AT4-CLJ4 Jose federico DG.

Aniiceto BSCRIM lll-2

Digest the following cases:

1. UMIL v RAMOS (187 SCRA 85) July 9, 1990 G.R. 81567

Facts:

The respondents assert that the privilege of the writ of habeas corpus is not available to the petitioners
as they have been legally arrested and are detained by virtue of valid informations filed in court against
them. The petitioners counter that their detention is unlawful as their arrests were made without
warrant and, that no preliminary investigation was first conducted, so that the informations filed against
them are null and void. The record shows that the persons in whose behalf these petitions for habeas
corpus have been filed, had freshly committed or were actually committing an offense, when
apprehended, so that their arrests without a warrant were clearly justified, and that they are, further,
detained by virtue of valid information filed against them in court

Issue:

Whether Dural can be validly arrested without any warrant of arrest for the crime of rebellion.

Ruling:

Yes. Dural was arrested for being a member of the New People’s Army (NPA), an outlawed subversive
organization. Subversion being a continuing offense, the arrest of Rolando Dural without warrant is
justified as it can be said that he was committing an offense when arrested. The crimes of rebellion,
subversion, conspiracy or proposal to commit such crimes, and crimes or offenses committed in
furtherance thereof or in connection therewith constitute direct assaults against the State and are in the
nature of continuing crimes. The arrest of persons involved in the rebellion whether as its fighting armed
elements, or for committing non-violent acts but in furtherance of the rebellion, is more an act of
capturing them in the course of an armed conflict, to quell the rebellion, than for the purpose of
immediately prosecuting them in court for a statutory offense.

2. PEOPLE v LOVERDIORO (250 SCRA 389) November 29, 1995 G.R. 112235
Facts:

Off-duty policeman SPO3 Jesus Lucilo was walking along Burgos St., away from the Daraga, Albay Public
Market when a man suddenly walked beside him, pulled a .45 caliber gun from his waist, aimed the gun
at the policeman's right ear and fired. The man who shot Lucilo had three other companions with him,
one of whom shot the fallen policeman four times as he lay on the ground. After taking the latter's gun,
the man and his companions boarded a tricycle and fled.

The incident was witnessed from a distance of about nine meters by Nestor Armenta, a 25 year old
welder from Pilar, Sorsogon, who claimed that he knew both the victim and the man who fired the fatal
shot. Armenta identified the man who fired at the deceased as Elias Lovedioro y Castro, his nephew
(appellant's father was his first cousin) and alleged that he knew the victim from the fact that the latter
was a resident of Bagumbayan.

Issue:

Whether or not accused-appellant committed Rebellion under Art. 134 and 135 or Murder under Article
248 of the RPC?

Ruling:

The court finds the accused ELIAS LOVEDIORO guilty beyond reasonable doubt as principal, acting in
conspiracy with his co-accused who are still at large, of the crime of murder, defined and penalized
under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, and hereby sentences him to suffer the penalty of
Reclusion Perpetua with all the accessories provided by law; to pay the heirs of the deceased SPO3 Jesus
Lucilo through the widow, Mrs. Remeline Lucilo, the amount of Fifty Thousand (P50,000.00) Pesos
representing the civil indemnity for death; to pay the said widow the sum of Thirty Thousand
(P30,000.00) Pesos representing reasonable moral damages; and to pay the said widow the sum of
Eighteen Thousand Five Hundred Eighty-Eight (P18,588.00) Pesos, representing actual damages, without
subsidiary imprisonment however, in case of insolvency on the part of the said accused.
3. PEOPLE v GERONIMO (100 PHIL 90) October 23, 1956 G.R. L-8936

Facts:

The accused being members of the Communist Party of the Philippines having come to an agreement
and decided to commit Rebellion, conspiring together and confederating among themselves to take
arms against the government. Accused Geronimo entered a not guilty-plea. But when the case was
called for trial he asked the permission of the court to substitute his original plea with that of guilty. The
fiscal recommended the penalty of life imprisonment be imposed taking into account the guilty plea as a
mitigating circumstance. However, Geronimo’s counsel argued that the penalty imposable is only that of
prision mayor.

Issue:

Is Geronimo guilty of the complex crime of Rebellion with murders, robberies and kidnappings or of
simple rebellion?

Ruling:

The accused is only liable of simple rebellion because any or all the acts described in Article 135 of the
Revised Penal Code, when committed as a means to or in furtherance of the subversive ends described
in Article 134 of the same code is absorbed in the crime of rebellion and cannot be regarded or
penalized as distinct crimes.
4. PEOPLE v UMALI (96 PHIL 185) November 29, 1954 G.R. L-5803

Facts:

Francisco Manalo, was investigated by operatives of the Tiaong, Quezon Police Department and for
which a case for violation of the Dangerous Drug Act was filed against him. He was likewise facing other
charges such as concealment of deadly weapon and other crimes against property. Pat. Felino Noguerra
went to the Tiaong Municipal Jail, and sought the help of Francisco to identify the source of the
marijuana. In return he asked the policeman to help him in some cases pending against him. He did not
negotiate his case for violating the dangerous drug act, as he has entered a plea of guilty.Pfc. Sarmiento,
Chief of the Investigation Division gave Manalo four (4) marked P5.00 bills to buy marijuana from
sources known to him. Few minutes thereafter, Manalo returned with two (2) foils of dried marijuana
which were allegedly bought from the accused Gloria Umali. Thereafter, he was asked by the police
investigators to give a statement on the manner and circumstances of how he was able to purchase
marijuana foils from accused Gloria Umali.

Issue:

Whether or not Manalo’s testimony should be given credit

Ruling:

The appellant vehemently denied the findings of the lower court and insisted that said court
committedreversible errors in convicting her. She alleged that witness Francisco Manalo is not reputed
to betrustworthy and reliable and that his words should not be taken on its face value. Furthermore,
hestressed that said witness has several charges in court and because of his desire to have some of
hiscases dismissed, he was likely to tell falsehood.Rule 130, Section 20 of the Revised Rules of Court
provides that:Except as provided in the next succeeding section, all persons who canperceive, and
perceiving can make known their perception to others may be witnesses.
5. PEOPLE v CABRERA (43 PHIL 64) March 6, 1922 G.R. 17748

Facts

The Philippine Constabulary has grudges against the police of Manila and they want to inflict revenge for
the following reasons: (1) On December 13, 1920, a Manila police arrested a woman who is a member of
the household of a constabulary soldier and was allegedly abused by the said policeman. (2) Private
Macasinag of the Constabulary was shot by a Manila police and was mortally wounded. A day after the
incident, a rumor spread among the Constabulary that the Police who shot Macasinag was back to his
original duties while Macasinag was declared dead. There were also rumors that the said shooting was
ordered. On the night of December 15 some members of the Constabulary escaped their barracks
through a window "the saw out the window bars"

Issue:

• Is there connivance/conspiracy between the accused

• Are the accused property convicted of violation of and treason sedition law

Ruling:

The treason sedition law makes no distinction between the persons to which itapplies. What is
important is that there is a publicrising to incite or inflict any act of hate or revengeupon the person or
property of any official or agentof the Insular government or of a provincial ormunicipal government.