Supreme Court Reports Annotated People, plaintiff-appelle, vs.

Fernando Pugay and Benjamin Samson, accused-appellants, 167 SCRA 439, GR No. L-74324, November 17, 1988 Facts: At a town fiesta, Pugay and Samson saw Bayani Miranda, a retardate and a friend of Pugay, walking nearby, and Pugay started making fun of him. Pugay Later took a can of gasoline and poured it on Miranda. Samson then set Miranda on fire making a human torch out of him, causing his death. The accused were charged with the crime murder. Issue/s: 1. WON conspiracy is present. 2. If not, what are the criminal liabilities of Pugay and Samson? Held: 1. No. There was no evidence showing previous conspiracy of criminal purpose and intention between the two accused immediately before the commission of the crime for the meeting of the accused and Miranda are merely accidental; the criminal liability of the two accused is individual and not collective, and each of them is liable for acts committed by him. 2. Pugay failed to exercise all the diligence necessary to avoid every undesirable consequence arising from any act committed by his companions, thus finding him guilty of homicide through reckless imprudence. While Samson, even if he merely intended to burn the victims clothes, will not be relieved, for although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended, criminal liability shall be incurred, thus finding him guilty of homicide. Philippine Reports Annotated People, plaintiff-appelle, vs. Julian Eriia, defendant-appelant 50 Phil 998, GR No. 26298, January 20, 1927 Facts: Eriia was caught in the act of having carnal intercourse with the victim of 3 years and 11 months. The examination only found a slight inflammation of the outer part of the genital organ and its doubted whether the penetration was effected; that the child was of such tender age that complete entry is not possible. Issue: WON the crime of rape is consummated. Held: No. There without conclusive evidence of penetration of the organ, the defendant, with the benefit of doubt, can only be found guilty of frustrated rape, but with the fact that the defendant was living in the house of the parents of the child, there is aggravating circumstance of abuse of confidence, hence the penalty of maximum degree shall be imposed. Appealed and modified, defendant is hereby found guilty of frustrated rape.

Supreme Courts Annotated People, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Manuel Tan, and Hector Selmo, accusedappelants 145 SCRA 614, GR No. L-53834 Facts: Tan and Selmo were accused guilty of Robbery with Homicide with the supreme penalty of death. On the day of May 13, 1977, Tan, Selmo, Navarro, coaccused-turned-witness, and Guzman, the victim, were together in a jeepney owned by Guzman. The next day, Tan, as instructed by Selmo, struck Guzman with a pistol in the head, shot and left him dead; the 3 tires of the jeepney were sold. Navarro testified against Tan and Selmo. Issue: Whether Navarros testimony is credible. Held: Yes. Despite Tans and Selmos alibi, the rule is that the testimony of only one witness, if credible and positive is sufficient. Navarros testimony corroborated the autopsy report and the facts he narrated would not be so detailed had it not actually occurred. Moreover, Navarros positive identification of the appellants as the perpetrators of the crime, the alibi dwindles into nothingness. Judgment is affirmed, but with reduced penalty.

Philippine Reports Annotated People, plaintiff-appelle, vs. Antonio Oanis and Alberto Galanta, defendant-appellant 74 Phil 257, G.R. No. L-47722 July 27, 1943 Facts: Chief of Police Oanis and Corporal Galanta were instructed to arrest Anselmo Balagtas, a notorious criminal and an escaped convict, and if overpowered, to get him dead or alive. Proceeding to his house, and on seeing a man sleeping with his back towards the door, they fired at him, without first making any inquiry about his identity. The man, who was Serapio Tecson, an innocent citizen, and not Balagtas, died. Issue: WON the defendants were guilty of murder. Held: Yes. Rule 109, Section 2 (2) provides, No unnecessary or unreasonable force shall be used in making an arrest, and the person arrested shall not be subject to any greater restraint than is necessary for his detention. It is only when the fugitive from justice is determined to fight the officers of the law who are trying to capture

him that killing him would be justified. As the deceased was killed while asleep, the crime committed by both was murder.

Philippine Reports Annotated United States, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Ah Chong, defendant-appellant 15 Phil 488, GR No. 5272, March 19, 1910 Facts: Ah Chong was awakened by someone trying to open the door of his room. He called out twice but received no answer. After he threatened the intruder, he was suddenly struck by a chair and believing that he was attacked, seized a kitchen knife, struck and fatally wounded the intruder who turned out to be his roommate. He was charged with murder. Issue: WON Ah Chong is criminally liable for the death of his roommate. Held: No. Under such circumstances, there is no criminal liability, provided that the ignorance or mistake of fact was not due to negligence or bad faith; doing no more than exercising his right of self-defense from the danger which he believed threatened his person and his property. The judgment was reversed and the defendant was acquitted.

