Criminal Law Digest 2

Published on June 2016 | Categories: Documents | Downloads: 48 | Comments: 0 | Views: 967
of 57
Download PDF   Embed   Report

Criminal Law Digest 2

Comments

Content

LAW 109 : CRIMINAL LAW 1 DIGESTS SECRETARY OF JUSTICE v. LANTION [322 SCRA 160 (2000)] Nature: Petition for review of a decision of the Manila R C Fact : !n "#ne 1$% 1&&& the 'e(art)ent of "#stice received fro) the 'e(art)ent of *orei+n Affairs a re,#est for the e-tradition of (rivate res(ondent Mar. "i)ene/ to the 01S1 he 2rand "#r3 4ndict)ent% the warrant for his arrest% and other s#((ortin+ doc#)ents for said e-tradition were attached alon+ with the re,#est1 Char+es incl#de5 11 Cons(irac3 to co))it offense or to defra#d the 0S 21 Atte)(t to evade or defeat ta31 *ra#d 63 wire% radio% or television 71 *alse state)ent or entries 81 9lection contri6#tion in na)e of another he 'e(art)ent of "#stice ('!")% thro#+h a desi+nated (anel (roceeded with the technical eval#ation and assess)ent of the e-tradition treat3 which the3 fo#nd havin+ )atters needed to 6e addressed1 Res(ondent% then re,#ested for co(ies of all the doc#)ents incl#ded in the e-tradition re,#est and for hi) to 6e +iven a)(le ti)e to assess it1 he Secretar3 of "#stice denied re,#est on the ff1 +ro#nds5 11 :e fo#nd it (re)at#re to sec#re hi) co(ies (rior to the co)(letion of the eval#ation1 At that (oint in ti)e% the '!" is in the (rocess of eval#atin+ whether the (roced#res and re,#ire)ents #nder the relevant law (P' 106&;Phili((ine 9-tradition <aw) and treat3 (RP=0S 9-tradition reat3) have 6een co)(lied with 63 the Re,#estin+ 2overn)ent1 9val#ation 63 the '!" of the doc#)ents is not a (reli)inar3 investi+ation li.e in cri)inal cases )a.in+ the constit#tionall3 +#aranteed ri+hts of the acc#sed in cri)inal (rosec#tion ina((lica6le1 21 he 01S1 re,#ested for the (revention of #na#thori/ed disclos#re of the infor)ation in the doc#)ents1 31 *inall3% co#ntr3 is 6o#nd to >ienna convention on law of treaties s#ch that ever3 treat3 in force is 6indin+ #(on the (arties1 he res(ondent filed for (etition of )anda)#s% certiorari% and (rohi6ition1 he R C of ?CR r#led in favor of the res(ondent1 Secretar3 of "#stice was )ade to iss#e a co(3 of the re,#ested (a(ers% as well as cond#ctin+ f#rther (roceedin+s1 I ue : 1. WON !r"vate " re !#$%e$t e$t"t&e% t# t'e t(# )a "c %ue !r#ce r"*'t #+ $#t"ce a$% 'ear"$* @es1 A2(a) of P' 10$6 defines e-tradition as Bthe re)oval of an acc#sed fro) the Phili((ines with the o6Cect of (lacin+ hi) at the dis(osal of forei+n a#thorities to ena6le the re,#estin+ state or +overn)ent to hold hi) in connection with an3 cri)inal investi+ation directed a+ainst hi) in connection with an3 cri)inal investi+ation directed a+ainst hi) or the e-ec#tion of a (enalt3 i)(osed on hi) #nder the (enal or cri)inal law of the re,#estin+ state or +overn)ent1D Altho#+h the in,#isitorial (ower e-ercised 63 the '!" as an ad)inistrative a+enc3 d#e to the fail#re of the '*A to co)(l3 lac.s an3 C#dicial discretion% it (ri)aril3 sets the wheels for the e-tradition (rocess which )a3 #lti)atel3 res#lt in the de(rivation of the li6ert3 of the (ros(ective e-tradite1 his de(rivation can 6e effected at two sta+es5 he (rovisional arrest of the (ros(ective e-tradite (endin+ the s#6)ission of the re,#est E the te)(orar3 arrest of

the (ros(ective e-tradite d#rin+ the (endenc3 of the e-tradition (etition in co#rt1 Clearl3% thereFs an i)(endin+ threat to a (ros(ective e-traditeeFs li6ert3 as earl3 as d#rin+ the eval#ation sta+e1 Geca#se of s#ch conse,#ences% the eval#ation (rocess is a.in to an ad)inistrative a+enc3 cond#ctin+ an investi+ative (roceedin+% the conse,#ences of which are essentiall3 cri)inal since s#ch technical assess)ent sets off or co))ences the (roced#re for E #lti)atel3 the de(rivation of li6ert3 of a (ros(ective e-tradite1 4n essence% therefore% the eval#ation (rocess (arta.es of the nat#re of a cri)inal investi+ation1 here are certain constit#tional ri+hts that are ordinaril3 availa6le onl3 in cri)inal (rosec#tion1 G#t the Co#rt has r#led in other cases that where the investi+ation of an ad)inistrative (roceedin+ )a3 res#lt in forfeit#re of life% li6ert3% or (ro(ert3% the ad)inistrative (roceedin+s are dee)ed cri)inal or (enal% E s#ch forfeit#re (arta.es the nat#re of a (enalt31 4n the case at 6ar% si)ilar to a (reli)inar3 investi+ation% the eval#ation sta+e of the e-tradition (roceedin+s which )a3 res#lt in the filin+ of an infor)ation a+ainst the res(ondent% can (ossi6l3 lead to his arrest% E to the de(rivation of his li6ert31 h#s% the e-traditee )#st 6e accorded d#e (rocess ri+hts of notice E hearin+ accordin+ to A3 A17(1) E (2)% as well as A3 AH;the ri+ht of the (eo(le to infor)ation on )atters of (#6lic concern E the corollar3 ri+ht to access to official records E doc#)ents he co#rt held that the eval#ation (rocess (arta.es of the nat#re of a cri)inal investi+ation% havin+ conse,#ences which will res#lt in de(rivation of li6ert3 of the (ros(ective e-tradite1 A favora6le action in an e-tradition re,#est e-(oses a (erson to event#al e-tradition to a forei+n co#ntr3% th#s e-hi6itin+ the (enal as(ect of the (rocess1 he eval#ation (rocess itself is li.e a (reli)inar3 investi+ation since 6oth (roced#res )a3 have the sa)e res#lt I the arrest and i)(rison)ent of the res(ondent1 he 6asic ri+hts of notice E hearin+ are a((lica6le in cri)inal% civil E ad)inistrative (roceedin+s1 ?on=o6servance of these ri+hts will invalidate the (roceedin+s1 4ndivid#als are entitled to 6e notified of an3 (endin+ case affectin+ their interests% E #(on notice% )a3 clai) the ri+ht to a((ear therein E (resent their side1 R"*'t t# $#t"ce a$% 'ear"$*: D" !e$ a)&e "$ , ca e : a1 Jhen there is an #r+ent need for i))ediate action ((reventive s#s(ension in ad)inistrative char+es% (adloc.in+ filth3 resta#rants% cancellation of (ass(ort)1 61 Jhere there is tentativeness of ad)inistrative action% E the res(ondent isnFt (revented fro) enCo3in+ the ri+ht to notice E hearin+ at a later ti)e (s#))ar3 distraint E lev3 of the (ro(ert3 of a delin,#ent ta-(a3er% re(lace)ent of an a((ointee) c1 win ri+hts have 6een offered% 6#t the ri+ht to e-ercise the) had not 6een clai)ed1 -. WON t'" e$t"t&e.e$t c#$ t"tute a )reac' #+ t'e &e*a& c#.."t.e$t a$% #)&"*at"#$ #+ t'e /'"&"!!"$e G#ver$.e$t u$%er t'e R/0US Treat12 ?o1 he 01S1 and the Phili((ines share )#t#al concern a6o#t the s#((ression and (#nish)ent of cri)e in their res(ective C#risdictions1 Goth states accord co))on d#e (rocess (rotection to their res(ective citi/ens1 he ad)inistrative investi+ation doesnFt fall #nder the three e-ce(tions to the d#e (rocess of notice and hearin+ in the Sec1 3 R#les 112 of the R#les of Co#rt1 WON t'ere3 a$1 c#$+&"ct )et(ee$ !r"vate re !#$%e$t3 )a "c %ue !r#ce r"*'t 4 !r#v" "#$ #+ R/0 US E5tra%"t"#$ treat1

?o1 'octrine of incor(oration #nder international law% as a((lied in )ost co#ntries% decrees that r#les of international law are +iven e,#al standin+ with% 6#t are not s#(erior to national le+islative acts1 reat3 can re(eal stat#te and stat#te can re(eal treat31 ?o conflict1 >eil of secrec3 is lifted d#rin+ trial1 Re,#est sho#ld i)(ose veil at an3 sta+e1 Ju%*.e$t: Petition dis)issed for lac. of )erit1 6a!u$a$7 e!arate c#$curr"$* #!"$"#$: Jhile the eval#ation (rocess cond#cted 63 the '!" is not e-actl3 a (reli)inar3 investi+ation of cri)inal cases% it is a.in to a (reli)inar3 investi+ation 6eca#se it involves the 6asic constit#tional ri+hts of the (erson so#+ht to 6e e-tradited1 A (erson ordered e-tradited is arrested% forci6l3 ta.en fro) his ho#se% se(arated fro) his fa)il3 and delivered to a forei+n state1 :is ri+hts of a6ode% to (rivac3% li6ert3 and (#rs#it of ha((iness are ta.en awa3 fro) hi);a fate as harsh and cr#el as a conviction of a cri)inal offense1 *or this reason% he is entitled to have access to the evidence a+ainst hi) and the ri+ht to controvert the)1 /u$#7 %" e$t"$*: Case at 6ar does not involve +#ilt or innocence of an acc#sed 6#t the inter(retation of an e-tradition treat3 where at sta.e is o#r +overn)entFs international o6li+ation to s#rrender to a forei+n state a citi/en of its own so he can 6e tried for an alle+ed offense co))itted within that C#risdiction1 /a$*a$")a$7 %" eval#ation sta+e1 e$t"$*: 4nstant (etition refers onl3 to the

/ESIGAN v. ANGELES [12& SCRA 1H7 (1&$7)] Nature: Petition to review the order of the Caloocan Cit3 R C Fact : Ansel)o and Marcelo Pesi+an trans(orted in the evenin+ of A(ril 2% 1&$2 twent3=si- cara6aos and a calf fro) Ca)arines S#r with Gatan+as as their destination1 he3 were (rovided with three certificates5 1) a health certificate fro) the (rovincial veterinarian% 2) (er)it to transferKtrans(ort fro) the (rovincial co))anderL and 3) three certificates of ins(ections1 4n s(ite of the (a(ers% the cara6aos were confiscated 63 the (rovincial veterinarian and the townFs (olice station co))ander while (assin+ thro#+h Ca)arines ?orte1 Confiscation was 6ased on 9! ?o1 626=A which (rohi6its trans(ortation of cara6aos E cara6eef fro) one (rovince to another1 I ue: J!? 9! ?o1 626=A% (rovidin+ for the confiscation and forfeit#re 63 the +overn)ent of cara6aos trans(orted fro) one (rovince to another% dated !cto6er 28% 1&$0 is enforcea6le 6efore (#6lication in the !fficial 2a/ette on "#ne 17% 1&$2 8e&%: ?o1 he said order isnFt enforcea6le a+ainst the Pesi+ans on A(ril 2% 1&$2 6eca#se itFs a (enal re+#lation (#6lished )ore than 2 )os1 later in the !21 4t 6eca)e effective onl3 fifteen da3s thereafter as (rovided in A2 of the CC E A11 of the Revised Ad)inistrative Code1 he word BlawsD in article 2 incl#des circ#lars E re+#lations which (rescri6e (enalties1 P#6lication is necessar3 to a((rise the (#6lic of the contents of the re+#lations E )a.e the said (enalties 6indin+ on the (ersons affected there631 Co))onwealth Act ?o1 63$ re,#ires that all Presidential 9!s havin+ +eneral a((lica6ilit3 sho#ld 6e (#6lished in the !21 4t (rovides that Bever3 order or doc#)ent which shall (rescri6e a (enalt3 shall 6e dee)ed to have +eneral a((lica6ilit3 and le+al effect1 his a((lies to a violation of 9! ?o1 626=A 6eca#se its confiscation E forfeit#re (rovision or sanction )a.es it a (enal stat#te1 4t res#lts that the3 have ca#se of action for

,.

the recover3 of the cara6aos1 he s#))ar3 confiscation wasnFt in order1 he reci(ients of the cara6aos sho#ld ret#rn the) to the Pesi+ans1 :owever% the3 cannot trans(ort the cara6aos to Gatan+as 6eca#se the3 are now 6o#nd 63 the said e-ec#tive order1 ?either can the3 recover da)a+es1 'octor Miranda E Menerosa acted in +ood faith in orderin+ the forfeit#re and dis(ersal of the cara6aos1 Ju%*.e$t: !rder of dis)issal and confiscation and dis(ersal of the cara6aos% reversed and set aside1 Res(ondents to restore cara6aos% with the re,#isite doc#)ents% to (etitioners for their own dis(osal in Gas#d or Si(ocot% Ca)arines S#r1 ?o costs1 I.!#rta$t !#"$t: P#6lication is necessar3 to a((rise the (#6lic of the contents of the re+#lations E )a.e the said (enalties 6indin+ on the (ersons affected here631 "#stice E fairness dictate that the (#6lic )#st 6e infor)ed of that (rovision 63 )eans of the (#6lication on the 2a/ette1

he +eneralit3 of law (CC A17) will never wor. wKo constr#ctive notice1 he r#lin+ of this case (rovides the (#6lication constit#tes the necessar3 constr#ctive notice E is th#s the c#re for i+norance as an e-c#se1 4+norance will not even )iti+ate the cri)e1

as.ed to leave1 Petitioners did not violate the stat#te as it was writtenL the3 received no notice 6efore enterin+ either the dr#+store or the resta#rant de(art)ent1 4ndeed% the3 .new the3 wo#ld not receive an3 s#ch notice 6efore enterin+ the store% for the3 were invited to (#rchase ever3thin+ e-ce(t food there1 So far as the words of the stat#te were concerned% (etitioners were +iven not onl3 no Nfair warnin+%N 6#t no warnin+ whatever% that their cond#ct in 9c.erdOs 'r#+ Store wo#ld violate the stat#te1

;OUIE v. COLUM;IA [3H$ 01S1 37H (1&67)] Nature: Certiorari to the S#(re)e Co#rt of So#th Carolina Fact : 2 ?e+ro colle+e st#dents too. seats in a 6ooth in the resta#rant de(t of 9c.erds E waited to 6e served1 As the3 were seated% the e)(lo3ee of the store (#t #( a no tres(assin+ si+n1 he store )ana+er called the (olice1 Jhen the (olice arrived% the )ana+er as.ed the) to leave 6#t the3 didnFt1 he3 were convicted 63 So#th Carolina SC on the +ro#nds of resistin+ arrest E cri)inal tres(ass1 Petitioners now contend that to constr#e the stat#te as s#ch is violative of d#e (rocess cla#se since state has (#nished the) for cond#ct which was not cri)inal at the ti)e the3 have co))itted it1 I ue: J!? (etitioners were denied d#e (rocess of law 6eca#se the stat#te failed to afford fair warnin+ that the cond#ct for which the3 have 6een convicted had 6een )ade a cri)e1 8e&%: 'ecision of the So#th Carolina SC was reversed1 he cri)e for which these (etitioners stand convicted was Nnot en#)erated in the stat#teN at the ti)e of their cond#ct1 4t follows that the3 have 6een de(rived of li6ert3 and (ro(ert3 witho#t d#e (rocess of law1 o 6e convicted of cri)inal tres(assin+% the law stat#te states5 Bentr3 #(on the lands of another after notice fro) the owner (rohi6itin+ s#ch entr31D he (etitioners sho#ld have first 6een warned (rior to enterin+ the resta#rant that to do so wo#ld constit#te cri)inal tres(assin+1 ?o (rior warnin+ was )ade1 he3 were onl3 as.ed to leave when the3 were inside1 he So#th Carolina SC constr#ed the stat#te to cover also the act of re)ainin+ on the (re)ises of another after receivin+ notice to leave1 A cri)inal stat#te )#st +ive fair warnin+ of the cond#ct that it )a.es a cri)e1 Since the stat#e was s(ecific% there was no reason to 6roaden its sco(e% for this is li.e an e- (ost facto law1 9- (ost facto law has two instances5 11 4t )a.es an action done 6efore the (assin+ of the law% and which was innocent when done% cri)inal E (#nishes s#ch action1 21 4t a++ravates a cri)e and )a.es it +reater than it was when co))itted1 Jhen an #nforeseea6le state=co#rt constr#ction of a stat#te is a((lied retroactivel3 and s#6Cects a (erson to cri)inal lia6ilit3% it de(rives that (erson of d#e (rocess in the sense of fair warnin+1 A((l3in+ those (rinci(les to this case% we a+ree with (etitioners that 16=3$6 of the So#th Carolina Code did not +ive the) fair warnin+% at the ti)e of their cond#ct in 9c.erdOs 'r#+ Store in 1&60% that the act for which the3 now stand convicted was rendered cri)inal 63 the stat#te1 G3 its ter)s% the stat#te (rohi6ited onl3 Nentr3 #(on the lands of anotherPafter notice fro) the ownerP(rohi6itin+ s#ch entr3PN here was nothin+ in the stat#te to indicate that it also (rohi6ited the different act of re)ainin+ on the (re)ises after 6ein+ U.S. v. SWEET [1 Phil1 1$ (1&01)] Nature: A((eal fro) an order of the Cit3 of Manila C*4 Fact : Sweet was e)(lo3ed 63 the 0nited States )ilitar3 who co))itted an offense a+ainst a P!J1 :is case is filed with the C*4% who is +iven ori+inal C#risdiction in all cri)inal cases for which a (enalt3 of )ore than 6 )onths is i)(osed1 :e is now contendin+ that the co#rts are witho#t C#risdiction 6eca#se he was Bactin+ in the line of d#t31D I ue : 1. WON t'" ca e " ("t'"$ t'e <ur" %"ct"#$ #+ t'e CFI. @es1 G3 Act ?o1 136 of the 0S=Phil Co))ission% the C*4s are +iven ori+inal C#risdiction in all cri)inal cases in which a (enalt3 )ore than 6 )onths i)(rison)ent or a fine +reater than Q100 )a3 6e i)(osed1 *#rther)ore% C*4s have C#risdiction to tr3 offenders char+ed with violation of the Penal Code within their territorial li)its% re+ardless of the )ilitar3 character of the acc#sed1 he defendant and his acts are within the C#risdiction of the C*4 6eca#se he failed to (rove that he was indeed actin+ in the line of d#t31 -. WON a$ a au&t c#.."tte% )1 a #&%"er #r ."&"tar1 e.!&#1ee u!#$ a !r" #$er #+ (ar " $#t a$ #++e$ce u$%er t'e !e$a& c#%e2 @es1 ho#+h assa#lt 63 )ilitar3 officer a+ainst a P!J isnFt in the RPC% (h3sical assa#lt char+es )a3 6e (ressed #nder the RPC1 A u."$* t'at "t " a$ #++e$ce u$%er t'e !e$a& c#%e7 WON t'e ."&"tar1 c'aracter u ta"$e% )1 t'e !er #$ c'ar*e% ("t' t'e #++e$ce at t'e t".e #+ "t c#.." "#$ e5e.!t '". +r#. t'e #r%"$ar1 <ur" %"ct"#$ #+ t'e c"v"& tr")u$a& 2 ?o1 he a((lication of the +eneral (rinci(le that the C#risdiction of the civil tri6#nals is #naffected 63 the )ilitar3 or other s(ecial character 6ro#+ht 6efore the) for trial (R1A1 ?o1 H088)1 A((ellant clai)s that the act was service connected1 4f this were tr#e% it )a3 6e #sed as a defense 6#t this cannot affect the ri+ht of the Civil Co#rt to ta.es C#risdiction of the case1D

TA9ADA v. TU:ERA [136 SCRA 2H (1&$8)] Nature: Petition to review the decision of the 9-ec#tive Assistant to the President1 Fact : 4nvo.in+ the (eo(leFs ri+ht to 6e infor)ed on )atters of (#6lic concern% a ri+ht reco+ni/ed in Section 6% Article 4> of the 1&H3 constit#tion% (etitioners see. a writ of )anda)#s to co)(el res(ondent (#6lic officials to (#6lish% andKor ca#se the (#6lication in the !fficial 2a/ette% of vario#s (residential decrees% letters of instr#ctions% +eneral orders% (rocla)ations% e-ec#tive orders% letter of i)(le)entation and ad)inistrative orders1 he res(ondents wo#ld have this case dis)issed on the +ro#nd that (etitioners have no le+al (ersonalit3 to 6rin+ this (etition1 Petitioners )aintain that since the s#6Cect of the (etition concerns a (#6lic ri+ht and its o6Cect is to co)(el (#6lic d#t3% the3 need not show an3 s(ecific interest1 Res(ondents f#rther contend that (#6lication in the !2 is not a sine ,#a non re,#ire)ent for the effectivit3 of laws where the laws the)selves (rovide for their own effectivit3 dates1 I ue: J!? (#6lication in the !fficial 2a/atte is an indis(ensa6le re,#ire)ent for the effectivit3 of the P's% <!4s% +eneral orders% 9!s% etc1 where laws the)selves (rovide for their own effectivit3 dates1 8e&%: @es1 4t is the (eo(leFs ri+ht to 6e infor)ed on )atters of (#6lic concern E corollaril3 access to official records% E to doc#)ents E (a(ers (ertainin+ to official acts% transactions% or decisions% shall 6e afforded the citi/ens s#6Cect to s#ch li)itation as )a3 6e (rovided 63 law (A6 A4>% 1&H3 Constit#tion)1 <aws% to 6e valid E enforcea6le% )#st 6e (#6lished in the !2 or otherwise effectivel3 (ro)#l+ated1 he fact that a P' or <!4 states its date of effectivit3 does not (recl#de their (#6lication in the !2 as the3 constit#te i)(ortant le+islative acts1 he (#6lication of (residential iss#ances Bof (#6lic nat#reD or Bof +eneral a((lica6ilit3D is a re,#ire)ent of d#e (rocess1 Gefore a (erson )a3 6e 6o#nd 63 law% he )#st first 6e officiall3 infor)ed of its contents1 Ju%*.e$t: Res(ondents ordered to (#6lish in !fficial 2a/ette all #n(#6lished (residential iss#ances of +eneral a((lication% and #nless so (#6lished shall have no 6indin+ force and effect1 I.!t /#"$t: 4t ill#strates how decrees E iss#ances iss#ed 63 one )an;Marcos;are in fact laws of +enFl a((lication E (rovide for (enalties1 he constit#tion afforded Marcos 6oth e-ec#tive E le+islative (owers1

,.

Ju%*.e$t: "#d+)ent there63 affir)ed BAn offense char+ed a+ainst a )ilitar3 officer in conse,#ence of an act done in o6edience to an order is clearl3 shown on the face% where s#ch offense is a+ainst the )ilitar3 law% is not within the C#risdiction of the co#rts of the Civil 2overn)ent1D ––Per Cooper, J., concurring

SC8NEC6EN;URGER v. MORAN [63 Phil1 27& (1&73)] Nature: !ri+inal action in the S#(re)e Co#rt1 Prohi6ition1

Fact : Schnec.en6#r+er% who is an honorar3 cons#l of 0r#+#a3 at Manila was s#6se,#entl3 char+ed in C*4=Manila with the cri)e of falsification of a (rivate doc#)ent1 :e o6Cected to this sa3in+ that #nder the 0S and Phili((ine Constit#tion% the C*4 has no C#risdiction to tr3 hi)1 After his o6Cection was overr#led% he filed a (etition for a writ of (rohi6ition to (revent the C*4 fro) ta.in+ co+ni/ance of the cri)inal action filed a+ainst hi)1 Aside fro) this% he contended that ori+inal C#risdiction over cases affectin+ a)6assadors and cons#ls is conferred e-cl#sivel3 #(on the S#(re)e Co#rt of the Phili((ines1 I ue : 1. WON t'e US SC 'a Or"*"$a& Jur" %"ct"#$ #ver ca e a++ect"$* a.)a a%#r 7 c#$ u& 7 et. a& 4 uc' <ur" %"ct"#$ e5c&u%e c#urt #+ t'e /'"& . ?o1 *irst of all% a cons#l is not entitled to the (rivile+e of di(lo)atic i))#nit31 A cons#l is not e-e)(t fro) cri)inal (rosec#tion for violations of the laws of the co#ntr3 where he resides1 he ina#+#ration of the Phili((ine Co))onwealth on ?ov1 18% 1&38 ca#sed the Phili((ine Constit#tion to +o into f#ll force and effect1 his Constit#tion is the s#(re)e law of the land1 4t also (rovides that the ori+inal C#risdiction of this co#rt Bshall incl#de all cases affectin+ a)6assadors% cons#ls et1al1D -. WON #r"*"$a& <ur" %"ct"#$ #ver ca e a++ect"$* a.)a a%#r 7 c#$ u& 7 et. a&. " c#$+erre% e5c&u "ve&1 u!#$ t'e Su!re.e C#urt #+ t'e /'"&"!!"$e B he S#(re)e Co#rt shall have ori+inal and a((ellate C#risdiction as )a3 6e (ossessed and e-ercised 63 the S#(re)e Co#rt of the Phili((ines at the ti)e of the ado(tion of this Constit#tion1D Accordin+ to Sec1 1H1 of Act ?o1 136 and 63 virt#e of it% C#risdiction to iss#e writs of ,#o warranto% certiorari% )anda)#s% (rohi6ition and ha6eas cor(#s was also conferred on the C*4Fs1 As a res#lt% the ori+inal C#risdiction (ossessed and e-ercised 63 the S#(re)e Co#rt of the Phili((ines at the ti)e the Constit#tion was ado(ted was not e-cl#sive of% 6#t conc#rrent with% that of the C*4Fs1 he ori+inal C#risdiction conferred to SC 63 the Constit#tion was not an e-cl#sive C#risdiction1

co)fort and s#stenance to the ene)3% cannot 6e serio#sl3 ,#estioned1] ?o1 B he war% in the le+al sense% contin#es #ntil% and ter)inated at the sa)e ti)e of% so)e for)al (rocla)ation of (eace 63 an a#thorit3 co)(etent to (roclai) it1 4t is the (rovince of the (olitical de(t% E not the C#dicial de(t% to deter)ine if war has ended1 *act that deliver3 of certain (ersons #nder c#stod3 of the 0S Ar)3 has alread3 6e+#n doesnFt )ean that the war has% in the le+al sense% alread3 ter)inated% wKc clearl3 it hasnFt1 'eliver3 wKin (ower of )ilitar3 a#thorities to )a.e even 6efore was ter)inated1 -. WON t'" c#urt 'a <ur" %"ct"#$ #r &e*a& !#(er t# a++#r% re&"e+ t# t'e !et"t"#$er "$ t'e a% a$% #rr1 !&"*'t t# ('"c' t'e1 'ave )ee$ a$% are )e"$* u)<ecte%2 ?o1 Civil Co#rts sho#ldnFt interfere1 A forei+n ar)3 (er)itted to )arch thro#+h a friendl3 co#ntr3 or to 6e stationed in it% is e-e)(t fro) civil E cri)inal C#risdiction of the (lace1 2rant of free (assa+e i)(lies a waiver of all C#risdiction over troo(s d#rin+ (assa+e (let the) e-ercise their own disci(line)1 An3 atte)(t 63 o#r civil Co#rts to e-ercise C#risdiction over 0S troo(s wo#ld 6e a violation of o#r co#ntr3Fs faith1 !n the other hand% (etitioners )a3 have reco#rse to (ro(er )ilitar3 a#thorities1

U.S. v. A8 SING [36 Phil1 &H$ (1&1H)] Cf. French vs. English rule Fact : he defendant is a s#6Cect of China e)(lo3ed as a fire)an on a stea)shi(1 he stea)shi( is a forei+n stea)er which arrived the (ort of Ce6# on A(ril 28% 1&1H% after a vo3a+e direct fro) the (ort of Sai+on1 he defendant 6o#+ht $ cans of o(i#) in Sai+on% 6ro#+ht the) on 6oard the stea)shi( and had the) in his (ossession d#rin+ the tri( fro) Sai+on to Ce6#1 Jhen the stea)er anchored in the (ort of Ce6#% the a#thorities on )a.in+ the search fo#nd the cans of o(i#) hidden in the ashes 6elow the 6oiler of the stea)erOs en+ine1 he defendant confessed that he was the owner of the o(i#) and that he had (#rchased it in Sai+on1 :e did not confess% however% as to his (#r(ose in 6#3in+ the o(i#)1 :e did not sa3 that it was his intention to i)(ort the (rohi6ited dr#+1 I ue: J!? the cri)e of ille+al i)(ortation of o(i#) into the Phili((ine 4slands has 6een (rovenS 8e&%: @es1 4t is the on#s of the +overn)ent to (rove that the vessel fro) which the dr#+ dischar+ed ca)e into Phili((ine waters fro) a forei+n co#ntr3 with the dr#+ on 6oard1 4n this case% it is to 6e noted that A7 of Act ?o1 23$1 6e+ins% BAn3 (erson who shall #nlawf#ll3 i)(ort or 6rin+ an3 (rohi6ited dr#+ into the Phili((ine 4slandsPD 4)(ort and 6rin+ sho#ld 6e constr#ed as s3non3)o#s ter)s1 he )ere act of +oin+ into a (ort% witho#t 6rea.in+ 6#l.% is (ri)a facie evidence of i)(ortation1 he i)(ortation is not the )a.in+ entr3 of +oods at the c#sto)ho#se% 6#t )erel3 the 6rin+in+ the) into the (ort% and the i)(ortation is co)(lete 6efore the entr3 to the c#sto)ho#se1 Moreover% (ossession for (ersonal #se is #nli.el3% C#d+in+ fro) the si/e of the a)o#nt 6ro#+ht1

LIANG v. /EO/LE [323 SCRA 682 (2000)] Nature: Petition for review on certiorari of a decision of the Re+ional rial Co#rt of Pasi+ Cit3% Gr1 1601 Fact : Petitioner is an econo)ist for A'G who was char+ed 63 the Metro(olitan C of Mandal#3on+ Cit3 for alle+edl3 #tterin+ defa)ator3 words a+ainst her fellow wor.er wK 2 co#nts of +rave oral defa)ation1 Me C C#d+e then received an office of (rotocol fro) the 'e(art)ent of *orei+n Affairs% statin+ that (etitioner is covered 63 i))#nit3 fro) le+al (rocess #nder section 78 of the a+ree)ent 6et A'G E the +ovFt1 Me C C#d+e% wKo notice% dis)issed the two cri)inal cases1 Prosec#tion filed writ of )anda)#s E certiorari and ordered the Me C to enforce the warrant of arrest1 I ue : J!? the (etitioner is covered 63 i))#nit3 #nder the a+ree)ent and that no (reli)inar3 investi+ation was held 6efore the cri)inal cases were filed in co#rt1 Rat"#: :e is not covered 63 i))#nit3 6eca#se the co))ission of a cri)e is (art of the (erfor)ance of official d#t31 Co#rts cannot 6lindl3 adhere and ta.e on its face the co))#nication fro) the '*A that a certain (erson is covered 63 i))#nit31 hat a (erson is covered 63 i))#nit3 is (reli)inar31 '#e (rocess is ri+ht of the acc#sed as )#ch as the (rosec#tion1 Slanderin+ a (erson is not covered 63 the a+ree)ent 6eca#se o#r laws do not allow the co))ission of a cri)e s#ch as defa)ation in the na)e of official d#t31 0nder >ienna convention on 'i(lo)atic Relations% co))ission of a cri)e is not (art of official d#t31 !n the contention that there was no (reli)inar3 investi+ation cond#cted% s#ffice it to sa3 that (reli)inar3 investi+ation isnFt a )atter of ri+ht in cases co+ni/a6le 63 the Me C s#ch as the one at 6ar1 Gein+ (#rel3 a stat#tor3 ri+ht% (reli)inar3 investi+ation )a3 6e invo.ed onl3 when s(ecificall3 +ranted 63 law1 he r#le on cri)inal (roced#re is clear than no (reli)inar3 investi+ation is re,#ired in cases fallin+ wKin the C#risdiction of the Me C1 Gesides% the a6sence of (reli)inar3 investi+ation doesnFt affect the co#rtFs C#risdiction nor does it i)(air the validit3 of the infor)ation or otherwise render it defective1

MI=UIA;AS v. COMMANDING GENERAL [$0 Phil1 26H (1&7$)] Nature: !ri+inal Action in the S#(re)e Co#rt1 :a6eas cor(#s1 Fact : Mi,#ia6as is a *ili(ino citi/en and civilian e)(lo3ee of the 0S ar)3 in the Phili((ines who had 6een char+ed of dis(osin+ in the Port of Manila Area of thin+s 6elon+in+ to the 0S ar)3 in violation of the &7th article of Jar of the 0S1 :e was arrested and a 2eneral Co#rt=Martial was a((ointed1 :e was fo#nd +#ilt31 As a r#le% the Phili((ines 6ein+ a soverei+n nation has C#risdiction over all offenses co))itted within its territor3 6#t it )a3% 63 treat3 or 63 a+ree)ent% consent that the 0S shall e-ercise C#risdiction over certain offenses co))itted within said (ortions of territor31 I ue : 1. WON t'e #++e$ e 'a )ee$ c#.."tte% ("t'"$ a US )a e t'u *"v"$* t'e US <ur" %"ct"#$ #ver t'e ca e. ?o1 he Port of Manila Area where the offense was co))itted is not wKin a 0S 6ase for it is not na)es in Anne- A or G of ATT>4 of the Militar3 Gase A+ree)ent (MGA) E is )erel3 (art of the te)(orar3 ,#arters located wKin (resented li)its of the cit3 of Manila1 Moreover% e-tended installations E te)(orar3 ,#arters arenFt considered to have the sa)e C#risdictional ca(acit3 as (er)anent 6ases E are +overned 63 AT444 (ars1 2 E 71 he offence at 6ar% therefore is in the 6e3ond the C#risdiction of )ilitar3 co#rts1 -. WON t'e #++e$%er " a .e.)er #+ t'e US ar.e% +#rce ?o1 0nder the MGA% a civilian e)(lo3ee is not considered as a )e)6er of the 0S ar)ed forces1 9ven #nder the articles of war%

Ju%*.e$t: C*4 has C#risdiction to tr3 the (etitioner% and the (etition for a writ of (rohi6ition )#st 6e denied1

RA=UI>A v. ;RADFORD [H8 Phil1 80 (1&7$)] Nature: !ri+inal action in the SC1 :a6eas cor(#s1 Fact : G3 virt#e of the (rocla)ation iss#ed 63 2eneral of the Ar)3 MacArth#r% (etitioners were arrested 63 the 306 C4C and detained #nder sec#rit3 co))it)ent order ?o 3$81 he (etitioners Ra,#i/a% ee :an Ree% and 4nfante were char+ed with 9s(iona+e activit3 with the "a(anese E active colla6oration with the ene)3 res(ectivel31 Power of Co))ander of the 0S Ar)3 to (roclai) 63 virt#e of )ilitar3 necessit3 is not ,#estioned1 :e 6ased (rocla)ation on reasons that a((rehended have violated d#e alle+iance to 0S and it is a )ilitar3 necessit31 Petitioners )ove for writ of :a6eas Cor(#s1 I ue : 1. WON t'e (ar ter."$ate% ("t'"$ t'e .ea$"$* #+ t'at !art "$ t'e !r#c&a.at"#$2 [?ote5 he (ower of co))ander in chief of the 0S Ar)3 to iss#e a (rocla)ation (rovidin+ for )ilitar3 )eas#res to 6e ta.en #(on the a((rehension of *ili(ino citi/ens who vol#ntaril3 have +iven aid%

the )ere fact that a civilian e)(lo3ee is in the service of the 0S Ar)3 does not )a.e hi) a )e)6er of the ar)ed forces1

e1 f1

GUMA;ON v. DIRECTOR OF /RISONS [3H SCRA 720 (1&H1)] Nature: !ri+inal Petition in the S#(re)e Co#rt1 :a6eas cor(#s1 Fact : 2#)a6on% after (leadin+ +#ilt3% was sentenced on Ma3 8% 1&83 to recl#sion (er(et#a for the co)(le- cri)e of re6ellion with )#lti(le )#rder% ro66er3% arson and .idna((in+ (alon+ with A+a(ito% Pal)ares and Pad#a)1 he decision for the first two (etitioners was rendered on March $% 1&87 and the third on 'ec1 8% 1&881 he last (etitioner Ga+ol6a+ol was (enali/ed with recl#sion (er(et#a on "an1 12% 1&871 9ach of the (etitioners have 6een i)(risoned for )ore than 13 3ears 63 virt#e of their convictions1 he3 now invo.e the doctrine laid down in Peo(le v1 :ernande/ which ne+ated s#ch co)(le- cri)e% a r#lin+ which was not handed down #ntil after their convictions have 6eco)e final1 4n Peo(le v1 :ernande/% the SC r#led that the infor)ation a+ainst the acc#sed for re6ellion co)(le-ed with )#rder% arson and ro66er3 was not warranted #nder Art1 137 of the RPC% there 6ein+ no s#ch co)(leoffense1 his r#lin+ was not handed down #ntil after their convictions have 6eco)e final1 Since :ernande/ served )ore than the )a-i)#) (enalt3 that co#ld have 6een served a+ainst hi)% he is entitled to freedo)% and th#s% his contin#ed detention is ille+al1 I ue: J!? Art1 22 of the RPC which +ives a (enal C#d+)ent a retroactive effect is a((lica6le in this case (J!? C#dicial decisions favo#ra6le to the acc#sedKconvicted for the sa)e cri)e can 6e a((lied retroactivel3) 8e&%: @es1 "#dicial decisions favo#ra6le to the acc#sed )#st 6e a((lied retroactivel31 Petitioners relied on Art1 22 of the RPC% which states the (enal laws shall have a retroactive effect insofar as the3 favo#r the acc#sed who is not a ha6it#al cri)inal1 CC also (rovides that C#dicial decisions a((l3in+ or inter(retin+ the Constit#tion for)s (art of o#r le+al s3ste)1 Petitioners even raised their constit#tional ri+ht to e,#al (rotection% +iven that :ernande/ et al1% has 6een convicted for the sa)e offense as the3 have% tho#+h their sentences were li+hter1 :a6eas cor(#s is the onl3 )eans of 6enefitin+ the acc#sed 63 the retroactive character of a favora6le decision1

ass#)in+ to re+#late civil ri+hts and re)edies onl3 in effect i)(oses (enalt3 or de(rivation of ri+ht which when done was lawf#l de(rives a (erson acc#sed of a cri)e so)e lawf#l (rotection to which he has 6eco)e entitled% s#ch as the (rotection of a for)er conviction of ac,#ittal or a (rocla)ation of a)nest31

8e&%: Petition denied1 Constit#tional act1 Constit#tional inhi6ition refers onl3 to cri)inal laws1 Penalt3 in law i)(osed to acts co))itted after a((roval of law

/EO/LE v. NAR:AE> [121 SCRA 3$& (1&$3)] Nature: A((eal fro) decision of the C*4 of So#th Cota6ato Fact : Ma)erto ?arvae/ has 6een convicted of )#rder (,#alified 63 treacher3) of 'avid *leischer and *laviano R#6ia1 !n A#+#st 22% 1&6$% ?arvae/ shot *leischer and R#6ia d#rin+ the ti)e the two were constr#ctin+ a fence that wo#ld (revent ?arvae/ fro) +ettin+ into his ho#se and rice )ill1 he defendant was ta.in+ a na( when he heard so#nds of constr#ction and fo#nd fence 6ein+ )ade1 :e addressed the +ro#( and as.ed the) to sto( destro3in+ his ho#se and as.in+ if the3 co#ld tal. thin+s over1 *leischer res(onded with N?o% +ada)it% (roceed% +o ahead1N 'efendant lost his Ne,#ili6ri#)%N and shot *leisher with his shot+#n1 :e also shot R#6ia who was r#nnin+ towards the Cee( where the deceasedOs +#n was (laced1 Prior to the shootin+% *leischer and Co1 (the co)(an3 of *leischerOs fa)il3) was involved in a le+al 6attle with the defendant and other land settlers of Cota6ato over certain (ieces of (ro(ert31 At the ti)e of the shootin+% the civil case was still (endin+ for ann#l)ent (settlers wanted +rantin+ of (ro(ert3 to *leisher and Co1 to 6e ann#lled)1 At ti)e of the shootin+% defendant had leased his (ro(ert3 fro) *leisher (tho#+h case (endin+ and ownershi( #ncertain) to avoid tro#6le1 !n "#ne 28% defendant received letter ter)inatin+ contract 6eca#se he alle+edl3 didnOt (a3 rent1 :e was +iven 6 )onths to re)ove his ho#se fro) the land1 Shootin+ was 6arel3 2 )onths after letter1 'efendant clai)s he .illed in defense of his (erson and (ro(ert31 C*4 r#led that ?arvae/ was +#ilt31 A++ravatin+ circ#)stances of evident (re)editation offset 63 the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of vol#ntar3 s#rrender1 *or 6oth )#rders% C*4 sentenced hi) to recl#sion (er(et#a% to inde)nif3 the heirs% and to (a3 for )oral da)a+es1 I ue : 1. WON CFI erre% "$ c#$v"ct"$* %e+e$%a$t0a!!e&&a$t %e !"te t'e +act t'at 'e acte% "$ %e+e$ e #+ '" !er #$. ?o1 he co#rts conc#rred that the fencin+ and chisellin+ of the walls of the ho#se of the defendant was indeed a for) of a++ression on the (art of the victi)1 :owever% this a++ression was not done on the (erson of the victi) 6#t rather on his ri+hts to (ro(ert31 !n the first iss#e% the co#rts did not err1 :owever% in consideration of the violation of (ro(ert3 ri+hts% the co#rts referred to Art1 30 of the civil code reco+ni/in+ the ri+ht of owners to close and fence their land1 Altho#+h is not in dis(#te% the victi) was not in the (osition to s#6scri6e to the article 6eca#se his ownershi( of the land 6ein+ awarded 63 the +overn)ent was still (endin+% therefore (#ttin+ ownershi( into ,#estion1 4tFs acce(ted that victi) was the ori+inal a++ressor1 -. WON t'e c#urt erre% "$ c#$v"ct"$* %e+e$%a$t0 a!!e&&a$t a&t'#u*' 'e acte% "$ %e+e$ce #+ '" r"*'t .

@es1 :owever% the ar+#)ent of the C#stif3in+ circ#)stance of self=defense is a((lica6le onl3 if the 3 re,#ire)ents are f#lfilled1 Art1 11(1) RPC en#)erates these re,#isites5  0nlawf#l a++ression1 4n the case at 6ar% there was #nlawf#l a++ression towards a((ellantOs (ro(ert3 ri+hts1 *leisher had +iven ?arvae/ 6 )onths and he sho#ld have left hi) in (eace 6efore ti)e was #(% instead of chiselin+ ?arvae/Os ho#se and (#ttin+ #( fence1 A836 of the CC also (rovides that (ossession )a3 not 6e ac,#ired thro#+h force or inti)idationL while Art1 83& (rovides that ever3 (ossessor has the ri+ht to 6e res(ected in his (ossession  Reasona6le necessit3 of )eans e)(lo3ed to (revent or re(el attac.1 4n case% .illin+ was dis(ro(ortionate to attac.1  <ac. of s#fficient (rovocation on (art of (erson defendin+ hi)self1 :ere% there was no (rovocation at all since he was aslee( Since not all re,#isites (resent% defendant is credited wK the s(ecial )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of inco)(lete defense% (#rs#ant to A13(6) RPC1 hese )iti+atin+ circ#)stances are5 vol#ntar3 s#rrender E (assion E o6f#scation (read (1 708 e-(lanation) Cri)e is ho)icide (2 co#nts) not )#rder 6eca#se treacher3 is not a((lica6le on acco#nt of (rovocation 63 the deceased1 Also% assa#lt wasnFt deli6eratel3 chosen with view to .ill since sla3er acted instantaneo#sl31 here was also no direct evidence of (lannin+ or (re(aration to .ill1 Art1 27& RPC5 Penalt3 for ho)icide is recl#sion te)(oral1 :owever% d#e to )iti+atin+ circ#)stances and inco)(lete defense% it can 6e lowered 3 de+rees (Art1 67) to arresto )a3or1 ,. WON 'e '#u&% )e &"a)&e +#r u) "%"ar1 ".!r" #$.e$t "$ce 'e " u$a)&e t# !a1 t'e c"v"& "$%e.$"t1 %ue t# t'e #++e$%e% !art1. ?o1 :e isnFt lia6le to 6e s#6sidiaril3 i)(risoned for non=(a3)ent of civil inde)nit31 RA 8768 )ade the (rovisions of A3& a((lica6le to fines onl3 E not to re(aration of da)a+e ca#sed% inde)nification of conse,#ential da)a+es E costs of (roceedin+s1 Altho#+h it was enacted onl3 after its co))ission% considerin+ that RA 8768 is favora6le to the acc#sed who is not a ha6it#al delin,#ent% it )a3 6e +iven retroactive effect (#rs#ant to RPC A221

I$ Re: 6AY :ILLEGAS 6AMI [38 SCRA 72& (1&H0)] Fact : Ra3 >ille+as Ra)i 4nc1 clai)in+ to 6e a reco+ni/ed non=stoc.% non=(rofit cor(oration contests validit3 of RA U 6132 Sec1 $ sa3in+ it violates d#e (rocess ri+hts of association% freedo) of e-(ression and is an e- (ost facto law I ue : 1. WON "t v"#&ate t'ree r"*'t 2 ?o1 4tFs set #( to (revent (rostit#tion of electoral (rocess and e,#al (rotection of laws1 -. WON "t " a$ e5 !# t +act# &a(2 ?o1 9- (ost facto law defined5 a1 )a.es cri)inal an act done 6efore law was (assed and (#nishes act innocent when done1 61 a++ravates a cri)e% )a.es it +reater than it was c1 inflicts +reater (#nish)ent than the law (rescri6ed when co))itted d1 alters le+al r#les of evidence and a#thori/es conviction #(on less or different tests

Ju%*.e$t: 'efendant +#ilt3 of ho)icide 6#t wK )iti+atin+ circ#)stances and e-ten#atin+ circ#)stance of inco)(lete self defense1 Penalt3 is 7 )os1 arresto )a3or E to inde)nif3 each +ro#( of heirs 7R wKo s#6sidiar3 i)(rison)ent E wKo award for )oral da)a+es1 A((ellant has alread3 6een detained 17 3rs so his i))ediate release is ordered1 Gut"erre?7 %" e$t"$*. 'efense of (ro(ert3 can onl3 6e invo.ed when co#(led with for) of attac. on (erson defendin+ (ro(ert31 4n the case at 6ar% this was not so1 A((ellant sho#ld then 6e sentenced to (rision )a3or1 :owever% since he has served )ore than that% he sho#ld 6e released1 /EO/LE v. RINGOR [320 SCRA 372 (1&&&)] Nature: A#to)atic review of a decision of the Ga+#io Cit3 R C Fact : he acc#sed (Rin+or) on the ni+ht of "#ne 23% 1&&7 was seen enterin+ Peo(leFs Resta#rant1 A witness *el3 Gatanes saw the acc#sed a((roach a ta6le where the victi) was sittin+% (#lled his hair% E (o.ed a .nife at the latterFs throat1 After% leavin+ the resta#rant% the acc#sed ret#rned with a +#n% entered the .itchen of

the resta#rant% stealthil3 a((roached the victi) fro) 6ehind E shot hi) 6 ti)es s#ccessivel31 he defendant was later a((rehended and ca#+ht in his (ossession was an #nlicensed wea(on1 0(on verification in Ca)( Cra)e% it was fo#nd o#t that Rin+or is not a licensed firear) holder E that the +#n was not licensed1 Rin+or (#t #( self=defense 6#t he failed to (rove *loridaFs #nlawf#l a++ression1 :e was fo#nd +#ilt3 of )#rder ,#alified 63 treacher3 and was sentenced to death1 :e was fo#nd +#ilt3 of a se(arate char+e of (ossession of an #nlicensed firear) with a sentence of 1H to 20 3rs1 I ue : 1. WON t'e a.e$%at#r1 &a( RA @-9A B('"c' t##C e++ect "$ 199D: cr".e #ccurre% "$ 199AE " a!!&"ca)&e ?o1 At the ti)e of the co))ission of the cri)e the #se of an #nlicensed firear) was still not an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance in )#rder to ho)icide1 o a((l3 it to Rin+or wo#ld increase his (enalt3 fro) recl#sion (er(et#a to death1 :ence% RA $2&7 cannot retroact as it is #nfavora6le to the acc#sed% lest it 6eco)es an e- (ost facto law1 -. WON RTC erre% "$ c#$v"ct"$* a!!e&&a$t +#r ".!&e "&&e*a& !# e "#$ #+ +"rear. a$% e$te$ce% '". t# u++er a$ "$%eter."$ate e$te$ce #+ 1D t# -0 1ear . @es1 4n cases where )#rder or ho)icide is co))itted with the #se of an #nlicensed firear)% there can 6e no se(arate conviction for the cri)e of ille+al (ossession of firear)s #nder P' 1$661 4t is si)(l3 considered as an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance% no lon+er as a se(arate offence1 Accordin+ to the A22 of RPC% retroactivit3 of the law )#st 6e a((lied if it is favo#ra6le to the acc#sed1 h#s% insofar as it s(ares acc#sed= a((ellant a se(arate conviction for ille+al (ossession of firear)s% RA $2&7 has to 6e +iven retroactive a((lication1 WON tr"a& c#urt erre% "$ c#$v"ct"$* accu e% #+ .ur%er ?o1 *or self=defense to (ros(er% #nlawf#l a++ression% (ro(ortionalit3 of )ethods to fend said a++ression% and lac. of s#fficient (rovocation fro) defender )#st 6e (roven1 4n this case% defendant failed to (rove #nlawf#l a++ression1 he state)ent that the victi) a((roached hi) with a 6olo was inconsistent to the witnessF state)ent of the victi) 6ein+ in a (rone (osition in the ta6le1 his does not constit#te the re,#isite ,#ant#) of (roof for #nlawf#l a++ression1 Jith the first re,#ire)ent )issin+% the last two re,#isites have no 6asis1 WON RTC erre% "$ e$te$c"$* t'e accu e% t# %eat' +#r .u%er ('"c' (a $3t !r#ve$ 4 t'at t'e a&&e*e% .ur%er c#.."tte% )1 t'e a!!e&&a$t7 t'e a!!r#!r"ate !e$a&t1 +#r t'e #++e$ e " rec&u "#$ !er!etua %ue t# t# t'e a) e$ce #+ a$ a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce. @es1 4n the a6sence of )iti+atin+ or a++ravatin+ circ#)stances to a cri)e of )#rder as descri6ed 63 A27$ RPC% a lesser (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a has to 6e i)(osed in accordin+ to A63(2) RPC

of=.in of the slain RG2 )e)6ers also filed )#rder char+es a+ainst the sa)e officers and (ersonnel1 !n ?ov1 2% 1&&8% after 2 resol#tions% the !)6#ds)an filed 6efore the SG 11 infor)ations of )#rder a+ainst the defendant E 28 (olice)en as (rinci(als1 0(on )otion of the res(ondent% the cri)inal cases were re)anded to the !)6#ds)an E in a re=investi+ation% the infor)ations were a)ended down+radin+ the (rinci(al into an accessor31 Jith the down+radin+ of char+es% the case was later transferred fro) the SG to the R C not d#e to C#risdictional ,#estions over the s#s(ects 6#t d#e to the fail#re to indicate that the offenses char+ed therein were co))itted in relation to% or in dischar+e of% the official f#nctions of the res(ondent% as re,#ired 63 RA $27&1 Gefore the arrai+n)ent% the witnesses of the (rosec#tion recanted their state)ents while the H (rivate co)(lainants s#6)itted their affidavits of desistance1 All 26 s#s(ects filed individ#al )otions to (1) )a.e a C#dicial deter)ination of the e-istence of (ro6a6le ca#se for the iss#ance of warrants of arrestL (2) hold in a6e3ance the iss#ance of the warrants% E (3) dis)iss the cases sho#ld the C find lac. of (ro6a6le ca#se1 he cases were dis)issed1 4t was on March 2H% 2001 when P?P director Mendo/a indorsed to the '!" new affidavits of new witnesses wKc it 6e+an to investi+ate E to file wK the R C1 he res(ondent% invo.in+ a)on+ others% their ri+ht a+ainst do#6le Ceo(ard3% then filed wK the CA a (etition statin+ that A$% R#le 11H of the 2000 R#les on Cri)1 Pro1 6ans the revival of the )#rder cases a+ainst hi)L a (etition the CA denied1 !n "#ne 6% 2001% 11 4nfor)ations for )#rder involvin+ the .illin+ of the sa)e )e)6ers of the Kuratong Baleleng +an+ were filed 6efore the R C VC1 he new 4nfor)ations char+ed as (rinci(als 37 (eo(le% incl#din+ res(ondent <acson E his 28 other co=acc#sed in Cri)1 Cases ?os1 V=&&=$16H& to V=&&=$16$&1 he defendant filed for deter)ination of (ro6a6le ca#se E an o#tri+ht dis)issal in the R C1 he CA considered the ori+inal cases to 6e (rovisionall3 dis)issed E the new cases as )ere revivals1 0nder A$ 2000 RCP 11H% the cases were dis)issed1 I ue: J!? A$% R#le 11H 6ars the filin+ of the 11 infor)ations a+ainst the res(ondent <acson involvin+ the .illin+ of so)e )e)6ers of the Kuratong Baleleng +an+1 8e&%: Re)anded to the R C to deter)ine if the3 co)(lied with r#le and case sho#ld 6e dis)issed1 here is no ,#estion that the new r#le can 6e +iven retroactive effect +iven RPC A221 here can 6e no r#lin+% however% d#e to the lac. of s#fficient fact#al 6ases to s#((ort s#ch a r#lin+1 here is need of (roof to show the ff1 facts5 (1) (rovisional dis)issal of the case had the e-(ress consent of the acc#sed (2) whether it was ordered 63 the co#rt after +ivin+ notice to the offended (art3 (3) whether the 2 3ear (eriod to revive the case has alread3 ela(sed (7) whether there is C#stification for filin+ of the cases 6e3ond the 2 3r (eriod1 he res(ondent e-(ressed consent% 6#t the records donFt reveal whether the notices to the offended (arties were +iven 6efore the cases were (rovisionall3 dis)issed1 !nl3 the ri+ht to do#6le "eo(ard3 63 the defendant was tac.led 63 the liti+ants1 he records are also inconcl#sive wK re+ards to the 2=3ear 6ar% if wKin or witho#t1 Geca#se of this% 6oth (rosec#tion E defendant )#st 6e +iven a)(le ti)e to add#ce evidence on the (resence or a6sence of the add#ced evidence1

relative to the a((lication of A$ RCP 11H on the dis)issal of the cases V=&&=$16H& E V=&&=$16$& a+ainst the res(ondent1 he res(ondent was char+ed with the shootin+ E .illin+ of 11 )ale (ersons1 he co#rt confir)ed the e-(ress consent of the res(ondent in the (rovisional dis)issal of the afore)entioned cases when he filed for C#dicial deter)ination1 he co#rt also r#led the need to deter)ine whether the other facts for its a((lication are attendant1 I ue : 11 WON t'e reFu" "te +#r t'e a!!&"ca)"&"t1 #+ A@7 -000 RC/ 11D (ere c#.!&"e% (G "$ t'e 6urat#$* ;a&e&e$* ca e a1 Jas e-(ress consent +iven 63 the res(ondentS 61 Jas notice for the )otion% the hearin+ and the s#6se,#ent dis)issal +iven to the heirs of the victi)sS Sec1 $% R#le 11H is not a((lica6le to the case since the conditions for its a((lica6ilit3% na)el35 1) (rosec#tion with the e-(ress consent of the acc#sed or 6oth of the) )ove for (rovisional dis)issal% 2) offended (art3 notified% 3) co#rt +rants )otion and dis)isses cases (rovisionall3% 7) (#6lic (rosec#tor served with co(3 of orders of (rovisional dis)issal% which is the defendantFs 6#rden to (rove% wKc in this case hasnFt 6een done1 a1 he defendant never filed and denied #ne,#ivocall3 in his state)ents% thro#+h co#nsel at the Co#rt of A((eals% that he filed for dis)issal nor did he a+ree to a (rovisional dis)issal thereof1 61 ?o notice of )otion for (rovisional dis)issal% hearin+ and s#6se,#ent dis)issal was +iven to the heirs of the victi)s1 21 WON t".e0)ar "$ A@ RC/ 11D '#u&% )e a!!&"e% !r# !ect"ve&1 #r retr#act"ve&1. i)e=6ar sho#ld not 6e a((lied retroactivel31 ho#+h (roced#ral r#les )a3 6e a((lied retroactivel3% it sho#ld not 6e if to do so wo#ld wor. inC#stice or wo#ld involve intricate (ro6le)s of d#e (rocess1 Stat#tes sho#ld 6e constr#ed in li+ht of the (#r(oses to 6e achieved E the evils to 6e re)edied1 his is 6eca#se to do so wo#ld 6e (reC#dicial to the State since% +iven that the "#d+e dis)issed the case on March 2&%1&&&% E the ?ew r#le too. effect on 'ec 1%2000% it wo#ld onl3 in effect +ive the) 1 3r E 3 )onths to wor. instead of 2 3rs1 At that ti)e% the3 had no .nowled+e of the said r#le and therefore the3 sho#ld not 6e (enali/ed for that1 B4ndeed for C#stice to (revail% the scales )#st 6alanceL C#stice is not to 6e dis(ensed for the acc#sed alone1D he 2=3r (eriod fi-ed in the new r#le is for the 6enefit of 6oth the State E the acc#sed1 4t sho#ldnFt 6e e)asc#lated E red#ced 63 an inordinate retroactive a((lication of the ti)e=6ar therein (rovided )erel3 to 6enefit the acc#sed1 o do so wo#ld ca#se an inC#stice of hardshi( to the state E adversel3 affect the ad)inistration of C#stice1

,.

A.

8e&%: Motion +ranted

/EO/LE v. LACSON [!cto6er H% 2003] Fact : Petitioner asserts that retroactive a((lication of (enal laws sho#ld also cover (roced#res% and that these sho#ld 6e a((lied onl3 to the sole 6enefit of the acc#sed1 Petitioner asserts that Sec $ was )eant to reach 6ac. in ti)e to (rovide relief to the acc#sed in line with the constit#tional +#arantee to the ri+ht to s(eed3 trial1 I ue : 1. Ju t"ce WON t'e H A #c"ate +r#. %ec"%"$* "$ t'e MFR

/EO/LE v. LACSON [Ma3 2$% 2002] Nature: Petition for review on certiorari of a decision of the CA Fact : Soon after the anno#nce)ent on Ma3 1$% 1&&8 that the R#raton+ Galelen+ +an+ had 6een slain in a shooto#t wK the (olice% 2 witnesses s#rfaced (rovidin+ the testi)on3 that the said sla3in+ was a r#6=o#t1 !n "#ne 1% 1&&8% Chief S#(erintendent "o6 A1 Ma3o% P?P 'irector for 4nvesti+ation% filed )#rder char+es with the !ffice of the !)6#ds)an a+ainst &H officers E (ersonnel of AGR4 *21 he ne-t=

/EO/LE7 et a&. v. LACSON [A(ril 1% 2003] Fact : Gefore the co#rt is the (etitionerFs M*R of the resol#tion dated Ma3 23% 2002% for the deter)ination of several fact#al iss#es

