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS AND AMMUNITIONS; OWNERSHIP IS NOT AN ESSENTIAL ELEMENT Arnold Jacaban v. People of the Philippines GR. No. 184355, March 23, 2018 Peralta, J. el Crimes Against Public Interest FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC 50CUI (ENTS: A°CONVICTION! FOR A QUASI- OFFENSE CAN BE HAD UNDER AN NFORMATION' EXCLUSIVELY CHARGING THE COMMISSION OF A'WILFUL OFFENSE Venzncio M. Sevilla v. People’of thé Philippines G.R. No. 194390, August 13,2014 Reyes, J. : s FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC DOCUMENT IS A CRIME INVOLVING MORAL ‘TURPITUDE, Cecilia Pagaduan v. Civil Service Commission and Salvador G.R. No, 206379, November 19, 2014 MENDOZA, J oe Crimes Committed by Public Officers ACQUITTAL UNDER THE ANTI-GRAFT AND CORRUPT PRACTICES ACT (RA 3019) IS NOT A BAR FOR CONVICTION UNDER ART. 218 OF THE RPC Aloysius Dait Lumauig v. People of the Philippines GR. No.166680, July 7, 2014. SAN BEDA COWEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 43 44 46 47 48DEL CASTILLO, J. : bet adden H a 49 Crimes Against Persons RAPE UNDER THE 2"? PARAGRAPH OF ART. 266-A IS KNOWN AS INSTRUMENT OR OBJECT RAPE; GENDER FREE OR HOMOSEXUAL RAPE Richard Ricalde v. People of the Philippines | GAR. No. 21100, January 21, 2018 Leonen, Je rises 50 RESISTANCE ON THE PART OF THE VICTIM IS NOT AN ELEMENT OF RAPE People of the Philippines v. Micha GR. No, 206393, January 214204 Perez, J... e 51 CIRCUMSTANCES QUALIFYING RAPE, People of the Philippines v. Hermenit GR. No. 194446, April 21,2014 Leonardo-De Castro, J iditdo Datén'y. CONSENT OF THE VICTIM-SPOUSE IS NOT! GOING TO THE CONJUGA: BEDROOM, ! People of the Philippines v. Edgar Jumawany:: G.R. No, 187495, April 21, 2014 we Reyes, J : : 53 QUALIFIED RAPE & ACTS OF LASCI 9(B}, ARTICLE Il OF RA.NO.7610 7 People of the Philippines v. Julito. Gerandoy G.R. No. 202838, September 17, 2014 G.R. No. 192912, June 4, 201# Leonardo-De Castro, J PUBLIC OF PLACES: v7 People of the Philippines v. Leonardo Castrodes G.R. No, 206768, December 03, 2014 Perez, Ji... . ee . 56 DATES NOT ESSENTIAL IN RAPE People of the Philippines v. Jose Prodenciado G.R.No. 192232, December 10, 2014 Del Castillo, Jo. ssccsesseeee SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSNee” T: Ss es INDEPENDENT PROOF IS REQUIRED FOR ‘SWEETH IEART THEORY AS A DEFENSE IN RAPE People of the Philippines v. Eco Yaba y Basa G.R. No. 194946, September 3, 2014 Perez, J. 87 DEFENSES OF ABSENCE OF RESISTANCE, FAILURE TO ESCAPE, AND OSTENSIBLE CARELESSNESS OF RETURNING AFTER BEING RAPED ARE WEAK IN RAPE CASES People of the Philippines v. Adel Ramos y Abellana G.R. No. 200077, September 17, 2014 Perez, J ‘ 58 DISTINCTION'BETWEEN A’ LASCIVIOUSNESS;INTENT OF QRFENDER-EO.LIE-WITH 7 Norberto Cruz‘v.:People of the Philippines had G.R. No. 166441; Octaberg?2 SK Coe Bersamin, J. es ee 59 SWEETHEARTS AS’A-DEFENSE IS IMMATERIAL! | CONSENT AS MAINELEMENTOF RAPE vee People of the Philippines vs. Enrique Quintos'y. Badlilia a G.R. No, 189402, November 12, 2014 congue (ORL Leonen, J ate i Ne seen 60 on io PROVING TREACHERY AS A,QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE OF MURDER Miguel Cirera y Ustelo v. People of the‘Philippines Sage 5.R. No, 181843 July.14, 2014 : Leenen, J. ieee SRE NES ot. 61 CONSPIRACY AND TREACHERY:1N:MURDER ‘AND FRUSTRATED MURDER PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, v. JOJO-SUMILHIG/RICARDG'SUMILHIG alias CARDING SUMILHIG, PASOT SALOLI ERIC ENOC, WARLIFO MONTEBON,* and ClO LIMAMA, Accused;"\ - +s 4040 SUMILHIG, RICARDO‘SUMILHIG alias CARDING“SUMILHIG, and PASOT SALOLI, Accused-Appellants ree GR. No. 178116. July 28, 2014 DEL CASTILLO, J : Sees FRONTAL ATTACK CAN BE TREACHEROUS WHEN UNEXPECTED AND ON AN UNARMED VICTIM WHO WOULD BE IN NO POSITION TO REPEL THE ATTACK OR AVOID IT People of the Philippines v. Virgilio Amora y Viscarra GR. No. 180322, November 26, 2014 Del Castilo, J Cy vi SANBEDA Conese oF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS~~ fe Crimes Against Property ELEMENTS OF QUALIFIED THEFT People of the Philippines v. Cahilig GR No, 199206, July 30, 2014 Carpio, J. e ELEMENTS PROVING GRAFT AND CORRUPTION AND ESTAFA Silverina E. Consigna v. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 175750-51, April 2, 2014 Perez, J. DEMAND IN THE CRIME OF; A Lito Corpuz. People of thi a GR. No. 180016, ‘April 29, 2044701 Peralta, J. i GeDA ESTAFA THROUGH ABUSE/OF:CONFIDENCE{~ EC People of the Philippines V. José C. Go G.R_ No. 191015, At et 6. eee Del Castillo, J : L VERY HIGH MONTHLY INTEREST RATE CON! ESTAFA People of the Philippines v. Paimy:Tidayai and GAR. Nos. 209655-60, January 14; 2045, PERLAS-BERNABE.W. JURIDICAL POSSESSION. none MISAPPROPRIATION, Margie Balerta v. People: ‘of'ttie Philip GR.No. 205144, November 26,2014 Reyes, J. weir THE CRIME OF BIGAMY CONSUMMATED FROM-THiE MOMENT A SECOND MARRIAGE IS CONTRACTED WITHOUT THE FIRST MARRIAGE BEING FIRST JUDIGIALLY DECLARED NULL AND VOID. Noel A. Lasanas v. People of the Philippines G.R. No, 159031, June 23, 2014 BERSAMIN,J. . ‘THERE IS PERFORMANCE OF ILLEGAL MARRIAGE CEREMONY WHEN ONE, HAVING THE AUTHORITY OF A SOLEMNIZING OFFICER, PERFORNS AN ILLEGA . MARRIAGE CEREMONY Rene Ronulo v. People of the Philippines GR. No. 182438 July 2, 2014 65 66 67 68 69 72 SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSCrimes Against Honor AN IMPUTATION TO BE LIBELOUS MUST BE DEFAMATORY, MALICIOUS, GIVEN PUBLICITY, AND THE VICTIM MUST BE IDENTIFIABLE Alejandro C. Almendras, Jr. v. Alexis C. Almendras GR. No. 179491, January 4 14, 2015 SERENO, C.J. : BRION, J. 74 Quasi Offenses AN ACT WHICH 1S SOMETHING Mor THAN... WILLFUL DISREGARD OF EQ OFFENSE OF RECKLESS INP R Reynaldo 8."Mariano v. Peopl GR. No. 178145.July 7, 2014 BERSAMIN, J pee RE NEGLIGENCE, BUT 76 ‘ q ga ae ¢ 1 UAE ow. ‘ RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE CONSISTS IN’ pea BUT WiHouTMALICE, DOING GR FAILING:TO DO'AN"ACT FROM WHI sf DAMAGE RESULTS BY REASON OF INEXCUSABLE LACK OF PRECAUTION TAKING INTO CONSIDERATIGN CERTAIN.CIRCUMSTANCES Or. Antonio P. Cabugao, et. al.’ v. People of the:P! Rodolfo M. Palma And Rosario:F, Palma GR. No. 163878, July 30, 2014 Peralta, J i Special Laws Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act it EXCHANGE OF MONEY AND DRUGS IS|MATERIALFOR:THE GONSUMMATION OF THE SALE. f People v. Dasigan se GAR. No. 206228, February, 04, 2015: Perez, J : Be 7 ‘ oe oe 79 NON-COMPLIANCE WITH. SECTION 21 OF RA’ 51953 NORPATAL AS LONG AS JUSTIFIABLE GROUND EXISPAND. THAT THE IN Wigner ans EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF THE SEIZED ITEMS ARE PROPERLY PRESERVED Peopie of the Philippines v. Noel Prajes G.R. No. 206770, April 2, 2014 REYES, Je ceesssseees . 20 DIFFERENCE IN MARKINGS AFFECT THE INTEGRITY OF DRUGS PRESENTED IN EVIDENCE People of the Philippines v. Sukarno Junaide y Agga G.R. No. 193856, te 21, 2014. Abad, J. i 81 vii SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSMANDATORY DRUG TESTING UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002 (R.A. NO. 9165); A WAIVER OF AN ILLEGAL WARRANTLESS ARREST DOES NOT MEAN A WAIVER OF THE INADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE SEIZED DURING AN ILLEGAL WARRANTLESS ARREST Jaime D. Cele Cruz v. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 200748 July 23, 2014 SERENO, Code. cee LACK OF MARKED MONEY IS NOT AN ELEMENT TO THE CRIME OF ILLEGAL SALE OF SHABU People of the Philippines vMai G.R. No. 188707, July 30, 20: PEREZ, J...) einer sc PROOF THAT THE’SALE ACTUALLY TOOK'BLACE COUPLED WITH 2" PRESENTATION: IN COURT OF THE CORPUS PELICT) QRILECIT ORUG IN EVIDENCE MATERIAL IN PROSECUTION OF IL CEGAL’SALE OF SHABU™ People of the Philippines v8" Réynaldo Ba G.R No. 189812, Septernber 4, 2014; Det Castillo, J 83 84 PROVING THE IDENTITY OF: THE NARCOTIC SU INDISPENSABLE IN THE PROSECUTON OF {lL DANGEROUS DRUGS : dl Peopie of the Philippines v. Righard Gui G.R No. 198314. September 24,2014": Perez. J, 85 i FOBY UNDER-SECTION 21 IF ACCUSEDPeople of the OF RA. No. 9165 WARRANTS ACQUIT Philippines v. Charve John’ vagahi a G.R. No, 200877, Noverbar'42,'2014 “55 Perez, J. i 86 REQUISITE UNDER RA 9165; FAILURE-TO CONDUCT REQUISITE PHYSICAL INVENTORY NOT FATAL, WHAT IS'ESSENTIAL IS-THE PRESERVATION OF EMS ‘THE INTEGRITY AND EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF THE SEIZE People of the Philippines v. Rommel Araza y Sagun G.R. No. 190623, November 17, 2014 Del Casto, J ar CHAIN OF CUSTODY NOT BROKEN BY FAILURE TO STATE THE PLACE WHERE THE SEIZED ITEMS WERE MARKED People of the Philippines v. Venerando Dela Cruz GR. No. 193670, December 03, 2014 Del Castillo, J 88 ‘SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS——— fase Bouncing Checks Law PRESUMPTION OF KNOWLEDGE OF INSUFFICIENCY OF FUNDS MAY BE ESTABLISHED BY PROOF OF RECEIPT OF NOTICE OF DISHONOR Ma. Rosario P. Campos v. People of the Philippines GR. No, 187401 September 17, 2014 Reyes, J.. a eae ee a) PAYMENT OF DISHONORED CHECKS BEFORE FILING OF INFORMATION NEGATES LIABILITY FOR VIOLATION OF B.P, 22 Ariel T..Lim v. People of the Philippines GR. No. 190834, November 26, 2014 gig Peralta, J. a Anti-Graft and-Corrupt Prac OMBUDSMAN-ENDOWED WITH POWER: 709 esnge NW CIMMIVAL COMPLAINTS INVOLVING PUBLIC OFFICIA\ "LOYEES Araullo v. Office ofthe Ofbiidsh nbekGG : OF LAA GR. No. 194757, ly 90. 2014 Reyes, Jo eres 90 92 RECKONING POINT:OF THE PERK p.oF PRE OF RA 3019 BEGIN FROM THE DAY: OFCOM LAW, AND iF UNKNOWN, FROM THE Biscay PEGG v. Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Mi G.R. No, 206357 November 12, 2014 Velasco, Jr. J. 93, MA oA S'SECTION 3(E) OF R.A. iS, NAMELY: (A) BY CAUSING OVERNMENT,OR (8) GIVING ANY PRIVATE ru UNWs a BVA ANTAGE OR PREFERENCE aR Alejandro Rivera v. Pedplelof the Phil GR. No. 156577, December, 2014. Mendoza, J oa VIOLATION OF SECTION 3(E) OF R.A‘NO. S01. PRESENT WHEN A PUBLIC OFFICER DISCHARGING ADMINISTRATIVE, JUDICIAL OR OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS ACTED WITH MANIFEST PARTIALITY, EVIDENT BAD FAITH OR GROSS INEXCUSABLE NEGLIOGENCE THEREBY CAUSING UNDUE INJURY TO ANY PARTY OR GIVING ANY PRIVATE PARTY UNWARRANTED. BENEFITS, ADVANTAGE OR PREFERENCE IN THE DISCHARGE OF HIS FUNCTIONS Edelbert C. Uyboco v. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 211703, December 10, 2014 Velasco JR., J... i 96 x SANBEDACOLLESE OF AW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAK OPERATIONSMALTREATMENT, WHETHER HABITUAL OR NOT, OF A CHILD WHICH INCLUDES ANY ACT WHICH DEBASES, DEGRADES OR DEMEANS THE INTRINSIC WORTH AND DIGNITY OF A CHILD AS A HUMAN BEING CONSTITUTES CHILD ABUSE Felina Rosaldes v. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 173988, October 8, 2014 4; Bersamin, J. see te a eseeieeeeOy! ; LOCATION OF THE WOUNDS AND THE NATURE OF WEAPON IS INDICATIVE | OF THE PERSON'S OBJECTIVE THE NATURE AND LOCATION OF THE | WOUNDS INFLICTED AND THE IN.USED ARE INDICATIVE OF ONE'SINTENTTOKILL i E oORe " Rogelio Roque vs. People of thei Bbil teste G.R. No. 193169/"Aprit 6, 20 oo 5 el Castillo, J. 2. Gens a 98 | ACCUSED CANNOT BE CONVICTED FOR ESTAFAIF SHE HAD MERE! MATERIAL POSSESSION, NOTUURIDICAL POSSESSION; iv San Diego vs. People‘of the Philippines Bian ¥ G.R. No. 176114; April’8, 20¢8° pee EO Peralta, J Bepewtarocesenalh sd 99 IN GRAVE MISCONDUCT, THE:ELEMENTS OF. CORRUPTION, CLEAR !NTENT TO VIOLATE THE LAW, OR FLAGRANT DISREGARD: OF AN ESTABLISHED RULED MUST BE EVIDENT i Office of the Ombudsman vs. Wilfredo B. Agustino, etal : G.R. No. 204171; April #5, 2018 Mendoza, Jo... e Hu 100 NON-COMPLIANCE WITH SECTIONEZ1) OF RA,S165 (THE COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF e008 FDOES NOT:AUTOMATICALLY RENDER ILLEGAL THE ARREST OF AN AGEUSED OR INADMISSIBLE, THE ITEMS SEIZED ee Baw J People of the Philippines SOF G.R.No. 201146; April 1 Peralta, J... : 101 BLE\ TO"-BOTH OFFENSES INDETERMINATE SENTENCE’ (AN i: Ci PUNISHED BY RPC AND TI ISHED BY Imbo vs. Pecple of the Philippines? °2i"'"" 7 GAR. No. 197712; April 20, 2015 7 Perez, J. nastiness eee 102 TREACHERY CAN EXIST EVEN IF THE ATTACK IS FRONTAL, AS LONG AS IT WAS SUDDEN AND UNEXPECTED People v. Samuya G.R. No. 213214; April 20, 2015 ‘ Perlas-Bernabe, J... : : 103 CCNSPIRACY CAN BE INFERRED FROM THE ACTS OF SEVERAL ACCUSED EVINGING THEIR COMMON PURPOSE OR DESIGN WHEN THE FELONIES OF “ROBBERY IN AN INHABITED HOUSE” AND “ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR INTIMIDATION OF A PERSON" ARE COMMITTED, THE CRIME IS A COMPLEX ONE SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSthe a ee Ee T Fransdilla v. People G.R. No. 197562; April 20, 2015 BERSAMIN, J.o.0-.-ceccnseessee as : 104 RECEIPT OF MONEY IS NOT MATERIAL TO A PROSECUTION FOR ILLEGAL, RECRUITMENT; : WELL-SETTLED IS THE RULE THAT A PERSON CONVICTED FOR ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT UNDER THE LAW MAY, FOR THE SAME ACTS, BE SEPARATELY CONVICTED FOR ESTAFA People v. Mateo and Lapiz GAR, No. 198012; April 22, 2015 DEL CASTILLO, J a wee 105 AN ACCUSED MAY BE CONVICTED Ol OFeCIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE PROVIDED THATS THE PRG ANCES INESCAPABLE AND REASONABLE'C IMPUTED CRIME Zapanta v. People. ‘ G.R. No. 192698-99;-April22/2015 5 8% MENDOZA J. 107 ‘SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CenTRALsZED Bak OPERATIONSBOOK ONE ARTICLE 4(1) REQUIREMENT OF INTENT IN INTENTIONAL FELONY MUST REFER TO MALICIOUS THROUGH EXTERNAL MANIFESTATIONS. ‘Artemio Villareal v. The element of intent refers to the purpose of the mind and the People of the resolve with -ich a person proceeds. It does not refer to mere itippines, will, for the latter pertains to the act, while the intent concems the GR. No. 151258, result of the act. December 1, 2014 Sereno, C.J. ANP BED A, INTENT TO KILL‘IS ‘A STATE:OF(MIN STHEICOURTS\CAN DISCERN ONLY Fantastico and Intent to killis a sl Villanueva v. Malicse, through external mii Br and People of the. considered the following Phifippines, ead GR.No. 190912, ae 3 January 12, 2015 2 (1) the means used bythe ialetactors; Peralta, J. f thes malefactors. before, at the”time, or iNGEt the vi (4) the circumstances ugdér which thé the-niotives of the actused,, /” INTENT TO KILL i EET Rogelio Roque vs. Usually, the intant to killis.ghown by the kind of weapon used. by People of the the offender and the parts? of the victim's body at which the Phil weapon was aimed, as shown by the wounds inflicted. It is worth GR. No. 193169; highlighting that the victim received two gunshot wounds in the April 6, 2015 head. indeed, the location of the wounds plus the nature of the Del Castillo, J. weapon used are ready indications that the accused's objective is not merely to warn or incapacitate a supposed aggressor, CONSPIRACY THROUGH CONSPIRACY, AN ACCUSED CAN BE CONVICTED WITH RAPE EVEN WITHOUT HAVING CARNAL KNOWLEDGE WITH THE VICTIM People of the In conspiracy, the act of one is the act c lence, an accused Philippines and AAA v. can be convicted with rape even without having actual carnal SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW. 2016 CenTRAWIZED BAR OPERATIONS.Court of Appeals. ee ‘vith the victim GR. No. 183652, February 25, 2015 Peraita, J. CONSPIRACY MUST BE PROVEN AS THE CRIME ITSELF People of the Jurisprudence requires that conspiracy must be proven as the crime itself, Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an‘agreement concerning the commission of a crime and decide GR. No. 207629 to commit it, the -agicerent need not rest on direct October 22, 2014 evi 4, Bei from the conduct of the Leonardo-De Castro, J. par nding among them with 2. It is ety essary to ther and’eptéred into an show thal-two or more, gersan: explicit agreement séttiag outéthe details 7 aR\yuplawiul scheme or te ptaigy which ahlléaal oplety Syattiod out PHYSICAL PARTICIPATION ‘AT THE”SCENE OF THE GRIME NG eWAYS NECESSARY IN CONSPIRAGY™""""** meee be Yongco, et al. v. ” Accused’s absencelin the Seenierof f.the cfime.is-not sufficient to People of the exclude-bim as.a conspira if Ip cbrispiracy ie act of one is the Philippines GR No. 209373, conspirators may act separately or together'n cifferent manners July 30, 2014 but always leading to the same.nlawfut result. The character and Velasco, Jr, J effect of conspiracy aré“not’ tobe adjudged by viewing its arts but only by looking ait as alwnole MERE PRESENCE DOES NOT SIGNIFY CONSPIRACY, NEITHER DOES IT INDICATE THE LACK THEREOF ‘Leopoldo Quintos v.~ Mere presence does Tot signify canspiracy However, neither People of the does it indicate:the)lack thereof. Gongpitacy can be inferred from Renn: pieoae andiestablished byt he-acts of the accliSéd themselves when said oF 0, 2o1d B21S°A9Int 10, a joint purpose an “design, concerted action and Carpio, Acting Cu commurity ofinterest...c's'P% ACCUSED MAY BE CONVICTED ON.-THE BAS!S ‘OF CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE Raymundo Zapanta v. The Court held that an accused may be convicted on the basis of People credible and sufficient circumstantial evidence provided that the tea a ett proven circumstances lead to the inescapable and reasonable Palette conclusion that he committed the imputed crime. The settled rule is that @ judgment of conviction based purely on circumstantial evidence can be upheld only if the following requisites concur: (1) there is more than one circumstance; (2) the facts from which the inferences were derived were proven; and (3) the combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce conviction beyond Feasonable doubt. in this case, when the circumstances are 2 SANBEDACowece oF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS.examined with the other evidence on record, that these circumstances do not lead to a logical conclusion that Zapanta lent support to the alleged conspiracy. it becomes clearer JUSTIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES THERE CAN BE NO COMPLETE OR INCOMPLETE’ SELF-DEFENSE WITHOUT UNLAWFUL AG SSION People v. De Los Unlawful aggression. on the part of the victim is the primordial Santos element.ofit WSR wasiance of self-defense. Without it, GAR. No. 207818, July no c ut it, th arnt Fe complete or incomplete, Reyes, J. Cn Ax HE WHO ALLEGES SELF-DEFENSE HAS: bor PROVIN HE SAME ee Mtn NES Federico Sabay v. Self-deferise'aa esting c creamatance impiigé-the admission ‘by People of the the accused*that# i! cts (that-would have been Philippines criminal in? characters orthe presence of GR No. 192150, circumstar aces, whos ices negate the commission October 1, 2014 of a crime ‘The mi ule Js that\1io. self-defense can be Brion, J. recognized ‘until ual leagg s ion is established. Since the accused alleges selfeg prove that’ he salle a ss th@ burden of evidence to CESSATION OF UNLAWFUL woo S510) Hsin ae OF SELF- DEFENSE Sherwin Dela Cruz v. iginaied from the victim Peopie of the fore, danger may have in Philippines . 8 608 upren fray jer-had already ceased the ee saffned he fipr’by wresting the gun from November 19, 2014 ye 7 ares Po the latter.!After ced had Successfully seized i, there was no Ef longer any unlawlag ou to speak of that would have necessitated the AES te Kil the victim EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCES MINORITY AS AN EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE AS DETERMINED BY ONE'S BIRTH DATE AND.NOT BY ONE’S MENTAL AGE. People of the in determining age for purposes of exemption from criminal Philippines v. Milan ability, the law clearly refers to the age as determined by the Roxas y Aguiluz anniversary of one’s birth date and not the mental age as argued G.R.No. 200793, June by accused. 4, 2014 Leonardo-De Castro, J. ‘SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSMITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES SELF-DEFENSE'S INAPPLICABLE WHEN THE UNLAWFUL AGGRESSION DID NOT START FROM THE VICTIM Alberto Aimojuelay ‘There can be no self-defense, whether complete or incomplete, Villanueva v. People of unless the victim had committed unlawful aggression against the the Philippines Se Ne He5502, June PE*SOM who resorted to self-defense 2, 2014 Brion, J NO TREACHERY WHEN ieee iE Treachery is — on wher iia Is not pieaieditated, or iu where the; sidden attack is, plot ree) id; deliberately _ adopted, buts just wagered bya int yreon the part of Gite 201658, June the accused as'2 result of a proved ea, ewiclim or when Reyes, J the killings dorie"atangsourof Emre SES 6 a INORITY ANO UNINHABITED PLACE AS AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE People of the Phils. v, “Jn rape through force or intimidation, the force employed by the Virgilio Antonio Y guilty party need not be irresistible, It is, only necessary that such Rivera force is sufficient to consurnmate'the purpose for which it was G.R. No, 208623, thy aac inflicted..Simitarly,imimidation shoulé be evaluated in fight of the Reyes, victim's perception at the time of the commission of the crime. It is : enoughrthatit7prgduced the feat in the pind of the victim that if she did not yield to the bestial demands ‘of her ravisher, some evil would Happen’to her at! that mor sntor-even thereafter. Hence, What, is importantis that beéause‘of force. and intimidation, the victim was madeto submitto the Will gfthie appellant 1d Uninhabited ‘pipe: may be appreciated as aggiavatingcircumstanges: a8 AAA was only 11 years old at the time of the rape and it was committed in a farm in the highlands, ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTH DOES NOT QUALIFY ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE _¥O MURDER People of the The presence of abuse of superior strength should not result in Philippines v. qualifying the offense to murder: When abuse of superior strength Reynaldo Torres obtains in the special complex crime of robbery with homicide, it is GR. No. 189850, to be regarded as a generic circumstance, robbery with homicide September 22, 2014 being a composite crime with its own definition and special penalty Del Castillo, J in the R°C. 4 SANBEDACOLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS.ean : TREACHERY: CAN EXIST EVEN IF THE ATTACK | SUDDEN AND UNEXPECTED People v. Eugene The prosecution was able to prove that Eugene's attack on Gabriel IS FRONTAL, AS LONG AS IT WAS ‘Samuya was so swift and sudden, and without any warning. Eyewitnesses GR. No. 213214; April testified that immédiately upon his arrival and without “any 20, 2015, exchange cf words, Eugene pulled out his gun and shot Gabriel, Although the attack was frontal, it was so sudden and unexpected which made it impossible for Gabriel to defend himsolf IF THE CIRCUMSTANCES “USE OF A DEADLY WEAPON” AND “TWO OR MORE PERSONS” ARE BOTH PRESENT, THERE IS NO NEED TO APPRECIATE THE FIRST AS QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE AND. THE. A GENERIC CIRCUMSTANCE People v. Ricky Arguta In theca the Court held ihat the and Wilson‘Cahipe f a deadly weapon" or "by Pertas-Bemabe, J i G.R. No. 213216; April Btifigycrime of Rape" If one is 20, 2015 present, the,remai pagclieyrpstance, also, atfepdant, is not a Perlas Bernabe; J: generic Speeavatngealubliatce, ‘There Bygedee tase te consider the=réiiiditing pifeurhnstanaetas a.generic aggravating circumstance for eltfier 8 e “otatbered eseuen under Article 14 of - the “RSviséd™ Paaae {imerating-~the aggravating circumstances. : IN ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE, IT MUST BEJESTAt MERE INCIDENT TO THE ROBBERY eis People of the Assuming. that fobbery Wag undegd committed, the prosecution Philippines vs Sonny é-that'the killing Was a mere incident to Gatarin y Caballero @ Beidigsthelperpatistors main purpose ard “Jay-R" objective: .Itiissfoten Suppase;jhat the purpose of the GR. No. 198022, April author of:thieshomicide’ wal oy Toby apes presumption of such 7-204 facts not sui Was Peralta, J. : bs wo ARES : st > WHERE THE PERSON KIDNAPPEO.IS KILLED wiihleoiee OF THE DETENTION, THE KIDNAPPING AND MURDER‘OR'HOMICIDE’SHAEL BE PUNISHED AS A SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME = People of the Where tha ‘person kidnapped is killed in the course of the Philippines v. detention, regardiess of whether the killing was purposely sought Armando Dionaldo, or was merely an afterthought, the kidnapping and murder or Renato Dionaldo, homicide can no longer be complexed under Art. 48, nor be Mariano Gariguez, Jr, treated as separate crimes, but shall be punished as 2 special and Rodolfo Laride complex crime under the last paragraph of Art. 267, as amended GR No. 207949, by RA No. 7659. Furthermore, the kidnapping was committed for July 23, 2014 the purpose of extorting ransom; accused-appellants’ conviction Perlas-Bernabe , J must be modified from Kidnapping and Serious lilegal Detention to the special complex crime of Kdnapping for Ransom with Homicide, which carries the penalty of death. SAN BEDA COLE 3€ OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS.iP" Su INES Ree” i FOR ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE, OFFENDER'S INTENT TO TAKE PERSONAL PROPERTY BEFORE THE KILLING MUST BE ESTABLISHED People of the What is imperative and essential for a conviction for the crime of Philippines v. Mark robbery with homicide is for the prosecution to establish the Jason Chavez para te offender's intent to take personal property before the killing, Somcnpar oe ond regardless of the time when the homicide is actually carried out. in " cases when the prosecution failed to conclusively prove that Leonen, J. bane homicide was committed for the purpose of robbing the victim, no accused a bbery with homicide. eis WHEN DIRECT: ASSAULT RES. OFSIHAHAGENT OROFA PERSON IN AUTHORITY, COMPLEX CRI OF D REC AULT WITH WURDER OR _HOMICIDE ARISES AMPY ES “People ofthe Whenithe assayitresullsinitha kijing of fhat-ac a ‘of a person, Philippines v. Ex- in “authority” 6r “that” mate there arises the plex crime of Mayor Carlos Estonilo~., direct assault with mi GR. No. 201565, a October 13, 2014 ae Leonardo-De Castro, v: : WHEN THE FELONIES OF “ROBBERY IN At }:HOUSE””AND “ROBBERY WITH VIOLENCE AGAINST OR INTIMIDATIO} RE A Y ‘ARE- COMMITTED, THE CRIME IS A COMPLEX‘ONE 4 ee Aurora Engson The Court: héldisthat wtieh the Sleménts“of both crimes are Fransdilla v. People _present;the'crime is a, camglex ong, calling forthe imposition ~ as Gi. No. 197562; April provided:in Article, 48-of-the"RPC — of tHe-penalty for the most 20, 2015, serious” offense. riod: The prosecution BERSAMIN,') competently: proved tie -cgnnfssion ihe complex crime by “showing thatthe! acculeda rr enterir fe residential house of “the” -complainat ih away yal (gS? including the vault “containing Ci Usable iggncies, and in the process committed. acts a ‘ale Ad intimidation of persons during'the robbery by mae arrestening Lalaine and tying her up_and"higrdingsthatottiérsinémbers of the household inside the bodega of the houses. PROBATION COMMISSION OF ANOTHER OFFENSE SHALL RENDER THE PROBATION ORDER INEFFECTIVE Neil V. Suyan v. People Section 71 of the Probation Law provides that the commission of of the Philippines and another offense shall render the probation order ineffective. The the Chief Probation Court's discretion to grant probation is to be exercised primarily for and Parole Officer, the benefit of organized society and only incidentally for the Dagupan City benefit of the accused. Having the power to grant probation, it GR. No. 189644, follows that the trial court also has the power to order its 6 SANBEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSJuly 2, 2014 revocation in a proper case and under appropriate circumstances. Sereno, C J EXTINCTION OF CRIMINAL LIABILITY VIOLATION OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 9165 DOES NOT ENTAIL ANY CIVIL LIABILITY People of the Ordinarily, both the civil and criminal liabilties are extinguished Philippines v. Alfredo upon the death of the accused periding appeal of his convietion Morates y Lam the lower courts, G.R. No. 206832, January 21, 2015 Perez, J. ublic Act No. 9165 or the giation jal f 2002 does not entail any EXEMPTION FROM! CIVIL LIABIEITYs IGESRROVED BY PREPON ERANCE OF EVIDENCE ONLY IF, THE-ACQUITTAL:/S. BASES ON, REASONABLE DOUBT ON THE GUILT OF THE ACCUSED son VP LAY Cristina Castillo v. The law retognizesit ittalwWith diferent effects on Phillip Saivader the civil fiability,of t iS anvagauittal on the ground GR, Mo. 191240, that the accused :i guttior of ithe act or omission poe Petter complained of The main element of fape is*latk of consent." {Decision-making 1S function of. thé ‘mind’ pRiénée, £a "person's, cApacity to decide whether 16 give consent or x fice to an adult GR. No. 199402, activity is determined’ (ik se échronological age but by his November 12, 2014 or her mental age. THUS, ae .dge of'a-mental retardale is Leonen, J. rape under- paragraph: oF Alt 6. 