Supreme Court Reports Annotated People, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Marife Bello (Joann Redillo), Eladio Consuelo, accused-appellants 428 SCRA 388, GR No. 124871, May 13, 2004 Facts: Accused Bello and Eladio were found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of robbery with homicide. Accused were arrested singly after renting a room at a lodge wherein a man, a messenger/collector in a moneychanger, was found stabbed and dead. There were no actual witnesses to the actual commission of the crime so the prosecution built its case through circumstantial evidence. Issue: WON it can be proved that conspiracy exists. Held: Yes. Conspiracy exists where the plotters agree, expressly or impliedly, to commit the crime and decide to pursue it. Consequently, direct proof is not essential to establish it. It may be inferred from proof of facts and circumstances which, taken together, indicate that accused are parts of the complete plan to

commit the crime. Along with the 2 accuseds completely different stories are the testimonies of the roomboys, the OIC of the moneychanger, etc. and the rule is that where there is positive testimony of eyewitnesses regarding the presence of the accused at the locus criminis on the date and time the crime was committed, a negative defense of alibi is undeserving of weight or credence. Decision is affirmed with modification.

Supreme Court Reports Annotated Evangeline Ladonga, petitioner, vs. People, respondent 451 SCRA 673, GR No. 141066, February 17, 2005 Facts: The petitioner and her co-accused husband, Adronico Ladonga, were convicted for violation of BP Blg. 22 after issuing 3 checks payable to one Alfredo Oculam which, upon encashment, bounced for the reason Closed Account, thus a criminal complaint. Petitioner contends that the principle of conspiracy is not applicable to BP Blg. 22 which is a special law; moreover, she is not the signatory of the checks and had no participation in the issuance thereof. Issue/s: 1. WON the principle of conspiracy is applicable to BP Blg. 22. 2. WON conspiracy exists. Held: 1. Yes. Article 10 of the Revised Penal Code provides on its second clause that RPC shall be supplementary to special laws unless the latter specifically provided the contrary, which BP Blg. 22 doesnt state so. 2. No. Overt acts leading to conspiracy may be of active participation or of moral assistance; and the prosecution failed to prove that the petitioner performed any overt act in furtherance of the alleged conspiracy. As testified by Alfredo Oculam, petitioner was merely present when her husband Adronico signed the check, and no participation of the petitioner was described. Conspiracy must be established, not by conjectures, but by positive and conclusive evidence. Petitioner Evangeline Ladonga was acquitted. Supreme Court Reports Annotated People, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Fernando Manungas, Jr. (Percy), accusedappellant 231 SCRA 1, GR No. 91552-55, March 10, 1994 Facts: Manungas, Jr. convinced 3 persons to apply as janitors in Saudi Arabia, thus the preparation of documents and the requirement of payments transacted with and given to the accused; the 3 failed to leave for Saudi Arabia, hence the

complaint; accused-appellant was found guilty of 3 counts of estafa, and illegal recruitment. Issue: WON Manungas, Jr. was guilty of Illegal Recruitment. Held: Yes. The accused executed acts which unquestionably constitutes acts of recruitment. It may be that the ZGRPA, which he is the operations manager, is a duly licensed recruitment agency, but the recruitment of private complainants was accuseds own personal undertaking, not the agencys. Besides, there is illegal recruitment when one gives the impression of his ability to send a worker abroad, which the accused did, and the crime of illegal recruitment is qualified when committed against three or more persons. The decision is affirmed. Supreme Court Reports Annotated People, appellee, vs. Danny Delos Santos, appellant 403 SCRA 153, GR No. 135919, May 9, 2003 Facts: On November 1997, De Leon witnessed the gruesome killing of Flores, while drinking with 3 men, one was the witness Tablate. The two were positive of Delos Santos as the perpetrator but testified only on January 1998. Despite Delos Santoss alibi, he was found guilty of murder. Issue: WON the testimonies of the witnesses are credible even after the 2-month period. Held: Yes. It is but natural for witnesses to avoid being involved in a criminal proceeding particularly when the crime committed is of such gravity as to show the cruelty of the perpetrator, the fear of retaliation can have a paralyzing effect to the witnesses. Besides, settled is the rule that positive identification x x x prevails over alibi and denial. Decision is affirmed with modification.

Supreme Court Reports Annnotated People, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Mariano Esteban, accused-appellants 103 SCRA 520, GR No. L-27046 and L-27047, March 30, 1981 Facts: In the afternoon of May, 1963, Maravilla had an altercation with the accused Esteban and one Camaya, and later that night, there were successive gunshots fired in the yard where Maravilla and some others were drinking, killing one Maria Pascua and wounding Maravilla. Maravilla saw and pointed, right after the incident, to Esteban and Mati as the gun wielders, then only after more than 6 months,

implicated Camaya, as well. Esteban was charged with murder for the death of Pascua and frustrated murder for Maravilla. Issue: 1. WON Maravillas belated identification of Camaya is credible. 2. WON Esteban is guilty of murder. Held: 1. No. Belated identification of Camaya is inconclusive evidence of his guilt, and the prosecution was not able to explain that gap in its evidence, and that which lacks spontaneity is not credible. Guilt not having been established to a moral certainty resulted in Camayas acquittal. 2. Yes. The fact that Esteban intended to kill Maravilla and in the course of the assault incidentally killed Maria Pascua makes him liable for murder just the same because a person is criminally liable although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended.