Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
CRIMINAL LAW
G.R. No. 193768. March 5, 2014People of
the Philippines Vs. Jerry Caranto y Propeta
Jerry was arrested during a buybust operation conducted on 24
July 2002 by the members of the
DEU of the Taguig PNP. A buybust operation is a form of
entrapment employed by peace
officers to apprehend prohibited
drug law violators in the act of
committing a drug-related offense.
Non-compliance
with
the
requirements of Section 21, par. 1 of
Article II of R.A. No. 9165
The required procedure on the seizure and
custody of drugs is embodied in Section
21, paragraph 1, Article II of R.A. No.
9165, which states:
1) The apprehending team having initial
custody and control of the drugs shall,
immediately
after
seizure
and
confiscation, physically inventory and
photograph the same in the presence
of the accused or the person/s from
whom such items were confiscated
and/or seized, or his/her representative or
counsel, a representative from the media
and the Department of Justice (DOJ), and
any elected public official who shall be
required to sign the copies of the
inventory and be given a copy thereof.
(Emphasis supplied)
This is implemented by Section 21(a),
Article II of the Implementing Rules and
Regulations of R.A. No. 9165, which
reads:
(a) The apprehending officer/team having
initial custody and control of the drugs
shall, immediately after seizure and
confiscation, physically inventory and
photograph the same in the presence of
the accused or the person/s from whom
such items were confiscated and/or
seized, or his/her representative or
counsel, a representative from the media
ISSUE:
CONVICTION
FOR
MURDER;
qualified by taking advantage of superior
strength and
employing means to weaken the defense
and afford impunity.
Assuming that the prosecution witnesses
failed to identify exactly who inflicted the
fatal wounds on Joey during the
commotion,
Erwins
liability
is
not
diminished since he and the others with
him acted with concert in beating up and
ultimately killing Joey. Conspiracy makes
all the assailants equally liable as coprincipals by direct participation.
Since about 15 men, including accused
Erwin, pounced on their one helpless
victim, relentlessly bludgeoned him on the
head, and stabbed him on the stomach
until he was dead, there is no question
that the accused took advantage of their
superior strength.
G.R. No. 207819. March 12, 2014People of
the Philippines Vs. Guillermo B. Candano,
Jr.
The essential issue for the Courts
resolution is whether or not
Cadanos conviction should be
upheld. [3 counts of statutory
rape]
Statutory rape is committed by sexual
intercourse with a woman below 12 years
of age regardless of her consent, or the
lack of it, to the sexual act. Proof of force,
intimidation or consent is unnecessary as
they are not elements of statutory rape,
considering that the absence of free
consent is conclusively presumed when
the victim is below the age of 12. At that
age, the law presumes that the victim
does not possess discernment and is
incapable of giving intelligent consent to
the sexual act. Thus, to convict an
accused of the crime of statutory rape, the
prosecution carries the burden of proving:
(a) the age of the complainant; (b) the
identity of the accused; and (c) the sexual
intercourse between the accused and the
and
up
to
now
remains unaccounted
the
for.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
and
that
appellant
had
performed
recruitment activities such as promising
employment abroad, encouraging job
applications, and providing copies of job
orders.
The
private
complainants
testimonies are consistent and corroborate
one another on material points, such as
the amount of the placement fees asked,
and the purported country of destination
and nature of work.
It was not necessary for the prosecution
to still prove that appellant himself
received the placement fees from private
complainants and issued receipts for the
same, given the finding of both the RTC
and the Court of Appeals of the existence
of conspiracy among appellant and his coaccused Hanelita and Daud, appellants
wife
and
mother-in-law,
respectively. When there is conspiracy,
the act of one is the act of all.23 It is not
essential that there be actual proof that all
the conspirators took a direct part in every
act. It is sufficient that they acted in
concert pursuant to the same objective.24
Estafa
We likewise affirm the conviction of
appellant for three counts of estafa
committed
against
the
private
complainants in Criminal Case Nos. 030123, 03-0127, and 03-0130, based on
the very same evidence that proved
appellants criminal liability for illegal
recruitment.
It is settled that a person may be charged
and convicted separately of illegal
recruitment under Republic Act No. 8042,
in relation to the Labor Code, and estafa
under Article 315, paragraph 2(a) of the
Revised Penal Code. As we explained in
People
v.
Cortez
and
Yabut28:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
In this jurisdiction, it is settled that a
person who commits illegal recruitment
may be charged and convicted separately
of illegal recruitment under the Labor
Code and estafa under par. 2(a) of Art.
315 of the Revised Penal Code. The
offense of illegal recruitment is malum
17
Undaunted,
Syhunliong
now
presents to this Court the issues of
whether or not: (a) the trial courts
denial of a motion to quash
information may be validly assailed
through a special civil action for
certiorari; (b) Rivera may validly
question the denial of her motion
to quash before the CA after
voluntarily allowing herself to be
arraigned
even
during
the
pendency of such motion to quash;
(c) the CA may validly review on
certiorari what was, at best, an
error of judgment made by the
RTC; (d) the CA correctly ruled
that the facts charged in the
18
19
20
21
22
23
as
24
25
26
27
confidence;
2) by means of false pretenses or
fraudulent acts; or
3) through fraudulent means.
The first way of committing estafa
is known as estafa with abuse of
confidence, while the second and
the third ways cover estafa by
means of deceit.
This Court finds that the present
case does not constitute estafa in
either form.
1) That the accused defrauded
another
(a) by abuse of confidence, or
(b) by means of deceit
As regards the first element, we
find that there was neither abuse
of confidence nor deceit in this
case.
It is the main contention of
petitioner that she was defrauded
through the use of her signature in
blank and through the use of the
first set of document she signed,
which
has
supposedly
been
abandoned.
Petitioner is being
held personally liable for the loan
of
MTI
by
virtue
of
the
Comprehensive Surety Agreement
(CSA) she signed in her personal
capacity for the initial application
for the USD10.5 million loan from
FEBTC.
Petitioner alleges that
since the second application for
USD 10 million loans was the one
granted by FEBTC, the second set
of documents supporting that loan
should be controlling. In that
second
application,
petitioner
signed the CSA in her capacity as
president
of
MLM
Logistics
International.
On the charge of abuse of
confidence, we find that there is no
evidence that could possibly lead to
a conclusion that respondents
28
As
a
consequence,
even
if
petitioner paid the amount of
Php5,903,172.30, we find that it
was legally paid pursuant to a valid
and existing agreement which
petitioner
voluntarily
entered
into. Therefore, the payment did
not constitute damage or prejudice
to petitioner.
Noel A. Lasanas Vs. People of the
Philippines G.R. No. 159031. June 23,
2014
Any person who contracts a second
marriage without first having a
judicial declaration of the nullity of
his or her first marriage, albeit on
its face void and inexistent for lack
of a marriage license, is guilty of
bigamy as defined and penalized
29
30
In
the
present
case,
the
petitioner admitted that he has
authority
to
solemnize
a
31
mockery of marriage.
32
33
suffer:
34
35
A
complaint
or
The question has been settled in Manlangit
information is sufficient if it states the
v. Sandiganbayan19 where we ruled that
name of the accused; the designation
prior demand to liquidate is not necessary
of the offense given by the statute;
to hold an accountable officer liable for
the acts or omissions complained of as
violation of Article 218 of the Revised
constituting the offense; the name of
Penal Code:chanroblesvirtuallawlibra===
the offended party; the approximate
Nowhere in the provision does it require
date of the commission of the
that there first be a demand before an
offense; and the place where the
accountable officer is held liable for a
offense was committed.
violation of the crime. The law is very
clear. Where none is provided, the court
When an offense is committed by more
may
not
introduce
exceptions
or
than one person, all of them shall be
conditions, neither may it engraft into the
included
in
the
complaint
or
law
qualifications
not
contemplated.
information.
Where the law is clear and unambiguous,
it must be taken to mean exactly what it
Sec. 11. Date of commission of the
says and the court has no choice but to
offense. - It is not necessary to
see to it that its mandate is obeyed. There
state
in
the
complaint
or
is no room for interpretation, but only
information the precise date the
application.
offense was committed except
when it is a material ingredient of
the offense. The offense may be
People of the Philippines Vs. Rael Delfin
alleged to have been committed on
G.R. No. 201572. July 9, 2014
a date as near as possible to the
Variance In the Date of the
actual
date
of
its
Commission of the Murder as
commission.
(Emphasis
supplied).
Alleged
Prepared by: ATTY. RESCI ANGELLI RIZADA, RN
Ateneo de Davao University
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
be
III,
the
no
the
43
44
we
45
46
47
48
49
50
Further,
her
alleged
verbal
agreement with Seven Sphere that
she
can
render
services
in
exchange for the dismissal of the
case, casts no significant bearing
to the herein proceedings. Only
the State may validly waive the
criminal
action
against
an
accused.28 The consequences of
such agreement with Seven Sphere
can affect only her civil liability to
the former for the value of the
misappropriated
jewelry
items.
Such matter can be more properly
threshed out during the execution
stage of the civil aspect of this case
before the trial court where the
evidence of such verbal agreement
as well as the deductions made on
the petitioners salary can be
received.
51
Campos
could
have
avoided
prosecution by paying the amounts
due on the checks or making
arrangements for payment in full
within five (5) days after receiving
notice. Unfortunately for Campos,
these circumstances were not
established in the instant case. She
failed to sufficiently disclose the
terms of her alleged arrangement
with FWCC, and to establish that
the same had been fully complied
with so as to completely satisfy the
amounts covered by the subject
checks. Moreover, documents to
prove such fact should have been
presented before the MeTC during
the trial, yet Campos opted to be
tried in absentia, and thus waived
her right to present evidence.