266-0 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended: “by: Repubiic Bet lo, 8353 because a mental relardate is not capable of-giving:her consent to a sexual act. Proof of force or intimidation is:nokinecessary, it being sufficient for the State to establish, one; the“sexual Congress between the accused and the victim, and, two, the mental retardation of the victim, PROVING TREACHERY AS A QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE OF MURDER ~ Miguel Cireray Ustelo Treachery ‘as. a ‘qualifyirig. circumstance must be deliberately v. People of the sought to.ensure the safety ofthe accuged from the defensive acts Philippines of, the victim! -Unexpectednéss. pt \thé..attack does nct always GR. No. 181843 July _equate'to treachery. A finding ofthe’ existence of treachery should 14,2014 be:based’on clear and convircing“évidence. Such evidence must Leonen, J. be as coriclusive as the fact.dfkilligg itself. its existence cannot be presumed. Aswith the fifiding of guilt of the accused, any doubt as to its existence should be resolved in favor of the accused. INSPIRACY AND TRE/ sople of the \CHERY IN MURDER AND FRUSTRATED MURDER Treachery is evident in this case as the suddenness and Philippines, v. Jojo unexpectedness of the assault deprived the victims of an ‘Sumithig opportunity to resist it or offer ariy defense of their persons. This is GAR. No. 178115, considering that the victims were unaware that they would be July 28, 2014 altacked by appellants with a heii of bullets from their firearms Del Castillo, J fired at close range. Indeed, "[i]he suddenness of the attack, without the sli zhtest forewarning thereof, placed the [victims] ». x-x in such a position that they could not have defended themselves from the aggression x x x." 42. SANBEDACOLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS.MURDER QUALIFIED BY TREACHERY; FRONTAL ATTACK. People of the Paragraph 16, Article 14 of the RPC provides thal there is Philippines v. Virgilio treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against Amora y Viscarra the person, employing means, methods or forms in the execution G.R. No, 190322, thereof which tend directly and specially to ensure its execution, November 26, 2014 withoutrisk to himself arising from the defense which the offended Del Castilo, J party might make. cRIM ae GRAVE ABUSE AS AN ELEME! 5 beet People of the Grave abuse of confidence, as an“element of Qudiified Theft, Philippines v. Cahilig “must beatles uIe-setetrGleton by reas fependence, GR. No. 199208, guardianshig-or siglengs, petwean appellaryiaiid the offended July 30, 2014. party that'might-cieate ‘arhigh degfde'bfcontidics between them Carpio, J. which the-appellantabusediirszen ELEMENTS PROVING ESTAFA : 4 Z Silverina E. Consigna The elemenis of estafa by means, of deceit, whether committed by V. People of the false pretenses or cdrigealient, areithe following: (a) there must Philippines be a false pretense, ‘fraidulén! ctor fraudulent means, (b} such GR Ne. 175750, false pretence, fraudulemact.or ffaudulenl means must be made April 2, 2014 or executediprior to oF'simullanedusly with, thé commission of the Perez, J. fraud: (0). the, offended” party mist thave relied on the false pretense, fraudulent act’ or; fraudulent’ wears, that is, he was inducedstolpat With Ris money 6r oy of the false. pretense.ifrandulent Ct or fraudulepit Bans; and (4) as a result thereof, th ange. DEMAND IN THE CRIME OF-ESTAF) Lito Corpuz v. People ~~ Demand neddnott evenr’be fornal ii-may be verbal. in his of the Philippines. testimony; private"cofiplainant harfated how he was able to locate GR. No. 180016, petitiorien: aller almost two,'months~trom the time he gave the April 29, 2014 pieces of jewelrysandiasked*petitioner about the same items with Peralta, J. the latter promising ‘topay’ them. Such satisfy the element of demand. «" ae ESTAFA THROUGH ABUSE. ENCE People of the The following are the elements of estafa through abuse of Philippines v. Jose C. confidence under Article 315, par. 1(b) of the RPC: (1} that money, Go goods or.othet personal property is received by the offender in GR. No. 191015, trust or ori commission, or for administration, or under any other, August 6, 2014 obligation involving the duty to make delivery of or to return the Del Castillo, J. same; (2) that there be misappropriation cr conversion of such money oF property by the offender, or denial on his part of such receipt; (3) that such misappropriation or conversion or denial is to the prejudice of another; and (4) there is demand by the offended party to the offender. SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Li W 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS - 1STHE INVESTMENT SCHEME OF INDUCING THE PUBLIC TO INVEST ON THE UNDERTAKING THAT THE INVESTMENT WOULD BE RETURNED WITH A VERY HIGH _MONTHLY INTEREST RATE CONSTITUTES SYNDICATED ESTAFA : People of the The accused-appeliants therefore used TGICI to engage in @ Philippines v.Palmy Ponzi scheme, resulting in the‘defraudation of the TGICI investors. Tibayan and Rico oe A ponzi scheme is a type of investment fraud that involves the GR_Nos. 209655-60, Payment of purported returns to existing investors from funds January 14, 2015 contributed by new investors. Its organizers often solicit new Perlas-Bemabe, J. investors by promis to, invest funds in opportunities claimed to ait vt 2 JURIDICAL “POSSESSION MISAPPROPRIATION é Margie Balerta v, The=pettionsr arn netsh ae sole _ thé records and People ofthe funds, Coneequerily. the’ authorship GF fed entries in the Philippines * passbuok™ cannot eRrettiny sto the petitioner G.R. No. 205144, alone, Morsover, Tienda fl Feertainty where in November 26, 2014 the records, held by:the: petitioner liscrepancies shown. Royes, J. In the prosecution oftestafa’s t be formal if there exists evidence of misay in the instant case, conclusive proofs a San Diego vs. People iets of ofiestata, swith abiseiot confidence is that the of the Philippines money, messes ‘other:;personal more be received by the GRNo. 176114 offender instiust; or on:€ommission, or for administration, or under April 8, 2015 any pther @bligation involving’ the sar delivery of, oF to Peralta, J retumn,the Salfe:Juridical-possessioiy: means a possession which gives, the, transfereen Tights Spe ie“thing transferred. In the ie, the possessian ofithe petitioner was akin to that of a lefzof,funds.stetéived-from third persons paid to the bank. A'teller is'a'mere custodian or keeper of the funds received, and has no-autonomdusright to retain the money or goods received. CRIMES AGAINST THE CIVIL STATUS OF PERSONS ‘THE CRIME OF BIGAMY CONSUMMATED FROM THE MOMENT A SECOND MARRIAGE 1S CONTRACTED WITHOUT THE FIRST MARRIAGE BEING FIRST JUDICIALLY DECLARED NULL AND VOID Noel A. Lasanas v. The crime of bigamy has the following elements: (1) that the People cfthe offender has been legally married; (2) that the marriage has not Philippines been legally dissolved or, in case his or her spouse is absent, the G.R. No. 159031, June absent spouse could not yet be presumed dead according to the 23, 2014 Civil Code; (3) that he or she contracts a second or subsequent 14 SANBEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS, on a PD Bersamin, J marriage; and (4) that t the second or subsequent marriage has all the essential requisites for validity. Petitioner should have first Secured a judicial dectaration of the nullity of his void marriage to private complainant Patingo before marrying Josefa Eslaban, In fact, he'éniy did so after his marriage to Eslaban. Consequently, he violated the law on bigamy. THERE IS PERFORMANCE OF ILLEGAL MARRIAGE CEREMONY WHEN ONE, HAVING THE AUTHORITY OF A SOLEMNIZING OFFICER, PERFORMS AN ILLEGAL MARRIAGE CEREMONY Rene Ronulov. People _ The law sei of the Philippines ceremony. G.R.No, 182438) July 2, cont 2014 declare Ab than twotwifiesses that Brion, J. they take- th . ye . ee SN : AS Ach the, GSE AeRUTgAMEA, Rofiulp/ gta tihat the parties appedréd Before him and this fact was testifigd’to by witnesses Onithe Setand 725 Sifia@sthat, contrary to the Ronulo's », thfougir:the testimony of a iBlV-dectared that they withess-ttatathe cof take each atheras Ie ceremony despite ements of marriage smiony, therefore, was “The marriage edi Abe po eg is) f ee Almendras, Jr. v. iféty and should be taken in their ghar i defamatory, the words usea ie Alexis C. Aimendras _pigin, natural, and ordinary meaning as they would naturally be GR. No. 179491 understoodty the persoiis:reading them, unless it appears that January 14, 2015 they were used and understood in another sense. In the instant Sereno, C.J, case, the letters tag respondent as a “reknown biack mailer,” 2 vengeful family member who filed cases against his mother and siblings, and with nefarious designs. Even an impartial mind reading these.descriptions would be led to entertain doubts on the person's character, thereby affecting that person's reputation. ‘SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 15. 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS ~ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT A PERSON CONVICTED FOR ILLEGAL RECRUITMENT UNDER THE LAW MAY, FOR ‘THE SAME ACTS, BE SEPARATELY CONVICTED FOR ESTAFA People v. Angel Mateo The elements of estafa are: (1) the accused defrauded another by and Vicenta Lapiz abuse of confidence or by means of deceit; and (2) the offended G.R. No. 198012; April party or a third party suffered damage or prejudice capable of 22, 2015 Pecuniary estimation.” Here, the appellants committed deceit Del Castillo, J against the private complainants by making it appear as though they had the authority and resources to send them to Japan for employment,that there were available jobs for them in Japan wi in truth, there were none: — “ai an Heasory or Gari of such assurance, the privatevcomplainants parted" withistheintmoney in paynient of the placement, fee,, documentation and hotel sections All these representations: were.actually false and fraddulént and thus, the appellants mtst’bemade Niable\under par, fe) "Art. 315 of the Revised Penal Cove. Quasi -OFF ENSES! AN ACT WHICH IS SOMETHING MORE THAN’A MERE NEGLIGENCE, BUT WILLFUL DISREGARD OF THE CONSEQUENCES: CONSTITUTE THE OFFENSE OF RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE. Reynaldo S. Mariano v. Reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily, but without malice, People of the doing orfailing to do an act from which material damage results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaution dn the part of the person GR. No. 178145, performing of failing to-perform such act, taking into consideration July 7, 2014 Sor gccupation, degree-of intelligence, physical Bersamin, J condition‘and ‘other circumstances regarding persons, time and RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE ‘consists! iNOLUNTARY, 8 Siiour MALICE, DOING OR FAILING TO DO AN ACT-FROM WHICH MATERIAL MAMIAGE RESULTS BY REASON OF INEXCUSABLE LACK OF PRECAUTION TAKING.INTO.CONSIDERATION CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES ESE ee Or. Antonio P. ‘Tie’ Giemenis of reckisss. imprudence are’ (1) That the offender Cabugao, et. al. v. does or fails to do an act: (2) that the doing or the failure to do that People of the act is voluntary; (3) that it be without malice; (4) that material Philippines and damage results from the reckless imprudence; and (5) that there is Spouses Rodolfo M. inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the offender, taking Palma And Rosario F. into consideration his employment or occupation, degree of Palma intelligence, physical condition, and other circumstances regarding GR. No. 163879, persons, time and place. July 30, 2014 Peralta, J First, Dr. Ynzon failed to attend to the needs of the patient by neglecting to monitor effectively the developments and changes on his condition during the observation period, and to act upon the situation when his condition worsened. Second, petitioner voluntarily failed to check on his patient. Third, no malice was 14 SANBEDA COLLEGE oF LAW 2016 CentRaLIZED Bar OPERATIONSCy . present in his act, but the latter caused material damage as the Patient died as a'result thereof. Lastly, from the testimonies of the expert witnesses presented, “it was irrefutably proven that Dr. Ynzon failed to practice that degree of skill and care required in the treatment of his patient. SPECIAL LAWS COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT EXCHANGE OF MONEY AND DRUGS|S, FOR THE CONSUMMATION OF THE. People v. Dasigan igi G.R. No. 206229, 6 OnMORdegerous drugs Ate: (1) thé February 04, 2015" accused.is. nupassegsion-ofarjtem or ject whic 1s identified to Perez, J. be a prohibitéd‘dig (2}-suich‘Dossession is nehauthorized by law; aiid’(3) the Hacrused eelj-ard geristiously.posséssed the said an (9) he CERES id Sorter oT Bt Dadigan is guilty of ilegal With all thé etemefts bona possession. of dangerous dhuds: : operat However, she cannot | a. gonivcted for illegal sale of dangerous drugs. The:markedsnonsywas;shown to-accused-appellant but it was not actually givensto, hersa she was immediately arrested when the ssHabuiwas handed “over to the poseur-buyer. it is material si iz8ale of dangerous drugs’that the sale actually took placéahd:what Consummates the buy-bust transaction is the delivery Uas.L0' thé poseur-buyer. and, in turn, the seller's NON-COMPLIANCE WITH'SECTION JUSTIFIABLE GROUND EXIST AND i _OF THE SEIZED ITEMS ARE-PROPERLY PR mS A 9165,NOT FATAL AS LONG AS IE INTEGRITY,AND EVIDENTIARY VALUE SERVED! Side People of the While thé Brion, J. FACTS: This petition for review.on certiorari stems from the decision of the SA affirming the decision of the RTC, which likewise affirmed the MTC's ruling convicting Federico Sabay of two (2) counts of Slight Physical injuries. Petitioner and his denghter, Erlinda, were laying woods and water pipes in the yard of Godofredo Lopez. When the fatter confronted the petitioner about his intrusion into Godofredo’s preperty, a verbal altercation ensued between them. In the course of the verbal exchange, Erlinda hit Godofredo on the head with a hard object. The petitioner joined in by throwing a stone at Godofredo’s face. The petitioner and Erlinda then shouted ‘at Godofredo and go SANBEDA Cottese OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSthreatened to kil him. Jervie Lopez came and pacified the three, ‘but in t was hit in the hand with a bolo. acre Petitioner denies the charge and claims that hy Godofredo suddenly hit him with an iron bar in Godofredo's son fired a .38 caliber gun at him. ie only acted in self-defense alleging that his right hand, causing him injuries and that Issue: Is the claim of self-defense valid in this case? ised that he committed the HELD: oy NO, Seif-defense as a justifyit tie acts that woilld’ have been fear inal in eEifigbeen for (the“presence of ircurnstances "whose" legal consequence: speaate ne copimissiof ofa cinfeythe plea of sell defense in order tovexcuipate ihe aceised 5 see ven. The Mosk basi rule is that no sef-defense can be tecognized Until aur ree y ste fe Qe> Since the accused. alleges self-defense, he ¢ Satsfied the elements required law, he who} wstealy, on tho strength of Ris fice, refjuires are resent, the admitlad the commission of the in fan opy-pleads that he acted in al py ak CESSATION OF UNLAWFUL sccgessiGnb BAR: 3 SHE preys OF SELF-DEFENSE Dela Cruz v. People oe aa} GR. No. 189405, November, 19, 201 a Peralta, J BA a FACTS: p ci This is a petition for review on éertiéren seekin. 19 “Set aside the decision of the CA finding petitioner Sherwin Dela Crud auilly Bey ne doubt of the crime of Homicide. act charged. In this case, the petitioner admitted the) a self-defense, Petitioner went to the office of Sykes Asia. When “Siready inside the building, he went to the workstation of the deceased victim, Jeffrey Gonzales who was seated fronting his compuier terminal, with his back towards the aisle. As petitioner epproached Jeffrey from the back, pelitioner was already holding a gun pointed at the back of Jeffrey's head. At the last second, Jeffrey managed to deflect the hand of petitioner holding the gun, and a short struggle for the possession of the gun ensued thereafter. Petitioner won the struggle and remained in possession of the said gun. Petitioner then pointed the oun at Jeffrey's face, pulled the trigger four (4) times, the fourth shot finally discharging the bullet that hit Jeffrey in the forehead, eventually killing him. Finally, after shooting Jeffrey, petitioner fled the office. SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS aFT AL hme For his par, petitioner contends that il was Jeffrey who suddenly picked up,a gun and pointed it at petitioner's face. The gun did not fire so petitioner grappled with Jeffrey for the possession of the gun. Petitioner was able to wrest away the gun from Jeffrey and tried to run away. However Jeffrey immediately blocked petitioner's path and took hold of a big fire extinguisher, aimed and was about to smash it on petitioner's head. While in the act of parying the aitack, the gun accidentally fired fatally hitting Jeffrey's forehead. Pelitioner pleaded not guilty and raises the Justifying circumstance of self-defense. ISSUE: Assuming that the contentions of the petitioner as to the facts are true, are the elements of seif- defense to exculpaie petitioner from crimi e HELD: s a a NO, the facts do not support patitioner's’con Unlawful aggression is the most esséatial! eleinent\di“Selt-defense. liprésubposes actual, sudden, unexpected or imminent? dangéf s-—y not merely { threatenifig-“and_ intimidating action. There is aggression, only wheh the one attacked faces reel andimétiate threat to his life, The petit sought to be avoided’ must be immlfentiand'AetuAl! not mezely speculative. When an unlawful aggression that has begut no longeF exists, the onelwho fesorts to self-defense has no Fight to kill or even wound the-former. aggressor. T'66'Sure, when the present victim no onger persisied in his purpose or-action te the extent that the object of his attack was no longer in peril, there was no more unlawiul aggression that would warréint legal seif-defense on the part of the offender pie Even assuming arquendo that theigun originated trom Jeffrey and an“altercation transpired, and therefore. danger may have in fact existed; the imminénce of thai danger had already ceased @ moment petitioner disarmed Jeffrey by:Wresting the gun from the’ latler. After petitioner had cessfully seized il, there was no longer afly unlawful aggression {9 speak of that would have necessitated the need to kill Jeffrey. a tence, Sherwin Dela Cruzis guily of Homicide MINORITY AS AN EXEMPTING CIRCUMSTANCE iS.DETERMINED BY ONE’S BIRTH DATE AND NOT BY ONE'S MENTAL AGE : People v. Roxas G.R. No, 200793, June 4, 2014 ‘eonardo-DeCastro, J, FACTS: ‘his is an appeal from the decision of the CA, which affirmed with modification the judgment of the RTC, which found Milan Roxas guilty of five counts of rape. AAA lestified that the appellant who was his uncle raped. her in five different occasions, The first ‘one was committed when AAA was only 9 years of age. The subsequent rapes were committed on the months of March, May, July and August of the year 1998. On those five instances, the 32 SANBEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS.° a ERP appellant employed the same’ method of blindfol Ising AAA and-turning her around three ti after which, he would lay her down in bed and ha v Hae Wve carnal knowledge with her. Roxas claims that he has a mental a criminal liability although his chronolos already eighteen years old. age of nine years old hence he should be exempt from gical age at the time of the commission of the crime was ISSUE: - 's Roxas exempt from criminal liability for having a mental age of a nine years old? HELD: NO, he is not exempt. ; ears of age fi he feng i be exernpt from criminal liability:‘However, re is 1a)! hessubjected to an interventioiprogram. A child above 15 years bit below 18 years oP Se Pere from éfirginal liability and be subjected to an interverition:prograin juslesS N6/sh6 bas abledyyith-discemdient. In determining age for purposes of exemption’ age as delermined by thé anniversary of one's ee the law clearly refers to the Roxas, oo \d.not the mental age as argued by Hence, accused-appellant Roxas is not exempied from:cri nai liability Mit gating;Gircum: tances SELF-DEFENSE IS INAPPLICAI START FROM THE VICTIM Almojuela v. People ¢ G.R.No. 183202, June 2,/2044 Brion, J. ‘ Fact: a Accused-appellant Alberto Almojuéla’ MASEREIREE forthe death of Ricardo Quejong. The instant case is a petition for review cn’Gerliorarl Seeking the reversal of the Court of Appeals decision, which affirmed with modification the decision of the trial court finding the accused guilty of the crime of homicide Quejong, Paz, along with some others, were on their way home from a party when they encountered Aimojuela, who was having a drinking spree with his friends. Almojuela called on Paz and shouted, "Matagal ka nang namumuro sa akin,” to which, Paz replied, “Ganoon ba? ‘What do you want?” Immediately, a fight ensued between the two. In the course of the fight, ‘Almojuela stabbed Paz in his right arm, causing the latter to retreat. It was at this point that Quejong fought with Almojuela. On hearing the gunshots made by a kagawad to pacify the parties, Quejo..q and his group immediately ran away. Thereafter, the friends of Quejong found ‘out that he had stab wounds in his back, which caused his death ‘SAN BEOA COLLEGE OF LAW 33 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSAs defense, Almojuela admits the altercation with the group of Quejong, However, he alleges that he was provoked by the group of Quejong and so the mitigating circumstance of incomplete self defense be appreciated in his favor. ISSUE: i Ave there sufficient elements to constitute an incomplete self-defense? HELD: No, the elements of incomplete self-defense were not present An incomplete self-defense is appisdilted nin (a bi the viatim: (b) the means empleyed taj fh reasonably necessary; and (c)' ‘of himself, There*can be no self-defense, whethef-completeror inca committed uniawiuvaggression againstithe fersot ‘ul aggression on the part of inlawful aggression is not part of the persén defending plete, uniess-the victim had ino-tékonted to sett-datense: * BONE able wwe Rescat Case Ubecatse the unlawful [Gucion@:ubsrOTAaeeused Aimojuela himsell The who firsti¢hallenc ae Therefore, the mitigating circumstance of incomplete set Weis mitigating circumstance ‘1s Way sasression cid not start: fromthe victiin Prosecution proved that it was ‘Almojuela Aggravating Circumstances NO TREACHERY WHEN THE KILLING IS'NOT PREMEDITATED People v, Likiran oe S. F G.R. No. 201858, June 4.2014 Reyes, J, 7 FACTS: a ‘The accused Jenny Lil the RTC which was affirni ‘ap, was chargédiwit necd.byihe CA.” ‘The accused alleges the Gefense of denial and states that he was outside of the basketball Court when the commotion happened. oe ISSUE: 's treachery present in the commission of the crime? HEL “lo, treachery is not present in this case. ‘SAN BEDA Cowtece oF Law 2016 CeNiRALIZED Bar OPERATIONS eeinthis case, the shooting and stabbing of Sareno was actually a spur of the moment cident, a {Poult of the brawi that happened during iit oarrio dance. The prosecution failed to show that the laccused-appellant and his brather Jerome deliberately planned the means by which they would harm Sareno. Therefore, there being no trea iptigany.ins murder, FF SM 7 ~ ABUSE OF SUPERIOR STRENGTHIDOESING MURDER wig People v. Torres GR. No. 189850, September 2272014" Del Castillo, J. f EGE £ oa FACTS: This. appeal assails the decision of thé OA of modi ‘Bulifyinig into'special. complex crime of robbery with hemicide the decision of the RTC which foun ‘opsito Torres guilty of the crime of murder Victim Espino was driving-his car WijéfiRGnnie’ Torres suddenly’ blocked his path. Espino alighted from his vehicle.and approughed:Ronnie; who suddenly fried’to grab his bell-bag Espino resisted and struggled with:Ronpietor the: possession of his belt-bag but the latter's brothers, Jay Torres, Rey. Torres, and: Roberto 'Torres, and an unidefittied companion’ suddenly appeared. With all of themybrandishing bladed weapons, apnellant and his brothers took turns in stabbing Espino in differantiparts of ilé*the unidentified! companion held him in the neck. When Espino was-already spi the ground, they’ tok his belt-beg, wallet arid pieces of jewelry and immediately dead on arrival ‘ was.rished to the hospital but was pronounced ISSUES: “pi 1. Are the elements of Robbery with Homicide present? 