1.

homicide gr 216728 people vs decito villagracia june 4, 2018

Jaime was watching a game at the wake of their neighbor when accused Decito suddenly came from behind the
victim and without a warning, stabbed him on the left side of his body with a 13-inch knife. Jamie was then seated
at the table and uttered “ I am wounded”. The regional trial court found accused guilty of murder for the attack was
attended by treachery.

Is Jaime guilty of murder?

No. he is guilty of the crime of homicide. To be convicted of homicide, the following elements must be present: 1. A
person is killed; 2. The person is killed by the offender; 3. The crime Is neither parricide or infanticide; 4. There is
absence of qualifying circumstance. In this case , there was an absence of qualifying circumstance which is
treachery.The mere fact that the attack was inflicted when the victim had his back turned will not in itself
constitute treachery absence any showing that the mode was deliberately adopted with purpose of depriving the
victim of a chance to either fight or retreat. The suddenness of attack does not, of itself, suffice to support a finding
of treachery.

In this case, the prosecutions witness testified that his attention was drawn to the accused only when the table
where the victim was seated at collapsed. At that moment, did the witness only saw accused pulling out a short
bolo from the victim's left side.further, the other witness narrated that accused approached the victim from behind
and stabbed him. Aside from showing that accused attack on the victim was sudden and unexpected, there is
nothing in the record which would prove that such method or form of attack was deliberately chosen by accused.
Thus, treachery cannot be appreciated in order to qualify the killing to murder.

2. murder People of the Philippines Vs. Benito Lababo alias "Ben", et al.

G.R. No. 234651. June 6, 2018

A, B, husband and wife respectively and their son c, alightened from a motorcycle then proceeded directly to their
residence. About a few moments later, B heard gunshots and when she checked it out, she saw B and her son C
lyring on the ground wounded together with Fred, holding a gun while Will, Sil and Del were armed with bolos. The
victims were brought to the hospital, and C died. The report stated that C died from a single fatal gunshot on his
back injuring his lungs which lead to its death. The court convicted them of murder.

Was murder committed?

Yes. The elements of murder are: 1. That a person was killed. 2. That the accused killed him. 3. That the killing was
attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Art. 248. 4. The killing is not parricide or infanticide.
Thus, for the charge of murder to prosper, the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that: (1) the
offender killed the victim, (2) through treachery, or by any of the other five qualifying circumstances, duly alleged
in the Information. 25 In the case at hand, the fact of C’s death is undisputed. Similarly, there is no question that
the killing is neither parricide nor infanticide. It has also been sufficiently established that the killing is attended
with treachery. the prosecution sufficiently proved that AAA, an unarmed minor, sustained a single, but fatal wound
on his back through from a firearm. This is more than sufficient to prove that the killing is treacherous since the
attack was so sudden and unexpected that C was not given an opportunity to defend himself.

3) robbery with rape

People fo the Philippines Vs. Antonio Llamera y Atienza

G.R. No. 218703. April 23, 2018

Edwin, rodel, victor and Alvin, all were armed with a pistol, entered the house of BB and ransacked the whole house
in search of money. Edwin, upon seeing the niece of BB, Barbie, told the latter to go downstairs and lie on the living
floor. While the others were busy ransacking the house, Edwin dragged Barbie to the office. There in the office,
Edwin assaulted Barbie by inserting his middle finger into the vagina of Barbie. Rodel knocked on the door and upon
seeing them, the latter let Barbie go outside the room.The court found them guilty of robbery while Edwin was
convicted with robbery with rape.

Is Edwin liable?

Yes, Edwin is liable for the crime of robbery with rape. To be convicted with rape, the elements are (1) the taking of
personal property is committed with violence or intimidation against person; (2) the property taken belongs to
another; (3) the taking is characterized by intent to gain and (4) the robbery is accompanied by rape. In this case,
the prosecution established that Edwin and his co- accused barged into the house of the victims armed with
handguns. They demanded BB to give them money and guns. Intent to gain, as an element of the crime of robbery ,
is an internal act; hence, presumed from the unlawful taking of things. Having established that the personal
properties of the victims were unlawfully taken by the accused, intent to gain was sufficiently proven. Thus the first
three elements were clearly established. As to the fourth element. It was clearly established by Barbie herself
during trial that indeed he was assaulted by Edwin by inserting his finger into her genitalia during the incident of
robbery.