While Campos blamed her former
counsel for alleged negligence that
led to her failure to be present
during the trial,17 it is settled that
the negligence of counsel binds his
52
or
her
client.
Given
the
circumstances, the Court finds no
cogent reason to reverse the ruling
of the CA which affirmed the
conviction of Campos.
People of the Philippines Vs. Bobby Torres
G.R. No. 189850. September 22, 2014
In an appeal by an accused, he
waives
his right not to be subject to
double
jeopardy.
We cannot give credence to appellants
contentions. An appeal in [a] criminal
case opens the entire case for review
on any question including one not
raised by the parties.26 [W]hen an
accused appeals from the sentence of
the trial court, he waives the
constitutional safeguard against double
jeopardy and throws the whole case
open to the review of the appellate
court, which is then called upon to
render such judgment as law and
justice dictate, whether favorable or
unfavorable to the appellant.27 In
other words, when appellant appealed
the RTCs judgment of conviction for
murder, he is deemed to have
abandoned his right to invoke the
prohibition on double jeopardy since it
became the duty of the appellate court
to correct errors as may be found in
the
appealed
judgment.
Thus,
appellant could not have been placed
twice in jeopardy when the CA
modified the ruling of the RTC by
finding him guilty of robbery with
homicide
as
charged
in
the
Information instead of murder.
Appellant is guilty of the crime of
robbery with homicide.
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
53
54
55
had no by
participation
in the
construction
(a) that money, goods or other personal property is he
received
the offender
in trust
or on
of the
facilitiesinvolving
do not, the
in any
strip
commission, or for administration, or under any other
obligation
dutyway,
to make
him of both his powers and duties related
delivery of or to return the same[;]
to the
implementation
of the
(b) that there be misappropriation or conversion of such
money
or property by
the project.
offender, or
denial on his part of such receipt[;]
second
element,andColomas
(c) that such misappropriation or conversion or denial As
is toto
the the
prejudice
of another;
13
argument
is basically a denial of bad faith
(d) there is demand by the offended party to the offender.
on his part. He claims that his statements
56
57
The
undue
injury
caused
to
the
government is evident from Colomas
statement of a cost of RTS 9 higher than
that discovered upon inspection. It bears
stressing
that
the
Sandiganbayan
accorded credence on Engr. Vacnots
testimony that the cost of the facilities
constructed
in
RTS
9
only
cost
P3,180,000.00, more or less, lower than
what was reported by Coloma. Contrary to
Colomas claim, this information was
supported by detailed costings and was
unequivocally testified on during trial.
Despite the opportunity to cross-examine
the witness, Coloma failed to controvert
the evidence against him. This fact, taken
together with the showing that no 50capacity barracks was ever built on the
site as opposed to Colomas reportage,
established that the construction of RTS 9
was replete with irregularities. Otherwise
stated, the public funds disbursed for the
project were not utilized in strict accord to
its purpose. Thus, the worth of public
funds spent for the project does not match
the meager benefit to be derived
therefrom.
People of the Philippines Vs. Richard
Guinto y San AndresG.R. No. 198314.
September 24, 2014
In illegal sale of dangerous drugs, the
prosecution must establish the identity of
the buyer and the seller, the object and
58
59
60
61
62
1.
Death
of
the
accused pending appeal of
his conviction extinguishes his
criminal liability as well as the
civil
liability
based
solely
thereon. As opined by Justice
63
the
civil
action.
In
such
case, the statute of limitations on
the civil
liability is deemed
interrupted during the pendency of
the criminal case, conformably with
provisions of Article 1155 of the
Civil Code, that should thereby
avoid any apprehension on a
possible
privation
of
right by prescription. (Citations
omitted; emphasis ours.)
64
65
66
suppressed,
possibly
through
connivance, then the exception
applies
and
the
period
of
prescription shall be reckoned from
the date of discovery thereof.
In the case at bar, involving as it does the
grant of behest loans which We have
recognized as a violation that, by their
nature, could be concealed from the public
eye
by
the
simple
expedient
of
suppressing
their
documentation,25cralawred the second
mode applies. We, therefore, count the
running of the prescriptive period from the
date of discovery thereof on January 4,
1993, when the Presidential Ad Hoc FactFinding Committee reported to the
President its findings and conclusions
anent RHC's loans. This being the case,
the filing by the PCGG of its AffidavitComplaint before the Office of the
Ombudsman on January 6, 2003, a little
over ten (10) years from the date of
discovery of the crimes, is clearly belated.
Undoubtedly, the ten-year period within
which to institute the action has already
lapsed, making it proper for the
Ombudsman
to
dismiss
petitioner's
complaint on the ground of prescription.
Simply put, and as correctly held by the
Ombudsman, prescription has already set
in when petitioner PCGG filed the
Affidavit-Complaint on January 6, 2003.
The People of the Philippines Vs. Engr.
Rodolfo Yecyec, Rogelio Bias, Isidro
Victa, et al.G.R. No. 183551. November
12, 2014
To determine whether probable cause
exists and to charge those believed to
have committed the crime as defined by
law, is a function that belongs to the
public prosecutor. It is an executive
function.22 The public prosecutor, who is
given a broad discretion to determine
whether probable cause exists and to
charge those believed to have committed
the crime as defined by law and, thus,
should be held for trial, has the quasijudicial authority to determine whether or
not a criminal case must be filed in
court.23 Whether or not that function has
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
does
not
merit
77
the
Court
78
79
80
81
respondents
reputation.28chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Lastly, having duly proved that all the
elements of libel are present in this case,
we rule that the damages awarded by
the trial court and affirmed by the
appellate court must be modified and
equitably reduced.
In awarding damages in libel cases, the
court is given ample discretion to
determine the amount, depending upon
the facts of the particular case.29 Article
2219 of the Civil Code expressly
authorizes the recovery of moral damages
in cases of libel, slander or any other form
of defamation. However, while no proof
of pecuniary loss is necessary in order
that moral damages may be awarded, x x
x it is nevertheless essential that the
claimant should satisfactorily show the
existence of the factual basis of damages
and its causal connection to defendants
acts.30
Considering that respondent
sufficiently justified his claim for damages
(i.e. he testified that he was embarrassed
by the said letters [and] ashamed to show
his face in [sic] government offices 31), we
find him entitled to moral and exemplary
damages.
Rogelio J. Gonzaga Vs. People of the
Philippines G.R. No. 195671. January
21, 2015
The Courts Ruling
82
circumstances, is indicative of
imprudent behavior.As a motorist,
Rogelio was bound to exercise
ordinary care in such affair by
driving at a reasonable rate of
speed commensurate with the
conditions encountered, as this
would enable him to keep the
vehicle under control and avoid
injury
to
others
using
the
highway.43]
Moreover,
it
is
elementary in traffic school that a
driver
slows
down
before
negotiating a curve as it may be
reasonably anticipated that another
vehicle may appear from the
opposite direction at any moment.
Hence, excessive speed, combined
with other circumstances such as
the occurrence of the accident on
or near a curve, as in this case,
constitutes
negligence.44
Consequently, the
Court finds that Rogelio acted
recklessly and imprudently in
driving at a fast speed on the
wrong side of the road while
approaching the curve where the
incident
happened,
thereby
rendering him criminally liable, as
well as civilly accountable for the
material
damages
resulting
therefrom.
People of the Philippines Vs. Jomer Butial
G.R. No. 192785. February 4, 2015
The prosecutions evidence must establish
that the illegal drug presented in court is
the same illegal drug actually recovered
from
appellant.1chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
BBB Vs. AAAG.R. No. 193225. February 9,
2015
ISSUE:
ISSUANCE
OF
PERMANENT
PROTECTION ORDER (RA 9262)
Disquisition of the Court
The instant petition is not a proper
subject of a compromise agreement.
The Court cannot take the simplest course
of finally writing finis to the instant
petition by rendering a judgment merely
83
84
financial support.
This Court, thus, affirms the CAs order to
remand the case for the RTC to resolve
the question of custody. Since the children
are now all older than seven years of age,
they can choose for themselves whom
they want to stay with. If all the three
children would manifest to the RTC their
choice to stay with AAA, then the PPO
issued by RTC shall continue to be
executed in its entirety. However, if any of
the three children would choose to be
under BBBs care, necessarily, the PPO
issued against BBB relative to them is to
be modified. The PPO, in its entirety,
would remain effective only as to AAA and
any of the children who opt to stay with
her.
Consequently,
the
RTC
may
accordingly alter the manner and amount
of financial support BBB should give
depending on who shall finally be awarded
custody over the children. Pursuant to
Articles 201 and 202 of the Family Code,
BBBs resources and means and the
necessities of AAA and the children are the
essential factors in determining the
amount of support, and the same can be
reduced or increased proportionately. The
RTC is reminded to be circumspect in
resolving the matter of support, which is a
mutual responsibility of the spouses. The
parties do not dispute that AAA is now
employed as well, thus, the RTC should
consider the same with the end in mind of
promoting the best interests of the
children.
85
filed
the
the
II.
Whether
the
prosecution
of
respondents for the crime of
accomplice to hazing can proceed
in spite of the dismissal with
finality of the case against the
principal accused
Whether the Information filed
against respondents contains all
the material averments for the
prosecution of the crime of
accomplice to hazing under the
Anti-Hazing Law
86
87
88