2. Is the aggravating circumstance of'Abuse of Superior Strength present in the commission of the crime? HELD: 1.. Yes, the elements of robbery with homicide are present Robbery with homicide exists ‘when a homicide is committed either by reason, or on occasion, of the robbery. To sustain a conviction for robbery with homicide, the prosecution must prove the following elements: (1) the taking of personal property belonging to another; (2) with intent to gain; (3) with the use of violence or intimidation against a person; and (4) ‘on the occasion or by reason of the robbery, the crime of homicide, as used in its generic sense, was committed. A conviction requires certitude that the robbery is the main purpose SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 35 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSPoke and objective of the malefactor and the killing is merely incidental to the robbery. The intent to rob must precede the taking of human life but the killing may occur before, during or after the robbery. {tis clear that the primordial intention of appellant and his companions was to rob Espino. Had they primarily intended to kill Espino, they would have immediately stabbed him to death. However, the fact that Rorinie initially wrestled with appellant for possession of the belt-bag clearly shows that the central aim was to commit robbery against Espino. This intention was confirmed by the accused's taking of Espino’s belt-bag, wallet, wrist-wetch and jewelries after he was stabbed to death. The killing was therefore merely incidental, resulting by reason or on-occasion of the robbery, 2. “les, there was abuse of supenorstrenigt ‘There was abuse of superior strength when;the.offenders took advantage pt their combined strength in order to consummate’ the ‘offense. Nériétheless, the presence of abuse of ‘superior strength. should “not: fesult in qualifyitg the) offapisg\fo murder. When abuse of superior strength obtains in the’ special Conipléx crime’ 6f robbery wilt bomicide, it is to be regarded as a generic circumstance, robbery with Hom Being a’composite crime with its own definition and special penalty in the RI bo Here, appeliant and his four companions not only took: advantage of their numerical superiority, they were also armed with knives. Espino;.on the otherchand, was unarmed and defenseless, While Ronnie was wrestling with “Espinoy ‘appellant and his co-accused simultaneously assaulted the latter. The unidentified: companion Iéicked his arm around the neck of Espinc while appellant and his co-accused stabbed and hacked him several times. While Espino was lying defenseless on the ground, they divested-him of all his valuables Thereaiter, they immediately fled the scene of the crime. Itis clear that they executed the criminal act by employing’ physical superiority over Espino. , ex Complex Crimes 0." IN ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE“IT MUST BE ESTABLI MERE INCIDENT TO THE ROBBERY People vs Gatarin and Quisayas G.R. No, 198022, April 7, 2014 Peralta, J. HED THAT THE KILLING WAS A FACTS: This appeal assails the decision of CA which affirmed the decision of the RTC convicting appellants Sonny Gatarin and Eduardo Quisayas with robbery with homicide committed against Juanario Castillo. Howel Umali was riding a bicycle on his way home when he saw Januario Castillo being mauled by two persons. On the same night, SPO3 Gregorio Mendoze and PO’ Rogelio Dizon Coronel were performing their routine patrol duty when they met the accused who were running at a fast speed. The policemen chased them but they were unsuccessful in catching them. As they continued their patrol, they saw Januario lying on the street, severely injured. While on the way 36 SANBEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSa / {o the hospital, SPO3 Mendoza asked Januario who hurt him. He answered that it was “Jay-R and his uncle" who stabbed him. The uncle tured out to be the appellant herein, while Jay-R is his co-accused who remains at-large. Subsequently, Januario died due to the fatal wounds he has sustained. Maria Castillo, the deceasec's wife, testified on the amount allegedly stolen from her husband, ‘The accused allegedly took cash money amounting to P20,000.00 from Januario. ISSUE: 1. Were the elements of complex crime of robbery with homicide present in the case? 2. Was the crime of murder, instead of rabbe whomicide, committed? HELD: a soe ’ a ee 1. NO. To sudtain 2 conviction:toreréBbery willy hom rosecutionymust prove the following elements: (1) the taking.of persanal-property belonging to anothérz(2).with intent to gain; (3) with thé-use of violencoodtihibai ee anate person; and Sonrthe ‘occasion or by reason of-tHe robbéty: "the criffierBfthomiitidé, es sech ih the “Yenéric sense, was committed. Moreover, assuring that robbery was indeed committed \the-prosecution must establish with certitude that tne Rillitg Wasiay (ets eidentito the robbery, the latter being the perpetrator’s main, purpose and objective, It's j6t eriough to!suppose that the purpose ol the author of the homicide was to.rob; a mere presumption of such facts not sufficient ican be inferred from Matia’s testiniony that'she obviously wals;rot at the scene of the crime as she was oniy informed that the incident -took:3lace. "appears that she had no personal knowledge. that Januario was robbed, While claimed, that 220,000.00 was illegally taken from him, no evideries WaS)presénted to show thatiJanuario indeed had that ‘aniount at thal time and that the Saitje:Was'in his possession. Hence, the evidence-presentet robbery with homicide,:did not st 2. YES. Abuse of supetior'strength at ithe com*hissionofitfie’crime which qualifies the papis'conadenyfmenever theres 2 notorious offense to murder. This qualifying cit 1k Jered inequality of forces between, they victim “and the aggigSSor, assessing a superiority of strength notoriously advaiitageous| for the aggresso"which the latter selected ‘or took advantage cf in the commission of ti erie: 2" It is clear from the records of thé-éase that Janvaric was then fifty-four (54) years old. Appellant, on the other hand, was then forty (40) years old. Appellant committed the crime with his co-accused, his nephew. Clearly, assailants are younger than the victim. Moreover, assailants were armed with a bladed weapon, while Januario was unarmed. This same bladed weapon was used in repeatedly stabbing Janiuario, who no longer showed any act of defense. Abuse of superior strength was present. Hence, the appellant be held guilty of the crime of murder. SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS 97WHERE THE PERSON KIDNAPPED IS KILLED IN THE COURSE OF THE DETENTION, THE KIDNAPPING AND MURDER OR HOMICIDE SHALL BE PUNISHED AS SPECIAL COMPLEX CRIME People v. Dionaido et. al. GR. No. 207949 July 23, 2014 Perlas-Bemabe, J FACTS: This is an appeal assailing the Decision of the CA finding accused-appellants Armando Dionaldo, Renato Dionaldo, Mariano Gariguez, Jr., and Rodoifo Larido guilty beyond reasonable «doubt of the crime of Kidnapping and roadie ae Roderick Navarro dropped his gr brother informed Roderick that Edwin was.kidnapped. Thetkidnappers: nanding Figen 000.00 as ransom money. After negotiations, ,the kidnapper ase Edw 110,000.00. Roderick was then: instructed to oririg’the ‘moneystosthe”kidnappers at ithe*Libingan ng mga Sayani, One of the men took the money‘andidrove’away, During) thy course%or the investigation, Rodolfo, an employee at the gym, confessed that hé was part aN plan|té'kidnap Edwin, as in fact he was the one who tipped off the’ ito Ng conditign-that he will be given aa share in the ransom money. The déad body found’ Bay after the accused: appellants were arrested a The RTC convicted the accused-appellants Kiarapping and Serious illegal Detention. On appeal, the CA affirmed the RTCHin he thatjthe prosecution clearly established the elements of Kidnapping and Serious a) 7 . Oa oF cused-appsllants guilly of the’crime of Kidnapping and Seridug|liggal Detention or of the sppcial complex crime of Kidnapping for Rangom with Hornicide? HELD: we Homicide. Where the person kidnapped is killéd in the éoUrSe of,the detention, regardless of whether the Killing was purposely sought or'was.merely an afteiholight;"the kidnapping and murder cr homicide can no longer be complexed UndeRart%#8i-tior be treated as separate crimes, but shall be punished as a special complex crime under the last paragraph of Art, 267, as amended by RA No. 7659. Furthermore, the kidnapping was committed for the purpose of extorting ransom; accused-appellants' conviction must be modified from Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention to the special complex crime of Kidnapping for Ransom with Homicide, which carries the penalty of death. Hence, the death of Edwin, regardless if it was purposely sought or was merely an afterthought, is sufficient to convict the accused with Kidnapping for Ransom with Homicide. gg SANBEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CenTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS(8H) FOR ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE, OFFENDER'S INTENT TO TAKE PER: PROPERTY BEFORE THE KILLING MUST BE ESTABLISHED oe People v. Chavez G.R.No. 207950, September 22, 2014 Leonen, J. FACTS: This is a review of the decision of the CA affirming the judgment of the RTC convicting the petitioner of the crime of Robbery with Homicide, of rings and 2 pieces of kt neighbor of Barbie gave a statement that ‘he saw Chavé jarbie's house Bante des ‘the physical appearance ofthe /Serson he sa parlor, and, jolice line-up, positively identified Chavez. Based SENN Chavez ° areeey ae : “G OF LAW VW Are the facts of the case sufficjent to ome oe ee HELD: he No, the facts are not sufficient. e at oi ~ What is imperative and essential for a tonvict prosecution to establish ‘the stiendes, intont regardless of the time when the horny Jot roobery with homicide is for the eSGpal ipveperty before the killing, to facilitate the robbery or the é§ to preserve the possession by # to prevent discovery of the’ com Bene The circurnstantial evidence ne 8 dpby the lower, bdo satisfactorily establish an original criminal design by ot init robbery 1y622:stab wounds would be overkill for these purposes. The sheer number. ST MBH iSinficied on Barbie makes it difficult to conclude an original criminal intent of merely faking Barbie's personal property but rather strengthens an intention to kill and ensure his deathyThere is no evidence showing that’ the death of the victim occurred by reason or on the occasion of the robbery. Hence, Chavez is only guilty of the crime of Homicide for failure of the prosecution to substantiate its allegaticns of the presence of criminal design te commit robbery, independent of the intent to commit homicide, SAN IHEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS: 3A 7 WHEN DIRECT ASSAULT RESULTS IN THE KILLING OF THAT AGENT OR OF A PERSON IN AUTHORITY, COMPLEX CRIME OF DIRECT ASSAULT WITH MURDER OR HOMICIDE ARISES People v. Ex-Mayor Estonilo, Mayor Rey Estonillo, et. al. G.R. No. 201565, October 13, 2014 Leonardo-De Castro, J FACTS: This case is an appeal seeking the reversal of the decision of the CA which affirmed the decision of the RTC finding accused-appeliants guilty of the crime of murder with direct assault for having kitled Floro Casas by reason of.the:perfa of public schools. atte eS ieee. We epayhile in the, Selste lomentary School by six men. He was shot to death-after,an arguinent concerning a program for the celebration of the Federation of 7th Day Adventist with Ex-Mayor Etojillo” After committing the crime, they went to the vehicle of MayokCarlag), Sriand eve} lually left the scene of the crime. The witness who was present When thé group planned to kill Fir stated that it was Ex-Mayor Carlos, Sr. and Mayor Rey wid didered fhe} seathtised {Rig Boro. cords show that Floro sustained gunshot wounds caused by! the sizes of the slugs recovered and that some cf.ther fete fired at close range. HELD, Yes, the RTC correctly concluded that they should be held accountablé for the complex crime of direct assault with murder. 5 = Mi eo? i There are two modes of committing direct a8Sdult under,AMticle 148 of the RPC. Accused- appellants committed the second form,of assault, thé gleftiehts of which are that there must be an attack, use of force, or serious. intimidationserivéSietance’ upon a person in authority or his agent; the assault was made when the.-said person was performing his cuties or on the feccasion of such performance; and the accused knew.that the victim is a person in authority or his agent, that is, that the accused must have the intenticn to offend, injure or assault the cifended party as'a person in authority or an egent of a person in authority. When the assault «esuits in the kiling of that agent or of a person in authority for that matter, there arises the complex crime of direct assault with murder or homicide, The offense is a complex crime, the penalty for which is that for the graver offense, to be imposed in the maximum period. 'n this case, Floro was the duly appointed District Supervisor of Public Schools, was a person in authority. But contrary to the statement of the RTC that there was direct assault just because Floro was a person in authority, this Court clarifies that the finding of direct assault is based on the fact that the attack or assault on Floro was, in reality, made by reason of the performance of his duty as the District Supervisor 49 SANBEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CenvTRALiZeD BAR OPERATIONSTherefore, since the assault the accused-appellants committed resulted in the death of Floro, a person in authority, they are guilty of the complex crime of direct assault with murder. Probation COMMISSION OF ANOTHER OFFENSE SHALL RENDER THE PROBATIUiv ORDER INEFFECTIVE ‘Suyan v. People and the Chief Probation and Parole Officer, Dagupan City G.R. No. 189644, July 2-2014 SERENO, C J. 3 FACTS: } - This is an appeal'trofh the decision af the GA. whichratfirmed the RTC’s finding tat Neii Suyan violated the conditiotis of his probation’and thug “ordetéd' that his probation be revoked. ‘ coies Ger LAY 8? Suyan was charged for ilegal possession, of, requ) pleaded’ guilty. Subsequently, the RTC issued a Probation Order cpvering ae ) petitioner was arrested on two occasiéns again forilledalsp sion of drugs. Two separate informations were filed against himsbothof whi ith the RTC. This led the Chief Probation and Parole’ Officer 10 file ai Motion to, been apprehended twice for crug possession wi RTC revoked the probation of ‘Suyan. and. directed:him'to-serve the sentence imposed upon him. On appeal, the.CA ruled that, fok’haying, been, appreheuded twice for the commission of two offenses similar in nature, petitietét Sayan violated one of the conditions in the Probation Order. He even admitted: to havitigésanyed Oul \fis;senience for those offenses. Petitioner alleges that he has already showed ee ICE aflenhis.conviction; the CA should have ordered hima to resume his probation purstigh positivist theory, adepted in our criminal justice system ¥ fo issu: Ki) lo Yeo Was rovecaton of the piobatisA ied? AYE a eoete > 3 Oy snag HELD: oo z YES. There was sufficient justification for thé revocation of the probation. Section 11 of the Probation Law provides that the commission of another offense shall render the probation order ineffective. It states that a probation order shall take effect upon its issuance, at which time the court shall inform the offender of the consequences thereof and explain that upon his failure to coinply with any of the conditions prescribed in the said order or his commission of another offense, he shall serve the penalty imposed for the offense under which he was placed on probation. ‘Suyan does not deny the fact that’he has been convicted, and that he has served out his sentence for anothcr offense while on probation, Consequently, his commission of another offense is a direct violation of Condition No. 9 of his Probation Order. As probation is a mere SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 4a 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSdiscretionary grant, Suyan was bound to observe full obedience to the terms and conditions pertaining to the probation order or run the risk of revocation of this privilege. Regrettably, Suyan wasted the opportunity granted him by the RTC to remain outside prison bars, and must now suffer the consequences of his violation. The Court's discretion to grant probation is to be exercised primarily for the benefit of organized society and only incidentally for the beriefit of the accused. Having the power to grant probation, it follows that the trial court also has the power to ‘order its revocation in a proper case and under appropriate circumstances Hence, the revocation was justified VIOLATION‘OF-REPUBLIC AC People v. Morales: G.R. No, 206832, January 21, 2015s: PEREZ, J. ANY CIVIL LIABI BILITY AS NY ston of the RTC in convicting This appeal assails.the decision of the e-CA in ali Alfredo Morale of illegal sale and possession of dar eats ee While this case is pending appeel,| the; ge ap plant Morales died while committed at th nae ISSUE: 15 the civil and criminal ability of HELD: Yes. Under Article 89(1) ofithie ROE minal convict, as to the personal’ penaliié extinguished only when the. death of Bader cet beforesfinak judgment. Ordinarily, both the civil and criminal liabilities: are ext Saeco ‘the, death. of the accused pending appeal af his conviction by the lowerceale 15 ACS sl) (eee However, a violation of Republic ie EE Fot-entail any civil liability. No civil lability needs extinguishment. < Hence, no civil liability is extinguished in this case, 42. SANBEDA COLLEGE DF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS{ i | | | s EXEMPTION FROM CIVIL LIABILITY MAY BE PROVED BY PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE ONLY IF THE ACQUITTAL IS BASED ON REASONABLE Di GUILT OF THE ACCUSED cies Castillo v. Salvador G.R. No. 191240, July 30, 2014 Peralta, J. FACTS: 5 This petition for review on certiorari assails the decision of the CA with respect to the civil aspect of the case of which Philipp Salvador was acquitted of estafa. fnpting her oF USS operation. When-Gastillo already had.the money ashe Pe ‘Same to Salvador which was witnessed by herShalf-brother. However: ‘thetpropdséd~business never, pefated. Salvador confessed that he-uséd therthdrey to payifar his étherofligat i never returned, 7 i ql c ins. /Singe then, the money was ISSUE: t.F Must the award of damages be reiained. despi case? & i HELD: NO, the award of damages:must be remev The law recognizes twOi kinds ‘of acquittal with, different effects on-the civil liability of the accused. First is an acquittal onthe groundithat,the accused is not the author of the act or ‘omission complained df.’ This instance closes. the door’ fo civil liability, for a person who hess (or omnission‘cann@t,and;can never be held liable is arvacayital bagadfor reasonable doubt on the guilt ofthe accuse has not been satisfactorily ty, which may,be-proved by preponderance of established, he is not exeitipt.from ci evidence only, A reading of the CA decision wailld Shaw titaesalvador twas acquitted because the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasoriable doubt: Thus, since the acquittal is based on reasonable doubt, respondent is not exempt from: civil liability, which may be proved by preponderance of evidence only. In this case, however, no such civil liabilly is proved even by preponderance of evidence. Henee, the petition for the award of damages is denied. SAN BEDACOLEGEOFLAW 4, 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSAND CIVIL LIABILITY EX DELICTO People v. Paras G.R. No. 192912, October 22, 2014 Leonardo-De Castro, v. FACTS: This appeal assails the decision of the CA, which affirmed the decision of the RTC finding the accused Democratico Paras guilly of the crime of rape. On dune 4, 2014, the SC promulgated its,Decision,. the accused-appellant. In a letter dated August TS, Prison informed the court thal Raras, has died letter only on August 27, 2074 a Affimming the judgment of conviction against eloffiger-in-charge of the New Bilibid #1Y 2452013. The Court received the ISSUE: Under Article 89, paragraph 1 of the RPC, the death’ f an accused pending his appeal ponaguishes both his criminal and cil lability ex delicto.-Thus. upon the deh ot the accused Rerding appeal of his conviction, the criminal action is extinguished tracey as there is no {onger a defendant to stand as the accused; the civil action incitated tree for the recovary of cml ability ex deticto is ipso facto extinguished, grounded as itis on the criminal action, When Paras died on January 24, 2013, his appeal was stl Pending. The decision dated June 4, 2014 was thereafter promulgated, as the Court was not immediately informed ofthe. accused. jibbetant’s death. The death of the accused-appellant herein. thus, extinguished his criminal ability, as well as his civil liability directly arising from and basco solely on the crime committed Hence, the Court's Decision has been rendered ineffectual and the same is set aside. Book’Two Crimes Against the Fundamental Law of the State Edigardo Geroche, et al. v, People of the Philippines GR, No. 179080, November 26, 2014 Peratta, J, This appeal assalls the decision of the CA, which set aside the decision of the RTC finding Accused guilly of the crime of less serious physical injuries aq SANBEDACouLEGE OF Law 2016 CenTRauizeo Bar OperationsBaleriano Limbag roused from sleep when herein petitioners, Barangay Captain Edigardo Geroche, and Citzens Armed Forces Geographical Unit (CAFGU) Members Roberto Garde and Generoso Marfil, without any search warrant, suddenly entered his house by destroying the main door. The petitioners mauled him, striking with a garand rifle, which caused his injuries. They searched for firearms but instead found and took away his airgun When the petitidners appealed for their acquittal to the CA, the later convicted them cf violation of domicile. It set aside the ruling of the RTC that the accused’ admission that they were public officers were not sufficient for conviction of the said crime, an essential element of the crime, ISSUE: _ qe te ae Is the CA correct in convicting the accuse Of tHe, chime’ ti mae al Bi ioncer HELD: YES, the are guilty of the crime of violation’ of dorriigiie!" or eae £ ANAS oF Violation of domicile is committed by any public officer or ‘employee who, riot being autherized by judicial order, shall enter any dwelling against thelWwill Gldliesoumer thefeot, search papers or other effects found therein without the previous consent of such owner, or having surreptitiously entered said dwelling, and being required to leave'the premises, shall refuse to do so. In their testimony before the open court as well’as.ih the pleadings they filed, neither Geroche denied that he was a barangay captain nor Garde‘and: Matti refuted that they were CAFGU members. In holding such positions, they are considered aS public officersiemployees. Hence, the petitioners are guilty of violation of domicile. Crimes Against Publi Order;; EXERCISING ONE'S RIGHT AGAINST UNREASONABLE SEARCHES CANNOT BE. EQUATED TO DISOBEDIENCE Poe Oye oy Edmund Sydeco vs. Peopie of the Phi GAR. No. 202692; November 12,-2014 = VELASCO UR,, J - FACTS: ‘This Petition for Review under Rule 45 seeks to set aside the decision of the CA. The assailed issuance affirmed the decision of the RTC, which, in tun, affirmed that of the MeTC adjudging the petitioner guilty of resisting arrest Edmund Sydeco was driving about twenty (20) meters away from a checkpoint when the police officers manning the same signaled Sydeco to stop for swerving, which he obeyed. The police officers, after seeing emply cases of beer at the trunk of the vehicle, concluded that petitioner was driving under the influence of alcohol. W ien asked to step out of the car, petitioner refused, contending that the police officers should only conduct a “plain view search”. A confrontation SANBEDACOLLEGEOFLAW gg 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS,ensued resulting to the petitioner bein face. When the case was elevated to the SC, petitioner contended that it was erroneous for the CA to uphold the presumption of regularity in the performance of duties by the police officers, which it used as basis in affirming the decision of the RTC. ISSUE: Is pe: -oner's act of refusing to alight for body and vehicle search an act of disobedience? RULING: can REP No, petitioner's act does not yor aX The two key.elements of rest ina serious ie hished under Ail. 151 of the RPG are: (1) thatie person in authprity,ojhjs agent is, engaged ih the perfd}iMance of official duly oF gives a Jawful, order to thé%otfender;“and:(2)-that the offendéh sists or seriously disobeys such personorhis'agents ¢ ("Riz Mee AYE cofnmnitteuia: warranting & reasonable inference of ‘criminel(actvity: Herd established, He came to a full stop.when. so|/requited'toi stop. ‘ officers are persons in authority of agents’of apetson invauthority manning a legal checkpoint. But petitioner's act of exercising one’s right against unteaconable searches to be conducted in the middle of the night cannot be equated to disobedience, contemplation of Art, 181 of the RPC. Sun The petitioner has nt; wen dy eatin i Hence, petitioner's act cannot beieguated'to-disobedience, ELEMENTS OF ILLEGAL POSSESSION/OF:FIREARMS AND AMMUNITIONS; OWNERSHIP Arnold Jacaban v. People: G.R. No. 184355, March 232015" Peralta, J. FACTS: ‘ Se This is a Petition for Review on Certiorariunder-Rule 45 of the Rules of Court aifirming the decision of the RTC finding Arnold Jacaban (Jacaban) guilty of illegal.possession of firearms and ammunitions under PD 1866, as amended by RA 8294 Presidential Anti-Organized Crime Task Force (PAOCTF) along with three barangay tanods implemented a search warrant at the house of Jacaban.. After SPO2 Eric Abeliana (SPO2 Abellana) served the warrant, Jacaban became angry and denied having committed any illegal activity. The team proceeded to search the living room in the presence of three tanods and vacaban, without any sign of protest. The team found a calibre .45 placed in the ceiling. Jacaban, who was at the living room that time, rushed to the room and grappled with SPO2 Abellana but failed to get hold of thi- gun. Other firearms and ammunitions were recovered from the searched premises. 6 SANBEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSJacaban raised as his defense that he is not the owner of the house where the unlicensed firearms and ammunitions were found, ISSUE: Are the elements of illegal possession of firearms and ammunitions present? HELD: Yes. The essential elements in the and ammunitions are: 1. The existence of subject firearm; and 2, The fact that the accused who wl corresponding license for it, Prosecution for the crime of illegal possession of firearms The unvarying *ule'is that owns and ammunition:What the law requires, is, merely Dhrysial possession, but algo Smaps control and management. EOF | ‘The ownership of the house isjriot ait’ SSSEnti| proved the essential elements of the crime chal ammunitions was established through whe immediately rushing frorn the living room to they and grappled with the latter for the possessiozy a jon, 2 Aveliera foune & calibre 45 ved thatthe gun was under his ‘idefd-or intent.to-possess the gun when pi sea 16) lelcks the ‘Authority to possess the wet cen ee'p possessafy kind of firearm ‘or control and management. He also had:the ani he tried ta wrest it from SPO2 Abellana, Moree firearm, evidenced by the factuthat hé is ammunition based on the FED- PNP: rmaster lh \ FALSIFICATION OF PUBLIC‘DOCUI BE HAD UNDER AN INFORMATION WILFUL OFFENSE ; Venancio M. Sevilla v, People. G.R. No. 194390, August 13, 2012. Reyes, FACTS: ‘This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court seeking to set aside the Decision of the Sandiganbayan finding Venancio M. Sevilla (Sevilla) guilty of falsification of public documents through reckless imprucence punished under Art. 365 of the RPC. Sevilla, a former councilor of Malabon City, feloniously made a false narration of facts, the truth of which he is legally bound to disclose, by stating in his Personal Data Sheet, an official document, that no criminal case is pending against him, whe in fact, as Sevilla fully well knew, he is an accused in Criminal Case No. 6718-97 for Assault Upon An Agent Of A Person In Authority, thereby perverting the truth. SAN BEDA COI LEGE OF LAW 47 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS.Sevilla averred that he did not intend to falsify his PDS. He claimed that it was Editha Mendoza, a member of his staff, who actually prepared his POS. He claims that the Information that was filed against him specifically charged him with the commission of an intentional felony, i.e. falsification of public documents under Article 171(4) of the RPC. Thus, ne could not be convicted of falsification of public document through reckless imprudence under Article 365 of the RPC, which is a culpable felony, lest his constitutional right to be informed of the nature and ‘cause of the accusation against him be violated. ISSUE: Be + While-a criminal negtigent act is nota imple lityapf sa willful “crime, bt itself, designated as a quasi-offensesin. aes ae lviriay however ta iat a conviction for the former can beihad under‘an informationexcluswely charging the.cgmmission of a willful offense, upon the theory thet the ‘gtéater offense includes the lesser offense” “ ol a Qe Aeatic quési-olfenses: penalizes the 2gSand lack of care or foresight although such mental attitude might have produced) Severat-effects or consequences. In this case, without maliciously perverting the’ truth withthe: wrongful intent to injure seme ation throught reckless imprudence A CRIME pene TURPITUDE Cecilia Pagaduan v. Civil'Servi scons G.R. No, 206379, November 19, 201457 MENDOZA, J. FACTS: on af ees This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari under Rulel: ade ‘thé Rules of Court seeking to set aside the Decision of the Court’ of “ARBERISIIOWIng a complaint. for falsification and misrepresenitation. Cecilia Pagaduan (Pagaduan) filed her first administrative complaint with the Civil Service Commission against Rema Martin Salvador (Salvador) on the ground of falsification and misrepresentation of facts indicated in her Personal Data Sheet (PDS). The CSC then found Salvador to be liable for simple misconduct, ruling that her act was mere error of judgment. As a penalty, Salvador was suspended for one (1) month. Prior to the CSC's order, Pagaduan filed a criminal charge with the MTCC against Salvador for falsification of public document for making false statement in her PDS. The MTCC found Salvador guilty of the crime charged. Salvador did not appeal and then applied for probation. Her application was granted and she was placed under probation for a period of one (1) year. B:’ reason of the said conviction, Pagaduan filed the second administrative complaint for the offense of conviction of a crime involving moral turpitude, 4g SANBEDACOLLEGEOF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSoe Pagaduan avers that Salvador was convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude - a sufficient ground for dismissal from government service. On the other hand, Salvador argues that the falsification, she committed did not involve moral turpitude. ISSUE: Was Salvador convicted of a crime involving moral turpitude? HELD: Yes. ‘in resolving the issue of whether Salvador was convict turpitude, the existence of only two elements is necessai conviton has attained finaly: and (baa ‘moral turpitude. ted of a crima involving moral Ty: (a) the conviction of a crime, which 2 n of facts and:berverted the twuth with a wrongful intent. While Salvador inv mvosgd.agog ith as.4 defense, theMTCC was not convinced, stating'that good faith“cotid-'not be made 40: depend solely gn. the self-serving statement of the accused. Mor specifically fie EEC Held%tHatiperversion of truth is an act which constitutes malice, negating the claim of good faith, Considering that the principal act punished in the cine: aleliaton of public document is the Violation of the public faith and the: destructifn oft a8 therein. Sdlemnly proclaimed, the elements of the administrative offense of convistion Af a: crime invclving moral turpitude elearly exist in this case ACQUITTAL UNDER THE ANTI. ale NOT A BAR FOR CONVICTION UN 0h: wm TIGES ACT (RA 3019) IS Aloysius Dait Lumauig v. Pebple, GR. No.166680, July 7, 2014 DEL CASTILLO, J. FACTS: The Sandiganbayan convicted Aloysius Dait Lumaluig (Lumauig) of the felony of Failure of Accountable Officer to Render Accounts under Art. 218 of the RPC. The Sandiganbayan denied the petitioner's motion for reconsideration. Hence, this petition COA Auditor Florence L. Paguirigan examined the year-end reports involving the municipal officials of Alfonso Lista, Ifugao. She came across a disbursement voucher for 2101,736.00 prepared fer Lumauig, as cash advance for the payment of freight and other cargo charges for 12 units of motorcycles supposed to be donated to the municipality. The amount was covered by Land Bank Check No. 118942007. She prepared two letters to inform Lumauig of his unliquidated cash advance t ut the same were not sent to him because she could not get his exact address despite efforts exerted. She averred that on June 4, 2001, Lumauig paid the SANBEDACOLLEGEOF LAW 4g 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSsubject cash advance before the treasurer of the municipality, for which reason, incumbent ‘Mayor Glenn D. Prudenciano executed an Affidavit of Desistance. Lumauig admitted having obtained the cash advance of 101,736.00 during his incumbency as municipal mayor of Alfonso Lista, Ifugao. This amount was intended for the payment of freight and insurance coverage of 12 units of motorcycles to be donated to the municipality by the City of Manila. However, instead of motorcycles, he was able to secure two buses and five patrol cars. From the same facts stemmed an Information for violation of Sec. 3 of RA 3019 docketed as against petitioner for having allegedly utilized the cash advance for a purpose other than for which it was obtained. The Sandiganbayan acquitted; the fetony of Failure of Account ISSUE: “ ; if the acquittal of the petitioner anol So alba hs conviction a Heo? ) COLLEGE OF LAG 3 HELO: : on eS No. It is undisputed: jfiat thegtwo cliarges sté Supreme Court nas consistently heidithatsthe and distinct charges: The glating\ differencesit necessarily impiy that the requisite evidence toestabie would certainly differ in’each case. Hence, a no refuge for him in. the. present < ca offenses, pisarie incident. However, the ve rise to:two or more separate iRevBlements of these two offenses ne it or innodence of the accused jiftal in the _anti-graft case provides Be peween the elements of the two town: That the offender is.a’public ae ‘) inthe Service or sejpraled there from; pub Yiefunds or propent render =, account ibe ‘Commission on Audit, or . 3. accounts should be rendered. Nowhere in the provision gaat fequire that there firstve:a demand before an accountable officer is held liable for a violation Sf tReferinjese "5. ‘Thus, acquittal from violation of RA 3018/5 riot a bat against conviction for Art. 248 of the RPC Crimes Against Persons RAPE UNDER THE 2° PARAGRAPH OF ART. 266-A IS KNOWN AS INSTRUMENT OR OBJECT RAPE, GENDER FREE OR HOMOSEXUAL RAPE Richard Ricalde v. People G.R. No. 21100, January 2%, 2015 Leonen, J FACTS: This is a Petition for Review assailing the Decision of the CA affirming the conviction of Richard Ricalde (Ricalde) for the crime of rape through sexual assault. 50 SANBEDA COLLEGE GF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS20x requested his mother to pick up Richard Ricalde (Ricalde). Ricalde, then 31 years old, is a distant relative and textmate of XXX, then 10 years old. XXX's mother told Ricaide to spend the night at their house as it was late. He'slept on the sofa while XXX slept on the living room floor. lt was around 2:00 a.m. when XXX awoke as “he felt pain in his anus and stomach. and something inserted in his anus.” He saw thet Ricalde “fondled his penis." When Ricalde returned to the sofa, XXX ran toward his mother's room to tell her what happened. He also told -his mother that Ricalde played with his sexual organ. XXX's mother armed herself with a knife for self-defense when she confronted Ricalde about the incident, but he remained silent. She asked him to leave, XXX's mother then accompanied XXX to the barangay hall where they were directed to report the incident to the, Ricalde contendsithat XXX did not-categarically porthat .ingQifEG-into his anal orifice, or that he-Saw a penis or any dbjectbeingvinsertéd into his anallorifice” XK was also able to immediately'push him away. Thus.“ho ‘push: ahd {pullrigvement happened that would explain XXX's alleged stomach ache, a ISSUE: x i } ae Is Ricalde guilty for the’erime of rape.through sexual ass HELD: sete Yes. Rape under the second paragraph of Article:266-Avis'aiso knowo.as “instrument or object rape,” “gender-free rape,” or "homosexual rape.” The gravamen of rapé through sexual assault is “the msertion of the-penis intgasolNer. person's mouth or anal office, or any instrument or object, into another person's gental.or:anal: In the case at bar, petitioners relianes on’ XXX's anal orifice, or anyiiitace of spetina the: medigg-lega’s finding of no recent trauma in yi Balbioo.ackg-meri. Thejabsence of spermatozoa in XXX's anal orifice does.nofnegate Blity OPah eréctiog gif penetration. The gravamen of the crime is the violation®bf the victiffs dRnity. The’degres.ghtpertetration is not important. Rape is an “assault on humal plohity a RESISTANCE ON THE PARTOFTHEMICTIM IS NOT» People v. Michael Josen y Rogando™""" 5." GR. No. 208393, January 21, 2015 Perez, J FACTS: This is an appeal challenging the Decision of the CA affirming the conviction by the RTC convicting Michae! Joson (appeliant) of the crime of rape committed against his 14-year old sister. ‘AAA lives with appellant and his common-law partner. AAA testified that at around 1:00 in the moming of 14 May 2009, and while appeltant’s wife was away, AAA was awakened by appellant undressing her. AAA tried to struggle but appellant was tightly holding her arms. appellant kissed and mounted her. Appellant was able to insert his penis into her vagina. AAA felt pain in her genitalia. Thereafter, appellant went back to sleep leaving AAA crying, At about 6:00 or 7:00 SaNv BEDA COLLEGE OF Law P S51 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS.in the morning, appellant left AAA with a letter apologizing for what happened and beaging her not to tell on his wife. AAA related to appellant's wife the rape incident. And AAA, accompanied by her father, reported the incident to the police and she executed a sworn statement detailing the rape. : Appellant maintains that the prosecution failed to prove ail the elements of rape AND further points out that there was no showing ef any resistance on the part of AAA to his alleged sexual advances. ISSUE: 's the lack of resistence ofthe victim negates theyccme,of spe? iy alii. HELD: No. Physical resistance is not the’ sble ace ie fletner a woah voluntarily succumbed to the lust of an accused. Rape victins-shaw,no uniform reactign?Some may offer strong resistance while. others may be too ‘i ‘intimmitiated’ tootfer any resistance’ ‘at all. After all, resistance is not anselement of rape.atid itS, absenéedoes ngtidenigrate AAA's claim that the accused-appellant consummated his bestial act” CIRCUMSTANCES QUALIFYING RAPE People v. Hermeningildo Delen y Esco Billa G.R_No, 196446, April’21, 2014 Leonardo-De Castro, J FACTS: This is an appeal seeking the reversal-of the conviction of Hermenigitdo Delen y Escobilla (Belen) for child abuse under Section 10(2), Article Vi‘of Republic Act No. 7610 and qualified rape. . The offended party AAA was the childiof Delen and BBBE AAA. lived in the Delen's house. One day, she was awakened from her sléep-when Delen“femoved her shorts and panty. Delen succeeded in having carnal knowledge ‘with AAA,.n another day, Delen kicked AAA in the buttocks, hit her head with a -hammer.and smashed her;he@d"on the wooden wali when AAA failed to find a lighter. She suffered:injuries on her foreheadcand the back of her head. AAA was able to escape and repori such incidents with the'help ‘ofa, :fisighbor. Delen merely denies the allegations against him ISSUE: Are the circumstances of minority and relationship present in the case to hold accused-appellant guilly of qualified rape? HELD: Yes. For a charge of rape to prosper, ihe prosecution must prove that: (a) the offender had camal knowledge of a woman; and (b) he accomplished such act through force, threat, or intimidation, or when she was deprived of reason or otherwise unconscivus, or when she was under twelve years of age or was demented. 52. SANBEDACOLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS' % ieee! BPE z In the instant case, the prosecution was able to establish that the accused-appellant had carnal knowledge of AAA, As to the manner by which the rape was committed, the accused-appellants ‘moral ascendancy over AAA takes the place of the force and intimidation that is required in rape cases. In qualified rape, minority and relationship between the victim and the accused must concur. In this case, it was clearly established that AAA was merely 12 years“old when the rape happened by none other than hef wn biological father. CONSENT OF THE VICTIM-SPOUSE IS NOT PRESUMED FROM THE ACT OF GOING TO ‘THE CONJUGAI. BEDROOM . People v. Edgar Jumawan bad. (oie G.R. No. 187495; April 21, 2014 Reyes, J. FACTS: 7 * y Two Informations for cape were filed agaitist:acdii8éd Edad, IUinawan (Jurawan). The trial court and the Court of Appeals both found him guilty of the crimes charged herice this autornatic review. & Jumawan and his wife KKK were married and’ had lived together, sirice then, One nighi, Jumawan expressed his desire to copulate with her by tapping?his fingers on her fap but she politely declined. However, he insisted and succeeded in,penetrating her. When their children heard the cry of their mother, they entered the room and: helped their-mother breakout from the room white their father was trying to stop them. The same! aagréSsion again recurred the following night. When KKK refused to:sleep with Jumawan and chosé-to stay in their children’s bedroom, he again forced himself to his wife and successfully had cagnal Knowledge with her. Jumawan denied raping his wife and argued that when the alleged:tape incidents took place, and the presence of force, threat or intimidation is, negated:by KKK’s-voluntary act of going with him to the conjugal bedroom: : Spe ISSUE: = Was the element of force, threat or intimidation negated by!f@asGn of the voluntarily act of the victim going to their conjugal bedroom? es HELO: No. As an element of rape, force or intimidation need not be irresistible. It may be just enough to bring about the desired result, What is necessary is that the force or intimidation be sufficient to consummate the purpose that the accused had in mind or is of such a degree as to impel the defenseless and hapless victim to bow into submission, The fact that KKK voluntarily went with the accused-appellant to their conjugal bedroom does not mean that she consented to the forced sexuai intercourse. Jumawan was KKK's husband ‘and hence it was customary for her to sleep in the conjugal bedroom, The:significant point ‘consent must be given is at that time when itis clear to the victim that her aggressor is sol sexual congress. In this case, thal point is when Jumawan tapped his fingers on her lap, a gesture KKK comprehended to be an invitation for a sexual intercourse, which she refused. KKK San BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS iput up persistent; audible and intelligible resistance for Jumawan to recognize that she seriously did not assent to a sexual congress. Having established all the elements of rape in this case, husband is guilty of raping his wite. QUALIFIED RAPE & ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS IN RELATION TO SECTION 5(B), ARTICLE ill OF R.A. NO. 7610 People v. Julito Gerandoy G.R. No. 202838, September 17, 2014 Perez, J Z ae FACTS: * aan ae 2 This is an appeai filed by accused-appellant from the johaF, the Court of Appeals modifying the decision or conviction rendered by the-RTC,andefiaging the accused guilly-Gftwo counts of Acts of Lasciviousness in relation“to~Sedtion=5(6) public Act Ng.7610 or "Special Protection of Children Againist Abusej Exploitation aiteeDisbrinination Aet.” ‘AAA narrated that he'was raped by He? TSNEHBeeUSEBESAEBIIGD y, of tWo'(2) occasions when she was 13 years old. She recalled that the first ined onDecember 7, 2001, when Gorandoy entered the room while she was, sleg| hee brothers and sisters. The accused forced her to lie down despite her resistance, Heonsciousness when the accused stabbed and boxed her stomach. When ‘she scious, sii was already undressed and noticed that her vagina was bleeding whi ediwas lying beside her. The second incident happened on December 15, 2001. ANAtnaftalsdeifal’she was awakened by Gerandoy Dut indoy threatened that he would kill and told her that he will rape her again 'She resisted but Gel all members of their family including:-himsélfif.she Would keep on resisting. She was then ickéd her nipple and kissed her lips. undressed and Gerandoy ‘mounted her The accused denied all the allegations’ lime the alleged incidents happened. ISSUES: 11. As regards the first incident; can the accused’ be quilt ofithe.cime of Rape, notwithstanding the fact that AAA lost consciousness and couldihgfcatsgorically testify what forcefully penetrated her vagina? In the affirrnativey's ould thé-Saivié be qualified? 2. As regards the second incident, is the accused.guilty of the crime of Acts of Lasciviousness in relation to Section 5(b), Article Il! of R.A, No. 7610? HELD: 4. Yes, The accused is guilly of Rape. Under Article 266-A of the RPC as amended by R.A. No. 8353 describes how rape Is committed: "(1) By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances: (a) Through force, threat or intimidation; x00" Despite the absence in AAA's testim any that there was actual carnal knowledge considering that she lost consciousness before that, the combination of all the circumstances obtaining was such as to produce conviction beyond reasonable doubt that Gerandoy indeed raped DAA. 54 SANBEDACOLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED Bak OPERATIONSMoreover, rape is qualified if the viclim is under eighteen (18) years of age and the olfender is @ parent, ascendant, stepparent, guardian, relative by consanguinity or affinity within the third civil degree, or the common-law spouse of the parent of the victim. In this case, AAA was raped by his father, hence, the presence of the qualifying circumstance of relationship. 2. Yes. The accused is’guilty of acts of lasciviousness in relation to Section 5(b), Article Ill of R.A. No. 7610, The elements, of sexual abuse are the following: (1). the accused commits : the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct; (2) The said act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse; and (3) the child, whether male or female, is below 18 years of age. It is deemed that a child is sexually abused under Section 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610, whon.henorshe.is subjected to other lascivious conduct under the coercion or influgsi¢é of any adit Tipers it some form of compuision equivalent to intimidation AE ee se é offended party's free will pipes OE oe Nee In this caso, the prosecution established that. orgaggy, agai Brtered 188m where AAA was sleeping and performed lascivious dets sgaisecher Despite AAA Sa jlection, Gerandoy touched parts.of her body: “Tecomtiued ns: ceXUpladvanges Byfindressing AMA and forced her to lie down. He) kissed AAA's lips, miduntéd’ himself on top of, ind touched and sucked AAA's nipple. eg ES Cybeor Therefore, the accused is guilty of.qualified rape-andia 5(b), Article Il of R.A, No 7610: PREGNANCY IS NOT AN ELEMENT OF RAPE Peopie v. Democrito Paras G.R. No. 192912, June 4, 2014 Bey Leonardo-De Castro, J. Tee FACTS: oe i Ser’ f The accused-appellant Democrito Paras was charged of comm year old gitl. The trial couftvand the Co (01) Appeals/found, hence, this instant appeal: ‘ La MS f fig’rape against AAA, a 17- ‘Quilty of the crime of rape, While AAA was weeding grass.at*Renemployer's teres fsed-appellant approached her from behind. He pulled AAA towards therloweF pertight@rthé tari and pointed a short firearm at her mouth. AAA struggled and tried to.kick appellant buf.ll proved futile as appellant was physically stronger. Since AAA was afraid of appellant and that she was also afraid to kill @ person, she did not strike appellant with the bolo she was holding. While struggting, AAA even threw stones at the accused-appellant. As a result of such incident, AAA got pregnant. ‘The appellant denied having raped AAA. He argued the supposed date of the rape was not clearly established by the prosecution. The appellant aise contends that the findings of a Dr. Pilapil was that AAA was already three months pregnant when she was examined on October 7, 1996 hence, AAA could have had sexual intercourse sometime in June or July 1996 and not in March 1996 when th: rape was supposed to have been committed. ISSUES: Is pregnancy an essential element of rape? ‘SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF ! AW 55 2016 CENTRAUZED BAR OPERATIONSHELD: No. Pregnancy is not an essential element of the crime of rape. Whether the child which the ‘ape victim bore was fathered by the accused, or by some unknown individual, is of no moment, Wibat is important and decisive is that the accused had carnal knowledge of the visti against the latter's will or without her consent, and such fact was testified to by the victim in a trathful manner, RAPE IS COMMITTED NOT ONLY IN SECLUSION BUT EVEN IN THE MOST PUBLIC OF PLACES ‘| People v. Leonardo Castrodes G.R. No. 206768, December 3, 201 Perez, J. : CTS: z wy tre a 5 SP KEES aa This is an appeal-‘challenging the"Datisioh Ofithe’GATatfiming the Degision of the RTC convicting Leonardo Castrodes'(Castiodés) fof thayGhigie gf raesy\ ia It was proved that while AAA was bie)” gathering FAWESENORERe coconut plantation when her neighbor. appellant Castrodes suddenly appeatesbehilid hoy tind wrested from her the bolo sha was then using to gather jirewood., Appellant embraced and-carried AAA to a spot udemeath a coconut tree. AAA could not do anything due'to fear of being hacked by appellant wilh the bolo. Under the coconut tree, the'accusedisuécessfully had carrial knowledge wiih AAA who threatened her that should she reveal to'anyche-Whatihad happened, he will kill her and anyone she confided to. AAA told his uncle of what happenc and the next day, the matter was reported to the barangay officials and har xamined by the Municipal Health Officer According to appellant, he was nowhere neanths area whan thealieged rape happened. The olense pointed out that it was improbable that AAA was raped in broad daylight and a very highly visible area, « ea oF CE ISSUE: ye |s it possible for rape to happen ‘in broad t anc’highty visitie-area? 0 ge Wao; : ier Yes, There is no rule that rape iiust-BeYSmapnitawORIN I Seclusion, A man's camalty Is not ne oF place—his prurient“desire impels him to commit rape even in the most Fublie of places. Appellant’s contention that it was highly improbable that he raped AAA in broad daylight and in a very visible area surrounded by eight (8) houses deserves scant consideraticn THE DATE OF THE COMMISSION OF RAPE IS NOT ONE OF ITS ELEMENT BUT THE OCCURRENCE ITSELF People v. Jose Prodenciado G.R. No. 192232, December 10, 2014 Del Castillo, J FACTS: Appellan. Jose Predenciado was charged of four counts of rape against his daughter, AAA. The {ial court and the Court of Appeals found him guilty of two counts of simple rape and two counts of statutory rape. SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSgrandmother permitted her to go home. provides ‘The four incidents happened on different years ~ was aged 8, 10 and 14 respectively on thos defense of alibi and AAA's failure to pinpoint the during 1993, 1995, and twice during 2000. She e dates. As defense, Prodenciado raises the dates when she was raped ISSUE: ~ Does the failure te pinpoint the dates of rape negate the appreciation of the crime of rape? HELD: No. The Court has-repeatedly held before that the date when she was raped for purposes. of. cases, the date of commissionis:fot anie: ik Occurrence, which in this casenWas SUMTieleAlly est itis not incumbent upon the victim to establish the perpetrator. This is because in rape a fense. What is material is its m4 Wie THEART. THEORY ABA DEFENSE IN LAMY pe INDEPENDENT PROOF iS REQUIRED:FOR * RAPE : rm People v. Eco Yaba y Basa : GR. No. 194846, September 3, 2014 Perez, J. FACTS: cee Eco Yaba (Yaba) was charged for the:crime of Rabel now appeals his conviction. ae The records show that AAA stays at hetigranaméther s house during. weekdays because she was studying reer her grandmother's house.“AAA wiSuld\go hometanlyvevery weekend. On July 8, 2005, because it was Friday, AAA“askediher Grandmother if, $hé”could go home. AAA's ial she yiould-be-ascompanied by ‘vada, a family friend who previously sought pecniss pipainy héh.jq).going home. On their way home, AAA was surprised: by, ‘Yaba bysgtsbbing’ T hair, ta er to fall and lose her balance. Yaba boxed and kicked her eel heeatoned Jt Shaner family would be killed i she will not give in to what he'wanted sinegine haded cousin NPA. He forcibly removed her shorts and undemear and inserted his.pen shi her vaghnacAHe satislying his lust cosres Yaba ordered AAA to dress up aszhie,, would acconipanytier in going to her parent's house Upon arrivial in AAA's hometown, her cousin=BBBIoticed, thiat the former was in tears and thal her clothes were muddy. Suddenly, Yaba.uttered~’Kukuha ako ng baril at uubusin lahat.” After disclosing to BBB that Yaba raped hér, the two went.to AAA's parents, and a day thereafter subjected AAA to a medical examination, revealing a contusion on the right thigh, 2 multilinear ‘abrasion on the right lower leg, another contusion on the left thigh, an abrasion onthe left knee, a perineal laceration measuring about .5-1 centimeter with minimal bleeding, and hymenal laceration superficial only at 7:00 o'clock position. ission to, Yaba contends that he and AAA were sweethearts, with testimonial evidence to that effect, i.¢., that they were walking hand in hand in going to AAA's hometown. ISSUE: ts Yaba guilty of rape, notwithstanding proof of his amorous relationship with AAA, as testified by witnesses during the trial? SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW’ aad Calsraicaa naa tweeeanat esHELD: No. The sweetheart theory or sweetheart defense is an oft-abused justification that rashly derides the intelligence of this Court and sorely tests its patience. For the Court to even consider giving credence to such defense, it must be proven by compelling evidence The defense cannot just present testimonial evidence in support of the theory, as in the instant case. Independent proof is required — such as tokens, mementos, and photographs. There is none presented here by the defense. Besides, even if it were true that accused-appellant and AAA were sweethearts, this fact dogs, 9 legate the commission of rape. Being sweethearts does not prove conseit te q man cannot demand sexual gratification from:a fiancée and the pretext of love. Love is ot a license for.lust. E ae” oe cee oa hte Hence, the accused cannot rely onsihé’BhebnbarkheBHas a defense.( The appeal is denied ard the decision of the CA ig’afftjed. EZQyIS ey i DEFENSES OF ABSENCE OF’RESISTANCES APeDIagE Wen s “AND OSTENSIBLE CARELESSNESS OF RETURNING AFTER BEI SRE WEAK IN RAPE CASES stem People v. Adel Ramos y Abellana G.R. No. 200077, September 17.2014) Perez, J. FACTS: 3 This is an appeal from the decisior Jt'of Apbeols affirming ihe judgment or conviction of Adel Ramos (Ramos) of.four (4) Ropeimeted by the RTC The first incident occurred. when AMA IBivearS Sian 10" in‘height, slept over at the house “uponthe jpvitationgf the latter's daughter. AAA of Ramos, 50 years old and’5'10” inehe woke up and went to the.comfort roonyigiuhiate. Appi to step.oit‘of the comfort room, she was surprised to see Ramos‘ivio' blocketlihetawaysslidden|).pushed her inside, pointed @ gun at her side, and told her tc be-quiét! Ramos threatened 49 kil:Her,2nd evict her family from their house as they were leasing theSamé,to Ramos, aganscsilenty acquiesced. Ramos ordered AAA to undress and lie on the bathroein*feenthesthan riourifed AAA and penetrated her twice She was terrified and thus, spoke to no,one-abolitwhat happened Unwittingly, AAA's mother sent her to Ramos’ house for some errand, This led to the second incident of rape. Like before, AAA was terrified, left Ramos' house and kept mum about it The experience was repeated when AAA wert to Ramos’ house to.return some things. Ramos kissed AAA on the neck, fondled her, and ultimately succeeded in raping her for the third time, ‘AAA, the whole time, just silently cried. As in the past assaults, AAA kept the ordeal to herself. The final incident took place when AAA went to the comfort roam outside af their nouse and was startled see Ramos already inside. Similar to the previous occasicns, Ramos threatened AAA to keep silent and tole’ her to remove all her clothes. This time, Ramos lifted one of AAA's legs, shoved her against the wall and penetrated her while standing up. Three days later, AAA broke 5g SANBEDACOLLEGE OF LAW 2046 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIC NS: oy el ett LCR SY er silence and told her best friend, Roselyn about Ramos’ sexual assaults. AAA’s me c ; \edicat examinations depicted positive results for penetrations, iz Ramos raises the following denials for his defens slightest amount of resistance to push him away; (2) that AAA could have: easily escaped during the second and third incidenis but did not; and (3) that AAA's ostensible: carelessness for returning to Ramos’ house even after she was raped is not the normal actuation of a woman who had been previously raped and is in fear of being raped again. @: (1) that AAA did not employ even the ISSUE: Are the denials of Adel Ramos sufficierit, overthraw the fi Ae ne relegate ding of guilt by the RTC and Court of HELO: ue 2 No. Under Art 266-A’ of the RPC, ‘Rape iis committed, <1. By a'man who\shall have carnal Knowledge of a:woman under any of the ‘féllowing-circumstances: a. Though force, threat or intimidation; x00%." * € W se First denial: tenacious resistanée" against “raAasinbtsrSaUiReMM neither is~a determined or a porsistent physical struggle on the part of the/vietiti necessary.It is well-settled that the force contemplated by law in the commission.of rape.s.relative, depending on the age, size and strength of the parties. In this case, AAA, was aiminor and;Of-small:stature as compared to Ramos. For AAA, resistance: would have beeft: {ule when’ taking. into consideration the gnificant age and height differences between her,and Ramos ‘Second denial: failure to cry for:help.ot attempt to escape during the. rape is not fatal to the charge of rape; it does not make vollintary/AAA’s subinission: to appellant's lust. Rape through intimidation includes the moral king:such’as'the fear caused, by threatening the girl with a knife oF pistol. In this case, Ramos’ gur-2nd eontinual tareats were enough to make AAA cower in fear. oN £ So dar f OL s : : Third denial: There is no'established Singular teaction t6'rape-Syssi vigiims of this exime against persons. indeed, AAA may, have, been naivesih returhing to Ramos’ house after Ramos raped her. However, naiveté is not-equivalent to consensual sex and€afinot erase the rape committed against AAA by Ramos. l Therefore, Ade! Ramos is quilty of the cririe’6f rape. DISTINCTION BETWEEN ATTEMPTED RAPE AND ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS; INTENT OF OFFENDER TO LIE WITH THE FEMALE Norberto Cruz v. People G.R. No. 166441, Ootober 8, 2014 Bersamin, 4 FACTS: ‘The petitioner Norberto Cruz (Norberto) was charged with attempted rape and acts of lasciviousness involving different victims. The RTC and the CA found Cruz guilty of both crimes charged, hence, this appeal. SaN BeDa COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS:Norberto and his wife employed AAA and BBB to help them in selling their plastic wares and glass wares in La Union. Upon reaching the place, they set up their tents to have a place to sleep. Petitioner's wife and their driver went back to Manila to get more goods. After AAA went to sleep, she was awakened when she felt that somebody was on top of her. Norberto was mashing her breast and touching her private part. He ordered her not to scream or-she will be killed. AAA fought back and Norberto was not able to pursue his lustful desires. AAA left the tent to seek for help. When she returned to their tent_she saw Norberto touching the private parts of BBB. When she finally entered the tent, Norberto left and went outside. Norberto denies the commission of the,crime,all i imputed out in the open as there oe e e i assails the credibility of AAA fe ce ng for the purpose of extorting mona ee oe he could not possibly do the acts gthe “simbang gabi”. He further the complaints were filed only 4, ISSUE: Is petitioner guilty of attempted rapie against AAA?" HELD: No. Cruz is guilty only’of acts of lasciviousness. “The Base. element of rape is carnal knowledge of a female, Rape is consummated once the penis capable of consummating the sexual act touches the external-genitalia of the female. In attempted'rape, the offender does not perform ail the acts of execution of having carnal knowledge. .The:only ‘means iby which the overt acts performed by the accused can be shown to havea causal relation to rape as the intended crime is to make a clear showing of his intent to lie with the female The petitioner climbed on top of the naked vietim, and was already touching her genitalia with inis hands and mashing her. breasts when she freed, herself from his clutches and effectively ended his designs on’her, Such circumstances remained equivocal, or “susceptible of dorible interpretation,” such that it was not permissible to dicectly infer from them the intention to cause Fape as the particular injury. aM? The intent to penetratevis"manifest onlythrough’ the ‘shwing of the penis capable of consummating the sexual actlouching the extemal genitalia..of the female. Without such showing, only the felony of acts-6f Jasciviousness isicommitted. The lack of evidence showing his ereciile penis being in the position to'pefietrate!Ner When he was on top of her deterred any inference about his intent to lie with her. At most, his acts reflected lewdness and lust for her. Hence, Cruz is guilty only of acts of lasciviousness and not attempted rape. RAPE OF MENTAL RETARDATE; CAPACITY TO GIVE CONSENT IS DETERMINED NOT BY HIS OR HER CHRONOLOGICAL AGE BUT BY HIS OR HER MENTAL AGE People v. Enrique Quintos y Badilla GR, No. 199402, November 12, 2014 Leonen, J FACTS: Enrique Quintos y Badilla (Quintos) was charged with rape allegedly committed against AAA, a mental retardate. The RTC found Quintos guilty of two counts of rape. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC decision; hence, this appeal, gn SANBEDACOLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSThe prosecution established that at the time of the incident, AAA was 21 years old with a mental age of & Yeats and 2 months and with an 1G of 98, based on the expert testimony of the National Bureau of Investigation Clinical Psychclogist. AMA testified that her neighbor Quinte went to her house and managed to have intercourse with her when she went to thelr restroom and Quintos followed her. Although she did not want to, she did not resist, AAA also recalled Wal on a cifferent day, Quintos kissed her and held her breasts, There was also one night when Quintos forced AAA t0 tune his penis inside her mouth despite her protests. Quintos claimed that he did not rape AAA and that he was in a romantic and sexual rel lationship with AAA. Quintos emphasized the lachobrasis ISSUES: ee May a mental retardate give consentto'S ses HELD: AS) BED A ny No. The main element of rape is “lack of cofigeit." /Detisién-makiigis a funétion of the mind. Hence, a person's capacity to decide whethér to give consent of fo express:rasistance to an adult activity is determined not by his or her éhrondlogical age, but by his or her mental age. Thus, carnal knowledge of a mental retardate is rape under paragraph 1 of Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No, 8353 because 4 mental retardate is not capable of giving her consent to a sexual act, Proof of force or:intimidation is not necessary, it being sufficient for the State to establish, one, the sexual congress between the accused and the victim, and, two, the mental retardation of the victim: Hence, Quintos is guilty of rape. PROVING TREACHERY AS A QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCE OF MURDER Miguel Cirera y Ustelo v. People G.R. No. 181843 July 14, 2014 LEONEN, J FACTS: : Miguel Cirera (Cicera) was convicted. by the Regional Trial’Court of two (2) counts of frustrated murder, which decision was affirmed by tHe'Court'6f’Appeals. Hence, this petition for review on certiorari According to the prosecution witness Romeo Austria (Austria), he was playing a lucky nine game at a wake. Cirera arrived, asking money from Austria so he could buy liquor. In response, Austria asked Cirera to keep quiet. Gerardo Naval (Naval) arrived and asked Austria to go home. There was an exchange of words between Naval and Cirera. Austria stood up and felt thal he was stabbed. As he ran home, he noticed Cirera armed with a knife this time chasing Naval. Austria was hospitalized and was confined for more than a month In his defense, Cirera testified that he saw private complains nts at a wake. Naval tapped his back and asked, "Anong problema mo?" to which he answered, "Wala naman." Thereafter, Naval punched Cirera. As he was about to stand up, he was hit by a hard object on his head, causing him to lose consciousness. He was brought to UERM Memorial Hospital where Naval ‘SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 4 2016 CENTRALIZED Bar Operarions = ©identiied him. He was then brought io Station17 in Galas, Quezon Gily. Ciera also testified that only Naval identified him at the hospital. ISSUE: Is Cirera guilty of two (2) counts of frustrated murder? HELD: - No. Ciera is riot guilly of two (2) counts of frustrated murder. The following are the elements of murder: (1) that a person is killed; (2) that he is killed by the accused; (3) that the killing is attended by any of the qualifying circumsta ated in Article 248 of the RPC; and (4) thal the kiling is not parricides inf ung circumstance found in Article 248 of the:RPC. aoe ve The requisites of treachery are: (1) The employment.of. -rpgns. “mathod, or ake which will ensure the safety of the malefactorifron déferisive or retaliating cis'oF the part of the victim, no opportunity.being?givet to the'lattér 16 deferid himself orto ret or conscious adoption of'such means, ‘method, < semen ‘execution, | sees Treachery as a qualifying circumstance rust deusiberaie tight fo:eriure'the safety of the accused from the defensive acts of the victim. Unexpe of the attack does not always Wale to treachery. A finding of the existence’ ee "should sbe" based on clear and convincing evidence. Such evidence must be a rae as the tact of killing itself, its existence cannot be presumed. As with the findigg.Of guiltaf the accused, any doubt as to its oxistence should be resolved in favor of the accused! {n this case, no evidence-was presented to show that petitioner consciously adopted or reflected nthe means, method, or form of attack to sepure his-unfair advantage. Petitioner was not only nissed by Austria when he approached thim for mongy. There” was also an altercation between him and Navai. The provocation mighi nave beén-enough:to entice petitioner to action and attack private complainants. Therefore: the“manner of, attack might not have been motivated by @ determination to'ensure Success in committing 'the-¢rime. What was more likely the case, based on private’complainants!;{estimonies, was}that-petitioner’s action was an impulsive reaction to being dismissed by Austria, his aleigatig with Naval, and Naval's attempt to summon Austria home. Goneraliy, this type of provocation negates the existence of treachery. This is the type of provocation that does not lend itseif to premeditation“The provocation in this case is of the kind which triggers impulsive reactions left unchacked by the accused and caused him to commit the crime, There was no evidence of a modicum of premeditation indicating the possibility of choice and planning fundamental to achieve the elements of treachery. The ability of the offended parties to retaliate and protect themselves may not by itself negate the existence of treachery. The efforts of the accused to employ means and method to ensure his safety and freedom from retaliation may not have succeeded. However, in this case, tne ability of the offended parties to have avoided greater harm by running eway or by being able to subdue the accused is a strong indicator that no treachery exists, Treachery did not exist and, hence, Cirera may only be convicted of two counts of frustrated homicide. 62 SANBEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS.CONSPIRACY AND TREACHERY IN MURDER AND FRUSTRATED MURDER People v. Jojo Sumilhig GR. No. 178115. July 28, 2014 Del Castilo, J. FACTS: asst ‘The CA convicted appeliants doj i R08) Saloli guilty of Murder for killing Ciisjoy Santander and Rolly Santa f lef for the wee of Marissa Santander, Hence, this appeals. ‘2 sens Hi Jerry Masaglang. with Eugenio Santander arli2hig lsbd°Mario, were ng room of Eugenio's house in Davao det:Sur; Suddenly, hey hpfird aumbiyesté and rs ix persons fiting al the Kitchen where members of the Santander family were Having, differ” Jerry and Mario recognized the assailants to ve the Sumiinigs TRB ah tatisgofalhe kitchgnjasted for about two minutes. Jojo shouted, "At last, | have relalatodl ie hildreh of Eugenio'srother son Remegio Santander 3-year old Cresjoy, 8- year. old, Rolly, teenagers Marissa‘and Micel, sustained gunshot wounds. Unfortunately, Cresjoy expired. while-Rolly;was pronounced dead-on-arrival Marissa sustained gunshot wounds at the right: preset area % rand eft “wrist, while Micel was wounded in the lefl sternal area and elbow. , Accused appellants contends that granting’Srquendo that tiey are guil ily, the court a quo gravely erred in finding that conspiracy and treachely were: “present and:betinding that the crimes committed were murder and frustrated murder. *-. ISSUES: 1. Was there conspiracy in. tie contig fa SH Sithed é 2. Was there treachery in the commissighratithe crime? S34 3. Were the crimes committed murder aid ffustrated murder, Yee HELD: Rarer +. Yes. There is no reason to doubt Jerry and\Mario's identification of the appellants considering that (1) Jerty was just six meters away from them; (2) the moon was bright and Jerry was familiar with all the Here, there is no proof of a previous agreement amcng the accused but there is a series of events that clearly established conspiracy among’ them. First, they were all armed with firearms. Second, they surreptitiously approached the crime scene. Third, when they were within close range of the intended victims, they simultaneously discharged their firearms. Fourth, they ceased firing at the same time and fled together. Undoubtedly, their acts before, during and immediately after strafing the house of Eugenio evince the r unanimity :in design, intent and execution. 2. Yes, Treachery is evident in this case as the suddenness and unexpectedness of the assault deprived the victims of an opportunity to resist it or offer any defense of their SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 63 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSPersons. This is considering that the victims were unaware’that they would'be attacked by appellants with a hail of bullets from their firearms fired at close range. indeed, “[tJhe suddenness of the attack, without the slightest forewarning thereof, placed the {victims] x x x in such a position that they could not have defended themselves'from the aggression x x x.” ‘Yes. As earlier discussed, treachery attended the commission of the crime. This qualifies the killing of Cresjoy and Rolly to murder. With regard to Marissa and Micel, the Court notes that while the RTC was silent as to the nature of injuries sustained by them, the CA correctly tuled on the seriousness therec’. The Medico Legal report of Marissa shows that she suffered multiple gunshot wounds in her right breast and left wrist?” while the Certificate of Treatment/Confinement of Micel states stained gunshot wounds in the area of the stemum and-elbow. Assaptivifour ‘ timely medical attention provider the them were thus frustrated murders: 7 atk ope & ‘tHeGitis,would have died if not for the oe Sab as iy couse FRONTAL ATTACK CAN BE TREACHEROUS: :\WHEN UNEXPEGT| ed by the appellants. against UNARMED VICTIM:WHO WOULD BE IN NQ/POSITION TOREREL THE J tt ORD EE POS sR HE ‘AND ON AN "ACK OR AVOID 34%. No. 190322, November 26, 2014 Del Castillo, J ACTS: Appellant Virgilio Amora y Viscarra (appellant) Gibaga. The CA affirmed with modification the’ Decisi R Wvieting appellant with the crime of murder attended by the qualifying.circumstance if treachery, hence, this appeal filed by tho appellant, 3 5 7 ¥ The facts show that AnSeimo, Aurelio, andthe victicy Romeo were|walking on their way to the market. Maricris and her son were tailinigithem about‘four'meters:behind. As they were on their way to the market, they saw’ appollantiinsbis:store when the\laifét-suddenly rushed towards thom from behind and went in front of Romeo, then-Stabbedstperlatter twice- one on the chest and another on the abdomen. They were all caught byr€urprise,due to the suddenness of the attack, Romeo fell to the grourid while appellant quickly-ran-away from the scene. Romeo was brought to the Sapang Palay District" Hospitalrandwasstransferred to East Avehue Medical Center where he died after three days. The appellant argued that the prosecution has failed to establish his guili beyond reasonable doubt and granting arguendo that he is criminally liable, the court erred in appreciating the qualifying circumstance of treachery. ISSUE: Whether treachery is present in the case despite the frontal attack? HELD: Yes, frontal attack does not negate the existence of treechery. In order for the qualifying circumstance of treachery to be appreciated, the following requisites must be shown: (1) the ‘employment of means, method, or manner of execution would ensure the safety of the ‘malefactor from the defensive or retaliatory acts of the victim, no opportunity being given to the 64 SANBEDA CoueGe oF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSFI TE TE a i Paragraph 16, Article 14 of the RPC provides that there is treacher , ry when the offender commit any of-the crimes against the person, employing means, methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to ensure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make. Itis of no consequence that appellant was.tnsfrantof: torso. Records show that appellant's ia ae gi the front. In any event, “even aifrontaliattie a unarmed victim who would be in novposition to rape bidet 120 when he thrust the Knife to his ahs mre ‘ Hence, Viscarra is guily of murder attended’ by fre gualiying circumstancBoffireachery. re wen Crimes Against Property, Q GRAVE ABUSE AS AN ELEMENT OF QUALIFIE People v. Trinidad Cahilig G.R. No. 199208, July 30, 2014 Carpio, J ie ke FACTS: sae eee epee Appellant Trinidad Cahilig (Cahilig) was found guilyeby the REC andthé CA of thirty (20) counts of Qualified Theft. Thus, an appealwasfitedwith'the SC.” i Cabilig worked as cashier at Wyeth Philippines Emplayées Savingg-and Loan Association, inc. (WPESLAI), She was tasked with handing. I.nsanas then filed a complaint for atinulment of marriage and damages against Socorro alleging that the latter had employed deceit, misrepresentations and fraud in securing his Consent to their marriage; ana that subsequent marital breaches, psychological incompatibilities and her infidelity had caused him to suffer mental anguish, sleepless nights and social humiliation warranting the award of damages, Socorro charged the accused with bigamy. Lasanas contended that he cannot be convicted of bigamy because the first element of bigamy was not established; that his good faith and the absence of criminal intent were absolutory in his favor; and that he had been of the honest belief that there was no ned for a judicial declaration of the nullity of the first marriage before he could contract a sub: equent marriage. ‘Meanwhile, the marriage between him and Socorro was declared valid and legal. 72 SANBEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSISSUE: |s the accused guilty of bigamy in the absence of a judicial deciaration of nullity of his void marriage? HELD: YES. The crime of bigamy has the following elements: (1) that the offender has been legally married; (2) that the marriage has not been legally dissolved or, in case his or her spouse is absent, the absent spouse could not yet be presumed dead according to the Civil Code; (3) that he or she contracts a second or subsequent marriage; and (4) that the second or subsequent marriage has all he essential requisites foc age apa The mariage between accused appele a because of the absence of a marriage license or of a fecohabitation, The ratificatory religious wedding ceremony could not have, validated ihe yoid marfiage. NeithéEtan the church wedding be treated as a marriage in tél forto de $0 all he essential and: ‘foFmal requisites of a valid marriage should be present. One ‘of thess réquibited ista, Yglid marriage license except in those instances when this requirement may be excused. There having.@en neither marriage license nor affidavit of cohabitation presented toithe pies Biesidedver the religious rites, religious wedding cannot be treated as a validimartiageliyibel. igmplainant Patingo was void Bul then, as the law and jurisprudence -say,:petitionst, shuld have. fiist secured @ judicial dectaration of the nulity of his void marriage’ to ‘private céripleinant Patingo before marrying Josefa Eslaban. Actually. he did just that “but aflerhis:'marriage lo Josefa Eslsban. Consequently, he violated the law on bigamy.) i sm subsisting due to such marriage not eo dee fed ‘null and’ oid: bby @ court of competent jurisdiction. oe - ‘Therefore, the accused's convic CEREMONY Rene Ronulo v. People of the Philippines “ GR. No. 182438; July 2, 2014 Beion, J. FACTS: Rene Ronulo was convicted of performance of illegal marriage ceremony under Article 352 of the Revised Penal Code by the Municipal Trial Court, which decision was affirmed by both the Regional Trial Court and the Court of Appeals. Hence, this petition for review on certiorari. twas shown that Joey Umadac and Claire Bingayen were scheduled to marry each other at the Sta. Rosa Catholic Parish Church of San Nicolas, locos Norte. However, on the day of the SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 3 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSwedding, the supposed officiating priest, Fr. Mario Ragaza, refused to solemnize the marriage upon learning that the couple failed to secure a marriage license. As recourse, Joey, and Claire, together with their parents, sponsors and guests, proceeded to the Independent Church of Filipino Christians, also known as the Aglipayan Church, They requested petitioner Ronulo, an Aglipayan priest, to perform a ceremony to which the latter agreed despite having been informed by the couple that they had no martiage certificate. Ronulo conducted the ceremony in the presence of the groom, the bride, their parents, the principal and secondary sponsors and the rest of their invited guests. Information for violation of Article 352 of the Revised Penal.Code (RPC), as amended, was filed against Ronulo before the Municipal. Trial,Court (Vt performing an illegal marriageeeérémony.: ceremony, denied that his as mamage as contemplated by lawl" BS Ag & ae ISSUE: ¢ GAN BREDA hye ‘Whether the elements of the crimieyinder i HE RPCRxler Wyo pretont case? S, Ronulo is guilty of-violating Artigle 352 of Hel RE clements of this crime’are as follows: (4).that the’accus ollicer, and (2) that he performs an illegal martiage: cof admitted that he has authority to solemnizea marriage Jemnizing-iliegal marriages, The has'the autfiotily of the solemnizing In the present case, the Ronulo see ‘Tne law sets the minimum requirements constituting!a marriage, cereinony: first, there should be the personal appearance of the’contraéting Parties ‘before @ solemnizing officer; and second, thelr declaration in the presence: ¢f Aetiess then tio. witnesses thal.they take each other as *sOh noulgss than tWo.witnesses th: husband and wife. ee eee g fol f Se ‘As to the first requirements Ronuloagmifted that theparties appeared before him and this fact was testified to by witnesses.-On thé'sé a allegation, the prosecution-has. provelit parties personally declared that thay take éagh squirément, we find:that, contrary to the Ronulo’s. h the testimony. ofja Witness, that the contracting rother-as husband and wife. Undoubtedly, Ronulo conduciedthimarriage cere py dept knowledge that the essential and formal requirements of marriage ™€8tibysiaW-wWere” lacking. The maniage ceremony, therefore, was illegal. Ronulo's knowledge’éf thie absence cf these requirements negates his defense of good faith : ‘Therefore Ronulo is guilty performance of illegal marriage ceremony. Crimes Against Honor AM IMPUTATION TO BE LIBELOUS MUST BE DEFAMATORY, MALICIOUS, GIVEN PUBLICITY, AND THE VICTIM MUST 3E IDENTIFIABLE Alejandro C. Almendras, Jr. v. Alexis C. Almendras GR. No. 179491; January 14, 2015 Sereno, Cu 74 SANBEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSFACTS: Petitioner Alejandro C. Almendras, Jr. was charged and convicted of the crime of libel. Petitioner sent letters with similar contents on different dates to House Speaker Jose de Venecia, Jr., and to Dr. Nemesio Prudente, President of Oil Carriers, Inc. The controversial portion of the first and second letters reads as follows: “This is to notify your good self and your staff that one ALEXIS ‘DODONG” C. ALMENDRAS, a brother, is not vested with any authority 10 a or transact any business with any department, office, or bureau, public or otherwise, that be gi lation wiih my off, mandates or functions. ue 2 7 eee: Noteworthy to mention, perhaps, isBithnd BEE ooay ©. Alejéndras, a reknown blackmaiter, is a bitter rival in theijust cOnclUU8 elBen of 4995 who ran against the wishes of iy father, the late Congressman Aigjandio'D. Almiéndras, Sr. He has caused pain fo the family when he filed cases against us: his’ brother’ hdSiBR, (es against’his own mother. 1 deemed that his act of transacting bysigesspihatalleets aly person and official functions is malicious in purpose, done with ill motive;and: pagel ere plan of harassment activities to perforce realise his egoistic and evil abjectives:- Xxx These letters were allsgedly printe diggiigula\sd andpublished by petitioner with evident bad faith and manifest mali eslipy ingent Alexjg:C. Almendras’ good name. The petitioner, on the other Haid, inter Oe ie defensé of privileged communication Reg ISSUE: ff “a Are the letters of the petitioner’ ribeiais in nature? Oe Li > eas HELD: YES. For an imputation to be libeloussiinder Articlé-353 of the RPC, the following requisites must be present: (a) it must be defamatory; (b) it must be malicious, (c) i must be given publicity, and (d) the victim must be identifiable. Consequently, under Article 354, every defamatory imputation is presumed to be malicious, even if true, if no good intention and justifiable motive is shown. As an exception to the rule, the presumption of malice is done away with when the defamatory imputation qualifies as privileged communication. in order to qualify as privileged communication under Article 354, Number 1, the following requisites must concur: (1) the person who made the communication had a legal, moral, or soc’ duty to make the communication, or at least, had an interest to protect, which interest may either be his own or of the one to whom it is made; (2) the communication is addressed to an officer or a board, or superior, having some interest or duty in the matter, and SAN BeDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CenTRALZED Bar Openarions — 7°Mi A a who has the power to furnish ‘the protection sought; and (3) the statements in the communication are made in good faith and without malice. In determining whether a statement is defamatory, the words used are to be construed in their entirety and should be taken in their plain, natural, and ordinary meaning as they would naturally be understood by the persons reading them, unless it appears that they were used and understood in another sense. In the instant case, the letters tag respondent as a “reknown black mailer,” a vengeful family member who filed cases against his mother and siblings, and with Nefarious designs. Even an impartial mind reading these descriptions would be led to entertain doubts on the person's character, thereby affecting that person's reputation Malice can also be presumed jpasitiiich: of the letters would reveal that’petitigner Tee ‘Therefore, the petitionter should be liable, tor damages. ‘Quasi Offenses” AN ACT WHICH IS ‘SOMETHING MORE THAN A’ MEI i icuighnce, BUT WILLFUL DISREGARD OF THE CONSEQUENCES CONSTITUTE THE OFFENSE OF RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE Reynaldo S. Mariano v. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 178145; July 7, 2014 Bersamin, J. a ‘ACTS: ihe accused Reynaldo. Mariano was convicted of the Jessér offense, of Frustrated Homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code in relation to’Article 50 thereof An altercation ensued between Ferdinand De'Leon and‘Mariand because the Toyota pick-up ‘overtook the jeep of De Leori:and almost:bumped it. De*Lean’gotimad, overtook the pick-up and blocked its path. Subsequently;nstead of ‘proceeding to his house, De Leon decided fo drop by his mother’s house to pick up:somesitems. He parked his jeepvin front of the house of his mother and alighted there from. However, he-was, bumped, hy-aioving vehicle, thrown four (4) meters away and lost consciousness. His wife identiied the fast moving vehicle that bumped De Leon as the same red Toyota pick-up driven by Mariano. De Leon suffered multiple injuries, a fracture and subdural hemorrhage. The RTC, convicted Mariano of frustrated homicide, but the CA modified the felony commitied to reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries. On appeal, Mariano claims that De Leon's injuries were the resull of a mere accident. He insists that he lacked criminal intent; and that he was not negligent in driving his pick-up truck ISSUE: Is Mariano guilty of reckless imprudence resulting in serious physical injuries? 7 SANBEDs COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CensTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSYES. Reckless imprudence consists in voluntarily, but without malice, doing or failing to do an act from which material damage results by reason of inexcusable fack of precaution on the pat of the person performing of falling to perform such act, taking into consideration his employment ©F occupation, degree of intelligence, physical condition and other circumstances regarding persons, time and place. Ee To constitute the offense of reckless , the act must be something more than a mere negligence in the operation of the motor vehicle, but a willful and wanton disregard of the consequences is required. Mariano tried to show that he stopped his’ pick-up five (5) to six (6) meters behind the jeep of De Leon as, vedan-oncoming vehicle to pass, Thereafter, he overtook the jeep of De Leon. Howiéver, ‘ithat Oe Yeon's: body was thrown four (4) meters away from his jeep showed that Matti Wes: Givingnhis jpick:up at a fast speed when he overtook the jeep of De Leon. Mariano SNould have Race Ne posity that,é Leon would alight from his jeep and go inside the-house of his.rpother where thie store is alge located. Thus, had Mariano not driven his pick-vip at‘aifast’Spééd jn overtaking théjjeep of De Leon, he could have easly stopped his pick-up of sired Farther Ts the lell sido af the road, as there was no oncoming vehicle, when he Saw that/D& ‘Leon alightéd from-his jeep and iost his balance, in order to avoid hitting the latter or, at least, misimhizing his injuries: Therefore Marian is guity of reckless imprudencé resulfing in serious physical juries RECKLESS IMPRUDENCE CONSISTS !N VOLUNTARY, BUT WIHOUT MALICE, DOING OR FAILING TO DO AN ACT FROM WHICH: MATERIAL DAMAGE RESULTS BY REASON OF INEXCUSABLE LACK OF PRECAUTION TAKING: INTO CONSIDERATION CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES ‘ Dr. Antonio P. Cabugao, et. al. v. People'of the Philippines G.R. No. 163879; July 30, 2014 Peralta, J. FACTS: The pelitioners, Dr. Antonio-PCabugao and Dr. Cienio-Ynzon were charged with reckless imprudence resulting in homicide forthe death of RodolfePalmne Jr. The 10-year-old victim complained of abdominal pain, for which reason he was brought by his parents to the the clinic of accused Dr. Cabugao. Dr. Cabugao, a general praciitioner specializing in family medicine, gave antibiotics and pain relievers and asked the parents to inform-him if the patient's stomach pains continue. Due to persistent abdominal pains, they returned to Dr. Cabugao, who advised them to bring the patient to the hospital for confinement. After conducting further examinations in the hospital, Dr. Cabugao referred the case to his co- accused Dr. Ynzon, a'surgeon. The following day, Palma’s condition worsened. Both doctors were not physically present. Instead, Dr. Ynzon merely gave medications over the telephone. JR's condition continued to deteriorate that he had convulsions and finally died. The death certificate provided that the cause of death was acute appendicitis \shich resulted to a cardiorespiratory arrest. SAN BEOACOLLEGEOFLAW 79 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSISSUE: Does medical malpractice on the part of Dr. Cabugao and Dr. Ynzon exist so as to constitute the elements of reckless imprudence resutting in homicide? HELD: Yes. However, only Dr. Ynzon's acts constitute reckless imprudence resulting in homicide. Dr. Cabugao is acquitted of the crime. The elements of reckless imprudence are: (1) that the offender does or fails to do ar act: (2) that the doing or the failure to do that-act is voluntary; (3) that it be without malice; (4) that material damage results from the reckless. mprugence; and (5) that there is inexcusable lack of Precaution on the part of the offender, tak dBi his employment or occupation, lf eae a a regarding persons, time and degree of intelligence, mhysial piace. In the case of Dr.'Ynzon, all five elements were established. Hence, He impnadencs resulting in homicide. 3 . AAAL b gulty of reckless First, Dr. Ynzon failed to-attend to the needs of tie paleHtsBynpalecting- the developments and-changes on his condition'dani iguihesabservation Betiod, and to act upon the situation when his-condition worsened. Second, petitioner voluntarily failed to check on his Patient. Third, no malice was present in his act, but'thé latter caused!material damage as the Patient died as a result thereof. Lastly, fromthe testimonies of the expeit witnesses presented, it was irrefutably proven that Dr. Yazon failed to practice thatidegree:of skill and care required in the treatment of his patient : | to" monitor effectively However, due to the death of accused prior to the disposition of this case, Dr. Ynzon's criminal liability is extinguished, His civil liability nevertheless’ subsists, In the case of Dr. Cabugao, he is not guilty.of reckless imprudence_ resting in homicide, The elements thereof were not proven by the prosecution beyond 2 reasonable doubt. Dr. Cabugao's faire to perform appendectomy on.the patient” othe failure to determine the source of infection which caused the deterioration of the2istter’s condition cannot be taken against him because he is not in any position to perfoirixthe required appendectomy. Dr. Cabugao is not a surgeon, but a general’pradtitioner-specializing in family medicine. Thus, even if he wanted to, he cannot de an cperation, much less an appendectomy on Palma. It is precisely for this reason why here referred the patient to Dr. Ynzon after he suspected appendicitis. Hence, Dr. Cabugac is acquitted of the crime of reckless imprudence resulting in homicide: Special Laws Comprehensive Dangerous Erugs Act EXCHANGE OF MONEY AND DRUGS MATERIAL FOR THE CONSUMMATION OF THE SALE OF DRUGS. 7 SANBEDACOLIEGE OF Law 2016 CeNTRaLizeD Bar OPERATIONSPeople of the Philippines v. Amy Dasigan Oliva G.R. No. 206229; February 04, 2015 Perez, J. FACTS: ‘The accused-appeliant Amy Dasigan was found guilty by the RTC and CA for illegal possession and illegal sale of shabu under the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. Hence, a Petition.for certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court was filed with the Supreme Court. A male confidential informant reported to Police Chief Inspector Luisito Meris that a certain alias “Amy" is engaged in delivering “Shabu. .her yt @ buy-bust operation against alias) # é The team proceeded with PO2 Corpus Seting entrance of the road leading to Bayabasiwh could see the transaction going on, 8% He posit getimnsel at the stayed a lee where they Ve te : AAD Thereafter, “Amy” arrived. She brought What appeared to be small transparent plastic sachets containing white crystalline substances, picked, Se ee to PO2 Corpuz. “Aray” then demanded the payment. He was readyawith the: amount but he was instructed that once the “shabu” was given to himy,he. need ‘not hand: th Conpuz placed the two sachets in Money”anylonger. ‘Thus, PO2 is pant{s] pockel,and held, Amy's right hand and announced PCI Meris then told “Amy” to-empty het.pockets..."Amy" complied and PCI Meris saw her actually bringing out her cell phone and four’Sealed-each containing a white Substance sirnilar to the ones she handed to PO2 Corpuz. PO2;Corpuz surrendered the confiscated items to the team leader PC}-Meris: PCI'Meris then‘held-on to the items as they went to the police station. s igeooustay? iSSUE. yee Is "Amy" guilty of illegal possession “ee ‘NAR HELD: s “PH , NO, Under Section 11, Article:il 6f)/R.4. No."0185, thé,elénipnts of the offense of illegal possession of dangerous drugs aré(1)/the accused isn'BosseSsion of an itam or object which identified to be a prohibited drug: (2)'Sti@n" possessions Tot authorized by law; and (3) the accused fresiy and consciously possessed the sald drug. With all the elements being present, “Amy’ is guilty of illegal possession of dangerous drugs. However, she cannot be convicted for illegal sale of dangerous drugs. The marked money was shown to accused-appeliant but it wes not actually given to her as she was immediately arrested when the shabu was handed over to the poseur-buyer. It is material in illegal sale of dangerous drugs that the sale actually took place, and what consummates the buy-bust transaction is the delivery of the drugs to the poseur-buyer and, in turn, the seller's receipt of the marked money. Thus, accused-appellant is found quilty for illegal possession of dangerous drugs but is acquitted for the crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs. SANBEDACOLLEGEOFLAW, 79 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSNON-COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 21 OF RA 9165 NOT FATAL AS LONG AS JUSTIFIABLE GROUND EXIST AND THAT THE INTEGRITY AND EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF ‘THE SEIZED ITEMS ARE PROPERLY PRESERVED. People of the Philippines v. Noel Prajes G.R. No. 206770; April 2, 2014 Reyes, J. FACTS: Accused-appeliants Noel Prajes and Alipa Mala are charged of illegal sale of dangerous drugs. This instant case resulted from an appeal AX decision affirming the trial ee Ra sa court in convicting herein petitioners: A buy-bust operation was condusted GdeP'tS CapORE Er consummated, SI Rey Tumalon, the pose buyer itoduced hi When the,sale had been c Self to then3ja$-an NBI agent. The accused were then arrested and.brought to"the!NBroffice, where theif ptiotographs and fingerprints were taken. At.the NBI office, “Sif Tumalos hanadigver the packs of shabu to Si Teodoro Saavedra who placed his markings on’the packs of shabu. A laboratory examination of the three packs sold by the acctised-appella Mihat the specimen contained methylamphetamine hydrochioride or shabu. Se ‘As defense, the accused-appellants question the subject drugs’ identity and the NBi's ‘observance of the rule on the chain of custody. Theyargde Jat it was unclear who actually marked the subject packs of stiabu, and that there: were ino: photographs and physical inventory ‘of the seized items, even when the same are requirediuinder the law. ISSUE: Was th Chain of Custody observed in the instant case?” HELD: : Yes. While the chain of custody should:ideally be"perfect, in-reality it is not, ‘as it is almost always impossible to obtain an unbroken: Section’ 21 of RYA”No. 9165's IRR recognizes an exception to the strictness “yf the”rile,/ It states that\fen-compliance with the rules’ requirements under justifiable grounds, as long’ as the“jntegrity. and.evidentiary value of the seized items are properly preserved by,the apprehendging’officer/team, shall not render void and invalid such seizures of and custody over SAidjitems%* Although there were conflicting accounts by the prosécution witnesses as to the person who actually marked the seized drugs, the failure of them to identify the said person could be readily explained by the fact that they had no actual participation in the evidence’s marking. It was St Saavedra who was the one who placed the markings on the evidence before the same were brought to the laboratory for examination. The fact that the marking was performed by SI Saavedra oniy upon the buy-bust team’s arrival at the NB! cffice did not adversely affect the prosecution's case against the accused-appeliants because the same was justified Therefore, the Chain of Custody was properly observed in the present case. 0. SANBEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CenTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSDIFFERENCE IN MARKINGS AFFECT THE IN’ EVIDENCE People of the Philippines v. Sukarno Junaide y Agga G.R. No. 193856; April 21,2014 * Abad, J. TEGRITY OF DRUGS PRESENTED. iN FACTS: The accused Junaide was found guilty by the trial court and Court of Appeals of the crimes of illegal sale and illegal possession of shabu. The Court affirmed the CA's ruling, hence, this ‘motion for reconsideration. Upon receipt of a tip that accusedisidinas drugs, the Zamboanga Drug Enforcement Unit, formed a buy-bustteain wit fa as poseur-buyer who was able to arrest the accused, Hewas'searched ar fd four saghets“of suspected shabu and the marked money on him. ere : oN BREDA h i ie During the trial, SPO1 Roca testified thatihé:markeasthe plastic bactiet of Shabu he bought with his initials “RR” but when the supposed sachet was presenféd to him in cotrt for identification, it instead carried the marking "RR-1" “pe coq ¥ ISSUE: Sees Does the difference in markings affect the integrity.of the dt Ss presented in evidence? HELD: aa : Yes. in a prosecution far the sale and possession of the prohibited drugs known as shabu, the State does not only carry the heavy Burden’ of ‘roving théyelements of the offense but also bears the obligation to prove the corpus. delicti; failing in-which the State would not have proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt foo tee ” wo To prove the corpus delict, it is\indisBepsable) for the, proseeutigi:to"show that the dangerous drugs subject of the sale and éxarhined ithe police léboratoryefe the same drugs presented in court as evidence Be fy Ab pe ted) Ciek- SPO1 Roca may have truly marked the TiB/rofwhablrhs' seld from accused Sukarno as "RR" Someone else, therefore, replaced the item by ahiother one, now marked as "RR-1.” Hence, the Court concluded that there may have been switching of evidence in the selling charge. Therefore guilt has not been proven beyond reasonable doubt, SANEEDACOLLEGEOF LAW gy 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS.MANDATORY DRUG TESTING UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002 (R.A. NO. 9165) VIOLATIVE OF A PERSON'S RIGHT TO PRIVACY AND RIGHT AGAINST SELF-INCRIMINATION Jaime D. Dela Cruz v. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 200748; July 23, 2014 Sereno, C.J. FACTS: ‘This is a Petition for Review on Certiorari, tiled by petitioner Jaime D. dela Cruz, from the Decision issued by the the CA convicting him of Use of Dangerous Drugs under Section 15 of R.A No. 9165. a The National’Bureau of investiga Rife) Escobido was picked up by several unknown male person: foi allegedly Sellfig drugs. An errand boy gave'a number to the complaigant the latter gave mber a ring, they were instructed to proceed t Novo Br ei78. Grice where theyJinét “James” who demanded from them.100,000 -latér on Ee one xchgingefforsthesreiease of Ariel. The Tile a ‘complainants proceeded to the NBECEVR to impiement an entrapment operation THES! @ pre-marked bill dusted with fluorescent demanded by "James." Petitionerwas;later °O CEVRO where forensic examination. Peti cam wasiifimediately formed nab Yaimerdela Cruz by using 3s made-part of the amount erensic! laboratory of the NBI- Dela Cruz alleged that he was required to ©» f saying he wanted it to be done by the'(PNP) Crime tabor ae ‘and: not by the NBI. His request was, however, denied." He also Faquested toibe ‘allowed tc I his tayejer prior to the taking of his urine sample, to no avail Ce ‘e ° jurisprudence. ¢ To impose mandatory drug testing on the Serusedts FBlabant attempt to harness a medical test 8 tool for criminal prosecution, contraryt6 thes ‘slated objectives of RA 6195. Drug testing in this case would violate a person's right to privacy*guaranteed under Sec. 2, Art. Ill of the Constitution. Worse still, the accused persons are veritably forced to incriminate themselves. We find that Dela Cruz never raised the alleged irregularity of his arrest before his arraignment and raises the issue only now before this tribunal; hencé, he is deemed to have waived his right to question the validity of his arrest curing whatever defect may have attended his arrest However, “a waiver of an illegal warrantless arrest does not mean 2 waiver of the inadmissibilty of evidence seized during an illegal warrantless arrest.” We are aware-of the prohibition against testimonial compulsion and the allowable exceptions to such proscription. Casés where non- testimonial compulsion Has been allowed reveal, however, that the pieces of evidence obtained were all material to the principal cause of the arrest. a2 SANBEDACouEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSLESS While we express our commendation of law e1 offenders in their laudable effort to curb the drugs on our society, they must, however, be nforcement agents as they vigorously track down Pervasive and deleterious effects of dangerous constantly mindful of the reasonable limits of their authority. because it is not unlikely that in their clear intent to purge society of its lawless elements, they may be knowingly or unknowingly transgressing the protected rights of its citizens including even members of its own police force. LACK OF MARKED MONEY NOT AN ELEMENT TO THE CRIME OF ILLEGAL SALE OF SHABU ilippines v. Manuelita gonzales, et al. G.R. No. 188707; July 30, 2014: q pt ete, ~ S ;ppellants(were found guilj ByAhSIRTO! far lNdSbsale of shab \ilégal possession of shahu and shebu -parapheralia; jounishabieklinds) Section®, $M (3), snd 12, Article Il of Republic Act No, 9165, ‘The decision was affirméd By the CA. Hence, this review. iH an No. 9165-While in detention he J him on the. alleged drug activity P/lpsp. Villanueva ordered Dujon to fstiaby aes deliver theithree (3) jumbo packs of Gre Tt jumbo.sachet in her possession it the SFFal of Manuelif-and her group, and their Apartelle’ogue's), ‘The PDEA operatives went 1d: Maniggita's convoy-arrived at Jogue's. Dujon, “sigup: jhe grbupjtasted the sample shabu to a nue|ita46-viait for his assistant, who bank? Withoupfidving received payment yet, 1g,sibstance,syer to Dujon. Police officers apprehended Edward Déjon for vid approached Police Chief InspectorsWVilksins.Vill of accused-appellant Manuelita in. Cotabato ahead to Jogue’s to secure the aredi| after getting Room No.-2'together wit test its quality. Satisfied. was on his way to withdrai tthe qual hig, mont Anthony Alpiz (PO! Alpiz) pearéd'thiro étiBos Upon seeing that the jumbo sachet with crystalline substancé-was"TMBYion's*possessiOn, POT Alpiz, followed by other PDEA operatives, rushed into Room Noc2v’Aiter'séizure of the illegal drugs and paraphernalia the POEA operatives brought the-éccused-appellants to the PDEA headquarters for investigation. ISSUE: Can Manuelita Ampatuan be liable fo illegal sale of drugs, notwithstanding the absence of any marked money in the buy-bust operation? HELD: YES. The elements necessary for the prosecution of the illegal sale of drugs are as follows: (1) the identity of the buyer and the seller, the object and the consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and payment therefor. The prosecution, to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, ‘SAN Bepa COLLEGE OF LAW 83 Saale tiea reais cea hate reaegoptonen ee al Digests!) "eq! : SA AP hee + ‘Must present in evidence the corpus delicti of the case The corpus delicti is the seized illegal drugs. The Court is convinced that the prosecution has sufficient! 'y discharged its burden to establish the elements in the illegal sale of shabu, Moi reover, the absence of marked money does not run (ounter lo the pfesented proof of illegal saie of shabu. Lack of marked money is not an clameat to jhe crime ofvillegal sale of shabu. The marked’ money used in the buy-bust operation, . although having evidentiary value, is not vital to the nrosecution of the oxee. It merely the oboralive in nature. What is material to the prosecution of ilagal sale of dangerous druge ig {he proof that the illegal sale actually teok place, coupled with the presentation in court of the corpus delcti #5 evidence. In the case st bar, the prosacution duly established both hae ig ih PROOF THAT THE SALE ACTUALLY TOOK PLACE COUPLED WITH PRESENTATION IN COURT OF THE CORPUS DELICT OF iLLICIT.DRUG IN EVIDENCE MATERIAL. IN PROSECUTION OF ILLEGAL SALE OF SHABU People of the Philippines vs. Reynaldo Baturi G.R No. 1898 12; September i, 2074 Det Castito, v. Hence, Manusiita Ampatian may: beheld liable for illegal sale FACTS: {This is an appeal irom the decision of the Court of Appeals that affirmed in toto the decision of Ne ByC finding appellant Reynaldo Baturi guilty of viclating Section 5, Article Il of Republic Act No. 9165, fhe Facts show that a confidential informant reported to the Philippine Drug Enforcement Agency (PDEA) office in Dagupan City the illegal dnig Pangasinan. A team was formed to conduci an entrapment operation where POS Velasquez Fe ast 28 Poseur-buygt and SPO1 Ferrer as back-up, During the entrapment, POS Nelasquez inlormed appalidht that he already had the payment; appellant then took out Fag Opened it and showed the contents thereof to:PO3 Velasquez, who, in turn, gave the boodle money. PO3 Velasquez made the pre-arranged. signal. SPO! Ferer immediately Showed up and recovered the, buy-bust money irom appellant, while POS Velasquez reued ine Sale containing the sachets of white crystalline granules:;The seized shabu was refered ong Gelivered io the PNP Provincial Crime Laboratory: Piinsp. Roderos issued a Chemistry Report No. stating that the white crystalline substance was positive for shabu Appellant denied seling shabu and claimed that he was a victim of frame up by the POEA, ISSUE: ff Are the elements of illegal sale of shabu present? HELD: YES. In a successful prosecution for illegal sale of snabu, the following elements must concur (1) the identity of the buyer and:the seller, the odject and the consideration; and (2) th delivery Giihe thing sold and the payment therefor. What is material in a prosonttcn wo illegal sale of Gangerous drugs is the proof that the transaction or sale actually took place, coupled with the Presentation in court of the corpus delicti or the illicit drug in evidence, a4 > SANBeDR CoLtece Or Law, 1026 CenTRALIZED Bar OPERATIONS| i PO3 Velasquez, who acted as poseur-buyer, positively identified appellant as the seller of the shabu and categorically testified that the shabu was received by him, and the payment therefor by appellant, in a legitimate puy-bust operation. The white crystaliine granules sold by appellant, when examined, were found positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride or shabu. Clearly, the Prosecution, through the ;testimonies of PO3 Velasquez and P/insp. Roderos, was able to ‘successfully establish the plements of legal sale of shabu, Mere denial cannot prevail over the positive testimony of a prosecution witness. A defense of Genial whichis unsupported and unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence becornes negative and self-serving, deserving no weight in law, and cannot be given greater evidentiary value over convincing, straightforward and probable-testimony on affirmative matters, 2a Hence, the appellant is quilly of violating of Section: eWFoF Republic Act No. 9165. PROVING THE IDENTITY-OF THE NARCOTIC SUBSTANCE ITSELF INDISPENSABLE IN THE PROSECUTON OF ILLEGAL SALE OF DANGEROUS-DRUGS People of the Philippines v. Richard Guinto y San Andres G.R. No. 198314; September 24, 2014 Peroz, J. FACTS: Fansp Melberl Esguerra formed a buy bust team which inctides PO1 Michael Familara andl PO! Jesus Mendoza. S01 Mendoze was designated to act as-the poseur-buyer and was given iwo (2) pieces of marked P'100.90 bills as buy-bust money by Plinsp. Esguerra. The informant approached Ricilard Guinto ane introduced PO1 Mendoza as a person in need of illegal drugs worth £200.00. PO! Mendoza then gave the buy-bust meney to Guinto as payment, who, in lum, drew two (2) plastic sachets containing shabu and gave them to PO1 Mendoza. Guinto then put the maney on his teft pocket To indicate consummation of illegal sale, PO1 Mendoza made the prearranged signal to the other members of the team and introduced himself to Guinto as a police. officer. The other members of the team responded and arrested Guinto. Immediately, PO1 Mendoza confiscated the marked money from the left pocket of Guinto and marked the plastic sachet containing shabu. Afterwards, the buy-usi team brought Guinto to Pasig City Police Station and turned him over to SPO2 Braulio Basco for investigation. POi Mendoza turned over the confiscated tugs to SPO2 Baser. Consequently, SPO2 Basco asked for a labcratory examination request ‘o detennine the chemical composition of the confiscated drugs. Thereafter, confiscated drug was brought by PO1 Richard Noble jo the Philippine National Police (PNP) Crime Laboratory for exemination Primarily assailed by the accused are the inconsistent officers with respect to the circumstances of hi which would warrant his acquittal statements of the apyrehending police is legal arrest and the broken chain of custody ISSUE: Should the accused be convicted of the crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs? SAN BED COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CenreauiZeD Bar Orerations 89"icaiaat NO. 'n illegal sale of dangerous drugs, the prosecution rust establish the identity of the buyer and the seller, the object and consideration of the sale and the delivery of the thing Sold and ihe eet of re nor ence, to establish a concrete case, il is an utmost importance to prove the (Geniity of the narcotic substance itself as & constitules the very corpus deli of the ottonee ana the fact ofits existence is vital to sustain a judgment of conviction, HELD: In this case, the prosecution failed to prove that each illegal sale of dangerous drug was.present to convi ipstimonies of PO1 Familara and PO! Mendoza, itis apparent that there is an inconsistency on the icentity and number of plastic sachets. bought from the accused. In his statement, LOY Familera recalled that upon arrivalliat thesplace ‘of attes’;;RO4.Mendoza told him that he was able lo buy one plastic sachet of shabu trom Guinto. On.the’other hand, PO1 Mendoza recalted that he was able to buy two plastic sachets instead of oné.-The pointed inconsistency is not a minor one that can be brushed aside as the discrepancy.taints the very corplis-delicit! of the Crime of illegal sale. A vital point of contention, the prosecution's evidencé places in reasonable oub! the identification of the dangerous drug that was'presented ia court, and every element that constitutes an ict the accused. Upon evaluation of the Therefore, the acquittal of Guinto is proper FAILURE TO OBSERVE PROPER CHAIN OF CUSTODY UNDER SECTION 21 OF R.A. No 9165 WARRANTS ACQUITTAL OF THE ACCUSED People of the Philippings v. Charve John Lagahit G.R. No. 200877; November 12, 2014 Perez, J, ; FACTS: On appeal is the decision of the Court of Appeals Charve John Lagahit guilty beyond Republic Act No. 916: 2002." affirming the decision of the RTC finding asenable doubt of violating Sections 5 and 14 Article II of Sy otherwise known-as the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of POS Arturo Lawas formed a team to conduct a buy-bust aperation against Charve John Lagahit (appellant), At the target area, the designated poseur-buyerapproached and handed the P20.00 Peso bill marked money to the appellant‘and the'latter, in turn, gave four sticks of hand rolied mariuana cigarettes to the former. Upon the ‘consummation’ of the sele, the poseur buyer cxecuted at once their! prearranged signal. Without ado, buy-bust team apprehended the appeliant. PO3 Lawas recovered from the pocket of the former eight more sticks of hand rolled ‘marijuana cigarettes and the marked money. {he appellant was thereafter brought to the Police Station, All the seized items remained with R02 Lawes, Jr. until hey reached the police station. Upon arrival thereat, Barangay Tanod Nicor, member of the team, marked the four slicks of handrolied marijuana cigarettes, which See ane ublect ot the sale transaction. While the other eight sticks of handrolled marijuana cigarettes, ‘which were recovered from the possession of the appellant during his arrest, were parked by PO3 Lawas, Jr. Afterwards, all.the marked pieces of evidence, together with a Request for Laboratory Examination of the same, were arought by PO3 Lawas, Jr. to the PNE Grime Lavoratory for qualitative examination which yielded positive resull for the presence of marijuana, 86“ SANBEDA CoLtece OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED Bak OPERATIONSISSUE: Did the police officers fail to observe the proper chain of custody of the seized items which ‘would warrant the acquittal of the accused? HELD: YES. The prosecution must establish in the chain of custody in a buy-bust situation to be as follows: first, the seizure. and marking, if practicable, of the illegal drug recovered from the accused by the apprehending officer, second, the turnover of ihe illegal drug seized by the apprehending officer to the investigating officer; third, the turnaver by the investigating officer of the legal drug tothe forensic chemist submission of the marked iogaleis ee In the Illegal Sale’of Dangerous'Drugs*case, Oniigiled to establishyihen, where, and how the said four sticks of hanroled madiyaneyci rettes “Sold by thgeeippellant to the trusted informant were turned over to/PO3*|awas; ieyithe latter. The? ig over to POS |Lawas, Jr. by the trusted infortiant af these jtemé"wAs the Subposedy ub ink in the chain of custody. Doubt therefore arises if the recovered itemfis with POS Lawas, Ur actually sold by the appellant to the trusted int in the Illegal Possession of Dangerous. Drugs iéas procedures estabiished in Soo: 21 of RA. No- 9165" inventory report or photograph of the confiscated the seized drugs subject of the illegal possess found that the marking thereof was done in the; mentioned third-party representatives. zm ike officers; falled to follow the athesrecotds do-tot conlain any physical Ws. Athough POS)Lawas, Jr. testified that 38 Nadibeen marked, nowhere can it be “{cfithe appellant or any of the above- While this Court recognizes that’'nén-compiiance-by,thé “yuy-bust team with Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165 is not fatal’as, long as: there i§ @ justifiable ground therefor, for and as long as the integrity and she evidentiary. valuié of the. seized items \are.properly preserved by the apprehending team, these conditions; however, were-fiot-met in. {he-present case. Despite of all the aforesaid major lapses, the prosecutjon'peither offefed any,2xblahation why the procedure was not followed nor mentioned:any just paround'for falling fé-opserve the rule Vee d onreashileink PRE-CCORDINATION REPORT NOT.AN ESSENTIAL PROCEDURAL REQUISITE UNDER RA 9165; FAILURE TO CONDUCT REQUISITE PHYSICAL INVENTORY NOT FATAL, WHAT {8 ESSENTIAL IS THE PRESERVATION OF THE INTEGRITY AND EVIDENTIARY VALUE THE SEIZED ITEMS ople of the Philippines v. Rommel Araza y Sagun G.R_No. 190623; November 17, 2014 el Castillo, J, “Therefore, the accused was acquitted, & FACTS: In this appez', appellant Rommel Araza y Sagun (Araza) assails the decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) which affirmed the decision of the RTC finding him guilty beyond reasonable douht of illegal possession of shabu. SAN BELA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CentRatizeD BAROPERATIONS 87PO1 Edmund Talacca accompanied the officials of the Barangay Council in confiscating a video carrera machine inside the house of a certain Alejandro Sacdo. (Sacdo). While confiscating said machine, PO1 Talacca saw nine persons, including petitioner Araza, sniffing shabu or engaging in a pot session inside the house of Sacdo. He arrested and frisked them. Recovered from the pocket of Araza was a small heat-sealed transparent plastic sachet coniaining white crystalline substance which PO1 Talacca suspected to be shabu. PO1 Talacca immediately seized said sachet and brought Araza and his companions to the police station. He turned over the Zaid sachat to the chief Investigator, Larry Cabrera (Cabrera), who marked the same with the initi “RSA in his presence. Is ees, Araza hinges his claim for aeqiitialgon He (alla SUSHlligymolice officers to submit a pre- coordination report and physica No a 60, drug, which is a departure from the mandate of Section 24(i)pAM Sigs Ss “ 5 a ISSUE: SAN BEDA, t Does the departure ftérh the mnaridate of Se: 21 waif the aequital of thelacdused? HELD: venien gae NO. Araza’s contention.that there must be compliai logal basis since nowhere is it stated.in,Section/24: that A pre-coordinalion report is also not needed helt ar) delicto for obvious reason. i 1 Pre-coordination report has no s:is,an essential procedural requisite. iecused Is “apprehended in flagrante Further, fallure by the prosecution t0 prove that IRE BUI ‘officers’ conducted the required physical inventory of the seized shabuidoes,ot immediately result.in'the unlawful arrest of an accused or render inadmissible: in: ther‘items seized. {What is essential is the preservaticn of the integrityand the:a\ uilized in the determination of the gui that the police officers ‘substantially. compl ed shabu. The chain 6f-custody hase ay Hence, Araza is guilty of IllegalPossessior «Oe | ys Ce CHAIN OF CUSTODY NOT BROKEN) BY FAILURE|TO:STATE THE PLACE WHERE THE SEIZED ITEMS WERE MARKED) 8japopuseiegs Peopte of the Philippines v. Venerando Dela Cruz G.R. No, 193670; December 03, 2014".” . Del Castillo, J FACTS: \Venerando Dela Cruz was charged with illegal sale of dangerous drugs. Both the trial court and the Court of Appeals found the accused guilty as charged, hence, this appeal with the Supreme Court. Acting upon the information received by police asset Warren Ebio from another asset that he could purchase shabu by calling a certain person, a buy-bust operation was drawn up to entrap appellant. ag SANBEDACOLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS"HELD: ey é Ne 2 — pon their arrival at the designated afea, Ebio proceeded towards the meeting place while two the same with “RSB-1" and "RSB-2." On the other hand, he marked the third sechet recovered) from the seller alter he conducted a search on him with “RSB-3.” These seized items were turned over together with the marked money for proper disposition Appellant contends that the failure'to rhention the place where the three plastic sachets 6f shabu were marked constitutes gap,io.the,chain.of custody of evidence. e © ss, 5 ISSUE: : if Ot cee * s Does the faiiure to.mention th Fe the seized i ef marked constitute a gap in wee # NNo, The failure to mention the placé Whe'e'the seidéd items‘ wars tharkedGoes not constitute a 2p in the chain of custody of evideri¢e.“Maiking of th is@ized'shabe is the initial stage in the chain of custody in buy-bust operations, ; While itis true that the exact location where the markings Were made was not mentioned, it can reasonably be concluded thal the same happened during appellant's apprehension, in transit to the police station or before the sachets were tumied over in the police tetion Juglue of the seized shabusis, shown to have been Therefore, the integrity and evidentiai ‘the chain of custody unbroken, Properly preserved and the crucialilinks i ‘Checks’ kaw | PRESUMPTION OF KNOWLEDGE OF wurrcnd OF FUNDS MAY BE ESTABLISHED BY PROOF OF RECEIPT OF NOTICE OF DISHONOR Ma. Rosario P. Campos v. Pegple‘of the Philippines | i" GR. No. 187401; September 17,2014" sunt 2 Reyes, J. - FACTS: Ma. Rosario P. Campos abtained_a loan, payable on installments, from respondent First Women's Credit Corporation (FWCC). She issued several postdated checks in favor of FWOC to cover the agreed installment payments. Fourteen of these checks, however, were dishonored when presented for payment. The checks were declared by the drawee-bank to be drawn against a “closed account." After Campos failed to satisfy her outstanding obligation with FWCC ‘despite demand, she was charged before the MTC with violations of B.P. 22. The MTC, RTC and the CA found Campos guilty of 14 counts of violation of BP 22 and found that the required Notice of dishonor from FWCC was received by Campos. SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS PeA Pata Campos denies having received a notice of dishonor from FWCC. She argues that the prosecution could not have established the crime’s element requiring her knowledge of her insufficient funds by the mere presentation of registry return receipts that supposedly covered the registered mail notice of dishonor. However, Campos categorically deciared in her present Petition that "she has in her favor evidence to show that she was in good faith and indeed made arrangements for the payment of her obligations subsequently after the dishonor of the checks.” ISSUE: Are the elements for violation of BP, 22 established? HELD: a YES. To be liable for vos Ree un sgn the making, drawing, and isst hy check {O-app\yefo ci lements must be present: (1) vi "Account or, forvAlue; (2) the knowledge of the}maker, drawer, of-issuer,that,at, the.timg of issue he does tiétthave sufficient funds In or creditwwith’ the drawee bankor. thé payméntofthe check in fullfuprrits presentment; and (3) the subsequent dishondhof thé:chack by the Srawee sbarik,forinsufficiency of funds or creditor dishonor for the same réason’had not the drawer, without any valid cause, ordered the bank to stop payment Juriprudence has emphasized the: importance. Of, proof: of receipt of such notice of dishonor, although not as an element of the offense, bullas a means to.establish that the issuer of a check was aware of insufficiency of fundsi-whenhe-issued the check and the bank dishonored it, in relation to the second element of the offehsé and Section 2 of B.P. 22 which creates a presumption of knowledge of insufficiency of funds. in the case at bar, the.presence-of-the first:and third elements is undisputed. Anent the second element, Campos’ declaration that she subsequently made arrangements for the payment of her obligations after the dishonor. of the:¢hecks.was'a confirmation that-she actually received the required notice of dishonor from FWCC. Campos would not have entered into the alleged arrangements if she hai “hot}received''a jNatice “of dishonor from her creditor, and had no knowledge of the insufficiency of her funds. with the bank and thejdishonor of her checks. mt 3 Hence, all the elements for conviction were duly Sstablishied PAYMENT OF DISHONORED CHECKS "BEFORE ‘FILING OF INFORMATION NEGATES LIABILITY FOR VIOLATION GF B.P. 22 Ariel T. Lim v. People of the Philippines G.R. No. 190834; November 26, 2014 Peralta, J. FACTS: The petitioner Ariel Lim was charged with violation of B.P. Blg. 22. The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment of the Regional Trial Court convicting petitioner of the crime charged. The petitioner's motion for reconsideration was denied, hence, this petition for review on certiorari. The facts show that petitioner issued Bank of Commerce Check Nos. 0013613 an3 0013814, dated June 30, 1998 and July 15, 1998, payable to CASH, in the amount of One Hundred ‘Thousand Pesos for each check. He gave the checks to Mr. Willie Castor as his campaign donation to the latter's candidacy. It was Castor who ordered the delivery of printing materials 90° SANBEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSand used petitioner's checks to pay for the same. Due to late delivery of printing materials. Castor instructed petitioner to issue a "Slop Payment” order for the two checks. Thus, the checks were dishonored by the bank because of said order and that said checks were drawn against insufficient funds. Private complainant Magna Badiee sent two demand letters to petitioner and private complainant filed a complaint against petitioner before the Office of the Prosecutor. After the lapse. of more than one month from receipt of the demand letters and after receiving the Subpoena, petitioner issued a replacement check dated September 8, 1998 in the amount of Two Hundred Thousand Pesos, whereas, complainant was able to encash said replacement check, ee fs seh 1cks, two Informations were = as Peiitioner posits that jurisprudence, mainly relying On the’ Griffith case, diétatesrthe dismissal of the criminal case against him on the grgund that he hs fully,paidf)e amount-cF the dishonored checks even before the Informations against him were filed’in court: AP i four 3 eee Six months after petitioner hadi ke im filed against him before the Metropolitan Trial ISSUE: {s petitioner guilty of violating B.P. Big. 22? HELD: ae NO. The Court holds that petitioner is nct quilty of violating B:P, Bld;-22as he had alreacy paid the amount of the dishonored checks six months before:the filing of Informations with the court. Such a course of action is more in keeping with justice’and equity. The Court enumerated the elements for violation of 8.P.. Blg.,22 being "(1) The accused makes, draws or issues a check to apply to-aceount or for value; (2) The'aceused knows at the time of the issuance that he or she does not have. sufficient funds in, or oredit with the drawee bank for the payment of the check in full uponiits: presentment; and. (3)The check is subsequently dishonored by the drawee'bank for insufficiency of funds -r grédit, or it would have been dishonored for the same reason had not'the’drawer, Without any Valid reason, ordered the bank to stop payment.” : Petitioner should not be penalized, alttlouigh’all:the-eléments of violation of B.P. Big. 22 are proven to be present. The fact that the isstier of the check had already paid the value of the dishonored check after having received the subpoena.from the Office of the Prosecutor should have forestalled the filing of the Information in court. The spirit of B.P. Big. 22 is the protection of the credibility and stability of the banking system which would not be served by penalizing geuple who have evidently made amends for their mistakes and made restitution for damages even before charges have been filed against them. Hence, petitioner is not guilty of violating B.P. Blg. 22. SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CenrRauzeD Bar OPcrarions 7%OMBUDSMAN ENDOWED WITH POWER TO PASS UPON CRIMINAL COMPLAINTS INVOLVING PUBLIC OFFICIALS AND EMPLOYEES Araullo v. Office of the Ombudsman, et al. GR. Ne. 194157; July 30, 2014 Reyes, J. FACTS: Petitioner Romeo Araullo had ilegal dismissal which he filed. againist'Gi ipi of ingythe finality of the decision in his favor, Araullo filed with Labor thedel Rangasibata n for issuance of a writ of execution. LA Panganiban, howevensnhiited 4onr further. the actionaresuilting in a re- raffle and assignment of the Case to Labor Arbiter Arden Anni Araullo's mt 5f,for execution was approved by LA.Anni but was iqmediatéiyiquashed by the same. Consatuently, the latter inhibited from further hearing ,the; case; coneemed, that: his impartiality ‘mnight be questioned because the parties to the case’ were his fraternily brothers When Araullo's motion for reconsideration was:denied by the’NURC, he filed with the Office of the Ombudsman a criminal complaint against respondents. charging them of violating Article 206 of the Revised Penal Code and Séciion 3(e) of Republic Act No. 3919, otherwise known as the Anti-Grafl and Corrupt Practices Act. Upon turther investigation, Araullo's charges were:dismissed by the Office of the Ombudsman due to lack of probable cause. Feeling aggrieved, Araullo filed a petition for certiorari with the Supreme Court to assail the Office of the Ombudsman's dismissal of his criminal complaint. IssuE: ? Can the Supreme Court take cognizance of the case? HELD: ee nH NO, the Court reiterates its.,policy of ‘norinterierente with tie. Ombudsman, except in a clear case of grave abuse of discretign™ The Constitution and R.A. No. 6770 efidowed.ine,Office-F the Ombudsman with wide latitude, in the exercise of its investigatory and prosecutory powers, 10 pase upon criminal complaints involving public officials and employees, Specifically; the determination of whether probable cause exists is a function that belongs to the Office of the Ombudsman. Whether a criminal case, given its atlendant facts and circumstances, should be filed or not is basically its call Similarly, there was no grave abuse of discretion in the dismissal of the complaint for violation of Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019. A violation under this provision entails the following: 1. the accused must be a public officer discharging administrative, judicial or official functions; 2. he must have acted with manifest partiality, evident bad faith or inexcusable negligence; and 3. (that his action caused any undue injury to any party, including the government, or gave any private party unwarranted benefits, advantage ot preference in the discharge of his functions 92. SANBEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONSThere was also no showing that the labor officials’ actions were performed with manifest partiality, evident bad faith or inexcusable negligence. The records instead indicate that the jabor officials only wanted to satisfy the demands of law and their procedural rules. Hence, the petition is dismissed for lack of merit. RECKONING POINT OF THE PERIOD OF PRESCRIPTION FOR VIOLATIONS OF RA 3019 BEGIN FROM THE DAY OF COMMISSION. OF THE VIOLATION OF LAW, AND IF UNK*!°WN, FROM THE DISCOVERY THEREOF PCGG v. Ombudsman Conchita Carpio Morales G.R.No. 206357; November 12, 2014 ,.. Velasco, Jr., J. FACTS: ee 9,65 of-the-Rule of Cou cookie ‘annulment and Solting aside of the! Orders rendered by’ the Office of the’@mbudsman 7 So OF LAV neo Then President Fidel V. Ramos created & Presidential Ad-Hoc raghifaing Committee on Behest Loans. One of the loan-accaunts bebe Ry cng for investigation was that of Resorts Hotel Corporation (RHC) with Development Bank of lng}Philippines (DBP). On January 4, 1993, the Ad Hoc Committee submitted a fepoit Ie President Ramos concluding that tne RHC account qualifies as tenest loan, On January’6,/ 2003, PEGG filed en Affidavit. Complaint with the Office of the Ombudsman against'tesparident directors and officers of RHC and the directors of DBP for violation of Sections 3(@):and'3(g) of R/A-No. 3019 or the Anti- Graft and Corupt Practices Act. The Ombudsman dismissed the complaint on the, gfouing.of prescrintiont ruled that since the complaint was filed after the prescriptive period of iGsyears, as provided under Section 11 of R.A. No, 3019, the offenses charged herein tad slready-prescribed. HELD: > YES. R.A, No, 3019 is silent as to'when the period df, (sein shall begin to run, However, this is remedied by Section 2 Act No. 2826 Which'B¥ovides tat “[p|tescription shall begin to run from the day of the commission of the violation of thie-lav, and if the same De not known at the time, from the discovery thereof and the institution of judicial proceeding for ite investigation and punishment. The Supreme Court laid down the following guidelines for the determination of the reckoning point: 1) As a general rule, prescription begins to run from the date of the commission of the offense; 2) The exception is, if the date of the commission.of the violation is not known, it shall be counted from the date of discovery thereof; 3) In determining whether it is the general rule or the exception that should apply in a particular case, the availabilily or suppression of the information relative to the crime should first be determined. If the necessary information, data, or records based on which the crime could be d:scovered is readily available to the public, the general rule applies. Otherwise, should martial law prevent SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF Law 2016 CentrauizeD BarOverarions —.°>Baden the violation be suppressed, possibly through the filing thereof or should information about connivance, then tHie exception applies. In the case at bar, the grant of behest loans, which by their nature, could be concealed from the public eye by the simple expedient of suppressing their documentation, the exception applies, Consequently, the prescriptive period commenced from the date of discovery thereof on January 4, 1993, when the Ad Hoc Committee submitted its report to the President. The filing by the PCGG of its Affidavit-Gomplaint before the Office of the Ombudsman on January 6, 2003, is cloarly belated. The 10-year period within which to institute the action has already lapsed Hence, the Ombudsman did not commil ‘on the ground of prescription. pee ‘TWO WAYS BY: WHICH A PUBL i RA. NO. 3019 IM THE DISCHARGE OF HIS FUN{ JAMELY( AUSING Ut /E INJURY TO ANY PARTY INCLUDING THE COVEAMENTCOA B) GIVING ANY PRIVATE PARTY UNWARRANTED BENEFIT, ‘ADVANTAGE-OR'| PREFERENCES 8° WF Alejandro Rivera v. People cf the Phi es : AY G.R. No. 156577; December 03, 2014 Mendoza, J. FACTS: Ss Appellants were public officers of the DOH Regional Health’ Office in Tacldban City, namely: Dr. Luis D. Montero, Regional Director; ‘Dr. Alfredo -Y, Perez: Assistant-Regional Director and Chairman of the Prequalification Bids and Awards.Comjnittee;and Alejandro C. Rivera, Regional Civil Works Implementation Office They were chaiged with volation of Section 3 (e) of RA. No, 3019 or the Aare nea BBR arAciCR® Act 7 The Sandiganbayan found them guilty “asi charged'heneg, thesé#coiisolidated petitions for review on certiorari : ; a: ieee ae DOH Region Vill entered into aoa ean with PAK Biatindustry (PAL Boat) for the construction of seven (7) initsofyriverine:boats tostie usedsdsstloating clinics with a contract price of 700,000.00. . Ce Sec a An anonymous letter was sent t5.the? OFBEtOfIHBFOiFioudSman stating that there were small white boats for the DOH in a smal! shipyar withistheir neighborhood which were built many months ayo but had been left rotting. He wes of the View that the country was losing money out of this deal A tochnical-financiat audit was conducted by the Commission on Audit which showed that there were anomalies in the floating clinics. project. It also showed that the project failed to comply with the pertinent provisions of P.D. No. 1594, Prescribing Policies, Guidelines, Rules and Regulations for Government Infrastructure Contracts, resulting in revenue losses to the government. It was found out that the seven units were not operational despite payment of 630,000.00. it was also found out that appellant Montero entered into said negotiated contract without waiting for approval of the project's plans and specifications by the Maritime Industry Authority (MARINA) 94 SANBEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CENTRALIZED BAR OPERATIONS—— RQ — Appellant Perez on the other hand approved ‘the commencement of the project without determining the contractor's financial capacity to undertake the same. Appellant Rivera failed to monitor, supervise and inspect the project in accordance with approved plans and specifications in order to safeguard the interest of the government, thereby causing undue injury to the government in the total amount of 630,000.00 ‘and giving unwarranted benefits to PAL Boat Industry in the discharge of their official functions. ISSUE: |s the conviction of the appellants for violating Section 3(e) of RA. No. 3019 proper? HELD: £3019 are: judicial or(afficial functions; 2. The accused.must have acted with maplfestpattiality, avident bad faith ofigidss inexcusable negigence, and SAEED A Wee 3. ‘The action of the accused caused OFd fnjury Wacanly partyfigotuding @ government, or gave any private party Uinwarranléd beriefils, advanta je OF preferéneein the discharge of L tenes ofthe accuse” a SE } aes NES yAWhich”4 Hublic official violaies ions, namely: (a) by causing undue ‘any private. party any unwarranted et ‘The Count has consistently held that, there ar Section 3(e) of R.A. No. 3019 in the performance injury to any party, including the Government; of (b benefil, advantage or preference. : 5 ‘The Court finds thet the petitioners indeed (A) a adicc Ug injuryjf6'the government and (by gave unwarranted benefits to PAL: Boat thiotghy oe pacity, inte The Court rules that appellants gave unwarrante qualification. PAL Boat was not financially: Gini project. They also failed to fol a negotiated contract. Moreover, Peréz' 6: its financial inability to undertakeythe proj more fiabilties than capital Pepegito PAW#BOat especially in its pre- teghiucally/ capable/of undertaking the floating prove procedure arig-decumentations in awarding ‘airman oF RIBAG, jualified PAL Boat despite 4 2nd ip»Spite (oF i knowledge that PAL Boat had Mekal (jO2K> scar heen quanaeeec irc : Petitioners also caused undue injury-to*thetgoverifient through their continuing and manifest partiality towards PAL Boat. The COA.Aucit Report visibly established the undue injury committed against the government. SS ‘Therefore, appellants’ conviction must be upheld. VIOLATION OF SECTION 3(E) OF R.A. NO. 3019 PRESENT WHEN A PUBLIC OFFICER DISCHARGING ADMINISTRATIVE, JUDICIAL OR OFFICIAL FUNCTIONS ACTED WITH MANIFEST PARTIALITY, EVIDENT BAD FAITH. OR GROSS —INEXCUSABLE NEGLIOGENCE THEREBY CAUSING UNDUE INJURY TO ANY PARTY OR GIVING ANY PRIVATE PARTY UNWARRANTED BENEHITS, ADVANTAGE OR PREFERENCE IN THE DISCHARGE OF HIS FUNCTIONS, ‘SAN BEDA COLLEGE OF LAW 2016 CentraueD Bar Orersvions 7°Edelbert C. Uyboco v. People of the Philippines : G.R. No. 211703; December 10, 2014 Velasco, Jr., J. FACTS: Edelbert C. Uyboco, President of a Japanese company, Gaikoku and Rodolfo Valencia, a public officer were charged and convicted by the Sandiganbayan of violation of R.A No. 3019. Hence this appeal Appellant Uyboco and his co-accused Valencia were found to be engaged in a transaction wherein there was an overpayment of thespurchase.af dump trucks. These dump trucks were directly imported by the ProviggaliGever ‘E:AlStributor in Japan. With this direct impotation, “the, Provincial paid the tax-free amount of P4,504,119.85:./Instead, acaibed “Valencia ci iguthorized and"ceused the disbursement of-P6,994,286, or an excess, of £2400-168.18, in favor of peticner's company, Gaikoku. This has clearly caused unduéthjuy tothé-governiment ? i SLL EGE OF LAY Appellant asserts that the Saridiganbayain erred in declaring the existence of a conspiracy, i an EEE ae ISSUE: ee Were the elements of Violation of RAMo,.3019 pres HELD: ates Yos. For accused to be found liable under Section: 9(@) 6FIRA 3019, the following elements must concur: (a) the accused must be a public officer:discharging: administrative, judicial or official functions; (b) he must have acted withinainlfest partiality, evident bad faith or gross inexcusable negligence; and (c) that his action cause Undue injbiy'to.any party, including the government, or giving any private party unwarranted;benelils, advantage-or preference in the discharge of his functions, He GT ' Appellant's co-accused, was rpublig ofligerzat tie-tiniesthe acts;in.question were committed Thus, while he was a-private‘intividual s foundsto hiaye.beer:in conspiracy with his co- accused, ~AR : ‘As to the second element, acéusSdilencia entered.into-acnégotiated contract with Gaikoku without authority from the Sangguniang Panlajawigah (SP). ‘Accused Valencia failed to comply
You might also like
The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life
From Everand
The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck: A Counterintuitive Approach to Living a Good Life
Mark Manson
Rating: 4 out of 5 stars
4/5 (5824)
The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are
From Everand
The Gifts of Imperfection: Let Go of Who You Think You're Supposed to Be and Embrace Who You Are
Brene Brown
4/5 (1093)
Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It
From Everand
Never Split the Difference: Negotiating As If Your Life Depended On It
Chris Voss
Rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars
4.5/5 (852)
Magazines
Podcasts
Sheet music
Principles: Life and Work
From Everand
Principles: Life and Work
Ray Dalio
4/5 (612)
The Glass Castle: A Memoir
From Everand
The Glass Castle: A Memoir
Jeannette Walls
4.5/5 (1720)
Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance
From Everand
Grit: The Power of Passion and Perseverance
Angela Duckworth
4/5 (590)
Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel
From Everand
Sing, Unburied, Sing: A Novel
Jesmyn Ward
4/5 (1194)
Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race
From Everand
Hidden Figures: The American Dream and the Untold Story of the Black Women Mathematicians Who Helped Win the Space Race
Margot Lee Shetterly
4/5 (898)
Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike
From Everand
Shoe Dog: A Memoir by the Creator of Nike
Phil Knight
4.5/5 (541)
The Perks of Being a Wallflower
From Everand
The Perks of Being a Wallflower
Stephen Chbosky
4.5/5 (2105)
The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers
From Everand
The Hard Thing About Hard Things: Building a Business When There Are No Easy Answers
Ben Horowitz
4.5/5 (349)
Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future
From Everand
Elon Musk: Tesla, SpaceX, and the Quest for a Fantastic Future
Ashlee Vance
4.5/5 (474)
Bad Feminist: Essays
From Everand
Bad Feminist: Essays
Roxane Gay
4/5 (1025)
The Outsider: A Novel
From Everand
The Outsider: A Novel
Stephen King
4/5 (1871)
Her Body and Other Parties: Stories
From Everand
Her Body and Other Parties: Stories
Carmen Maria Machado
4/5 (823)
The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)
From Everand
The Sympathizer: A Novel (Pulitzer Prize for Fiction)
Viet Thanh Nguyen
4.5/5 (122)
The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer
From Everand
The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer
Siddhartha Mukherjee
4.5/5 (271)
Angela's Ashes: A Memoir
From Everand
Angela's Ashes: A Memoir
Frank McCourt
4.5/5 (442)
Brooklyn: A Novel
From Everand
Brooklyn: A Novel
Colm Toibin
3.5/5 (1948)
The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living
From Everand
The Little Book of Hygge: Danish Secrets to Happy Living
Meik Wiking
3.5/5 (403)
A Man Called Ove: A Novel
From Everand
A Man Called Ove: A Novel
Fredrik Backman
4.5/5 (4771)
Steve Jobs
From Everand
Steve Jobs
Walter Isaacson
4.5/5 (809)
The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century
From Everand
The World Is Flat 3.0: A Brief History of the Twenty-first Century
Thomas L. Friedman
3.5/5 (2259)
The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel
From Everand
The Art of Racing in the Rain: A Novel
Garth Stein
4/5 (4208)
The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)
From Everand
The Yellow House: A Memoir (2019 National Book Award Winner)
Sarah M. Broom
4/5 (98)
Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America
From Everand
Devil in the Grove: Thurgood Marshall, the Groveland Boys, and the Dawn of a New America
Gilbert King
4.5/5 (266)
A Tree Grows in Brooklyn
From Everand
A Tree Grows in Brooklyn
Betty Smith
4.5/5 (1929)
Yes Please
From Everand
Yes Please
Amy Poehler
4/5 (1903)
A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story
From Everand
A Heartbreaking Work Of Staggering Genius: A Memoir Based on a True Story
Dave Eggers
3.5/5 (231)
Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
From Everand
Team of Rivals: The Political Genius of Abraham Lincoln
Doris Kearns Goodwin
4.5/5 (234)
The Woman in Cabin 10
From Everand
The Woman in Cabin 10
Ruth Ware
3.5/5 (2525)
Wolf Hall: A Novel
From Everand
Wolf Hall: A Novel
Hilary Mantel
4/5 (3973)
Fear: Trump in the White House
From Everand
Fear: Trump in the White House
Bob Woodward
3.5/5 (738)
John Adams
From Everand
John Adams
David McCullough
4.5/5 (2409)
On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal
From Everand
On Fire: The (Burning) Case for a Green New Deal
Naomi Klein
4/5 (74)
The Light Between Oceans: A Novel
From Everand
The Light Between Oceans: A Novel
M.L. Stedman
4.5/5 (789)
Manhattan Beach: A Novel
From Everand
Manhattan Beach: A Novel
Jennifer Egan
3.5/5 (880)
The Constant Gardener: A Novel
From Everand
The Constant Gardener: A Novel
John le Carré
3.5/5 (104)
Case Digest RA 6713
Document24 pages
Case Digest RA 6713
Anonymous oDPxEkd
100% (1)
The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America
From Everand
The Unwinding: An Inner History of the New America
George Packer
4/5 (45)
Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore
From Everand
Rise of ISIS: A Threat We Can't Ignore
Jay Sekulow
3.5/5 (137)
Little Women
From Everand
Little Women
Louisa May Alcott
4/5 (105)
Real Action Vs Personal Action
Document2 pages
Real Action Vs Personal Action
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Labor Law
Document124 pages
Labor Law
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Legal and Judicial Ethics
Document127 pages
Legal and Judicial Ethics
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Political Law
Document100 pages
Political Law
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
RA 9285-Alternative Dispute Resolution
Document3 pages
RA 9285-Alternative Dispute Resolution
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Jaworski Vs Pagcor Digest
Document1 page
Jaworski Vs Pagcor Digest
Anonymous oDPxEkd
100% (1)
People Vs Enojas
Document1 page
People Vs Enojas
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Testate Estate of Edward E. Christensen vs. Helen Christensen Garcia, G.R. No. L-16749 January 31, 1963
Document18 pages
Testate Estate of Edward E. Christensen vs. Helen Christensen Garcia, G.R. No. L-16749 January 31, 1963
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
LOPEZ Vs People
Document5 pages
LOPEZ Vs People
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Matienzo vs. Abellera
Document1 page
Matienzo vs. Abellera
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Scope of Administrative Law
Document2 pages
Scope of Administrative Law
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Radio Communications of The Philippines Vs National Telecommunications Commission 184 SCRA 517 Case Digest Administrative Law
Document2 pages
Radio Communications of The Philippines Vs National Telecommunications Commission 184 SCRA 517 Case Digest Administrative Law
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Esmael Orquinaza Vs People
Document5 pages
Esmael Orquinaza Vs People
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Conflict of Laws CASE DIGEST
Document11 pages
Conflict of Laws CASE DIGEST
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Cooperative Development Authority Vs Dolefil Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Cooperative Inc 382 SCRA 552 Case Digest Administrative Law
Document3 pages
Cooperative Development Authority Vs Dolefil Agrarian Reform Beneficiaries Cooperative Inc 382 SCRA 552 Case Digest Administrative Law
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Mobilia vs. Umezawa
Document17 pages
Mobilia vs. Umezawa
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
Javier vs. de Guzman
Document5 pages
Javier vs. de Guzman
Anonymous oDPxEkd
No ratings yet
People vs. Tira
Document8 pages
People vs. Tira
Anonymous oDPxEkd
100% (1)

Criminal Law

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like