"$'")"t t'e. e&ve

*"ve$ t'e1 (ere #$&1 a!!#"$te% "$ t'e SC a+ter '" Fe). 197 -00- #ra& ar*u.e$t . he r#le sho#ld 6e a((lied (ros(ectivel31 he co#rt #(held the (etitionersF contention that while A$ sec#res the ri+hts of the acc#sed% it doesnFt E sho#ldnFt (recl#de the e,#all3 i)(ortant ri+ht of the State to (#6lic C#stice1 4f a (roced#ral r#le i)(airs a vested ri+ht% or wo#ld wor. inC#stice% the said r#le )a3 not 6e +iven a retroactive a((lication1 21 WON t'e a!!&"cat"#$ #+ t'e t".e0)ar u$%er A@ RC/ 11D )e *"ve$ a retr#act"ve a!!&"cat"#$ (G# re ervat"#$ 7 #$&1 4 #&e&1 #$ t'e )a " #+ "t )e"$* +av#ra)&e t# t'e accu e%. he Co#rt isnFt )andated to a((l3 r#les retroactivel3 C#st 6eca#se itFs favora6le to the acc#sed1 he ti)e=6ar #nder the new r#le is intended to 6enefit 6oth the State E the acc#sed1 Jhen the r#le was a((roved 63 the co#rt% it intended that the r#le 6e a((lied (ros(ectivel3 and not retroactivel3% for to do so wo#ld 6e tanta)o#nt to the denial of the StateFs ri+ht to d#e (rocess1 A retroactive a((lication wo#ld res#lt in a6s#rd% #nC#st E o((ressive conse,#ences to the State E to the victi)s of cri)es E their heirs1 ;ERNARDO v. /EO/LE [123 SCRA 368 (1&$3)] Fact : Ge)ardo was a tenant of <edda Sta1 RosaFs Riceland in G#lacan fro) !ct1 FH2=A#+1 WH71 :is son sta3ed wK hi) in the ho#se 6#ilt on that land1 he tenanc3 ri+hts of the ho#se were left wK the son when the father transferred 6#t wKo Sta1 Rosa .nowin+1 9vent#all3% Sta1 Rosa too. (ossession of the whole rice field E filed a case of forci6le entr3 a+ainst the Gernardos1 he Gernardos lost in their cases 6efore the M#nici(al Co#rt1 Sta1 Rosa sent a letter of de)and to (etitioners tellin+ the) to vacate their ho#se E land 6#t since the3 ref#sed% a cri)inal co)(laint was char+ed a+ainst the) for violation of P' HH2 on s,#attin+1 I ue: J!? C*4 has C#risdiction to entertain cri)inal case for alle+ed violation of P' HH2 since the facts o6tainin+ in the case do not constit#te an offence or violation of said law 8e&%: Petition for certiorari is +ranted1 ?o (erson sho#ld 6e 6ro#+ht within the ter)s of a (enal stat#te who is not clearl3 within the)% nor sho#ld an3 act 6e (rono#nced cri)inal which is not clearl3 )ade so 63 the stat#te1 Gased on its (rea)6le% P' HH2 a((lied onl3 to s,#atters in #r6an areas and not to a+ric#lt#ral lands1

21

he3 are different offenses1 RA 1H00 (#nishes s#6version while P' 1$66 (#nishes ille+al (ossession of firear)s1 G#t% since RA H636 totall3 re(ealed s#6version or RA 1H00% E since this is favora6le to the acc#sed% we can no lon+er char+e acc#sed with RA 1H00 even if the3 didnFt raise this iss#e1 P' 1$66 sho#ld 6e a)ended to )ere ille+al (ossession of firear)s witho#t f#rtherance of s#6version

 

he facts fro) which the inferences are derived fro) are (roven he co)6ination of all the circ#)stances is s#ch as to (rod#ce a conviction 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1

8e&%: R C and CA reversed and set aside1 RA 1H00 char+e dis)issed1 P' 1$66 chan+e a)ended1 Release #Can1

reacher3 (attac.ed has no chance to defend hi)self or retaliate deli6erate ado(tion of )eans) and evident (re)editiation (ti)e when decided and clin+in+ to deter)ination and la(se 6etween deter)ination and e-ec#tion) sho#ld 6e (roven 63 (rosec#tion1 h#s% d#e to lac. of a++ravatin+ circ#)stances% death is lowered1

/ASCUAL v. ;OARD OF MEDICAL EIAMINERS [2$ SCRA 377 (1&6&)] Fact : Petitioner is facin+ an ad)inistrative case where char+es of i))oralit3 are filed a+ainst hi)1 he co#nsel for co)(lainants wished to (resent the (etitioner to 6e the first witness1 Petitioner o6Cected% rel3in+ on the constit#tional ri+ht a+ainst self= incri)ination1 he Goard of 9-a)iners r#led that (etitioner sho#ld 6e called to testif31 4t said that (etitioner% once on the witness stand% can then o6Cect to ,#estions incri)inatin+ in nat#re1 I ue: J!? the ri+ht a+ainst self=incri)ination is availa6le not onl3 to cri)inal% 6#t also to ad)inistrative (roceedin+s1 8e&%: @es1 Affir)ed1 Garrin+ Goard fro) co)(ellin+ Pasc#al to testif31 @es% the ri+ht a+ainst self=incri)ination is availa6le even in ad)inistrative (roceedin+s1 2iven the nat#re of the ad)inistrative (roceedin+s% which when fo#nd +#ilt3% shall res#lt in forfeit#re or loss of Pasc#alFs license to (ractice )edicine% is ,#asi=cri)inal in nat#re1 he acc#sed now has the ri+ht to re)ain silent% and his silence cannot 6e #sed as a (res#)(tion of his +#ilt1 he co#rt reiterated% B he ri+ht Self=4ncri)ination cla#se ena6les the citi/en to create a /one of (rivac3 which the +overn)ent )a3 not force to s#rrender to his detri)ent1D

/EO/LE v. MULETA [30& SCRA 17$ (1&&&)] Fact : he victi)Fs 6od3 was fo#nd na.ed in Malolos G#lacan tied to a (ost with the #se of a (air of (ants and 6oth her hand were with tied with a 6ra1 She had 3 sta6 wo#nds in her nec. and 2 at her 6ac.1 Accordin+ to the investi+ation cond#cted 63 the ?G4% the defendant is the victi)Fs #ncle1 4t was alle+ed that the a((ellant had left his wor. in ondo a da3 6efore the victi)Fs 6od3 was fo#nd1 :e ret#rned onl3 in the )ornin+ of the ne-t da31 Accordin+ to his co#nsel% he ad)itted havin+ ra(ed and later .illed the victi)1 Another witness testified that d#rin+ the wa.e of the victi)% the a((ellant #ttered incri)inatin+ words1 he a((ellant was fo#nd +#ilt3 of )#rder E sentenced to life i)(rison)ent E (a3)ent of da)a+es1 I ue : J!? the circ#)stantial evidence was eno#+h to esta6lish +#ilt of the a((ellantS S(ecificall35 1. WON e5tra<u%"c"a& c#$+e "#$ " va&"% a$% a%." ")&e st 1 assi+n)ent of error5 the co#rt erred in +ivin+ wei+ht and credence to the evidence for the (rosec#tion and in the (rocess disre+ardin+ the defence and ali6i of the acc#sed=a((ellant1 his a((eal is )eritorio#s1 he e-tra=C#dicial confession is inad)issi6le and the evidence ins#fficient1 he a((ellant ad)its to the confession% with the a6sence of co#nsel1 he a((ellant was also s#(erficiall3 infor)ed of his constit#tional ri+hts which is in violation of the re,#ire)ent of BeffectiveD co))#nication1 Most of the state)ents were terse and (erf#nctor3 state)ents1 4t sho#ld confor) with Article 444 sec 12 of Constit#tion a1 Ri+ht to 6e infor)ed of constit#tional ri+hts I acc#sed sho#ld #nderstand ri+hts1 State)ents were tense and (erf#nctor3 witho#t considerin+ if acc#sed #nderstood1 'oesnFt (rove vol#ntariness 61 Ri+ht to co#nsel I A+ent olentinoFs sworn state)ent shows that confession 6e+an on Se(te)6er 1&% 1&&3 when law3er onl3 arrived the followin+ da31 Confession 6e+an witho#t assistance of co#nsel1 <aw3erFs fail#re to a((ear did not +ive co#rt chance to confir) her co)(etence% inde(endence and validit3 of confession c1 4nvalid waiver I lan+#a+e was va+#e and ins#fficient1 and since he wasnFt assisted 63 law3er% waiver is invalid WON !r# ecut"#$3 ev"%e$ce u++"c"e$t t# c#$v"ct Mu&eta nd 2 5 S#fficienc3 of evidence1 he circ#)stantial evidence were controverted 63 the defense and even )ore i)(ortant% were not f#ll3 esta6lished1 he evidence on the a((ellant leavin+ wor. and ret#rnin+ the in the )ornin+ the discover3 of the victi)Fs 6od3 is )ere hearsa31 :is h3steria d#rin+ the wa.e co#ld )ean an3thin+1 4t is at 6est a)6i+#o#s1 Circ#)stancial evidence sho#ld 6e5 a1 )ore than 1 circ#)stance

/EO/LE v. LO/E> [313 SCRA 117 (1&&&)] Fact : Prior to the incident% 'avid% Candalo E <o(e/ were seen 63 SeriXo ((o#ltr3 careta.er) havin+ a drin.in+ s(ree at aro#nd 6()1 he3 sto((ed 63 H()1 SeriXo and :elsi) left when 'avid and Candalo were aslee( leavin+ <o(e/ who was still awa.e1 Chec.ed o#t 6ar.in+ do+ aro#nd 11 ()1 he3 went to 'avid et al ,#arters where the3 saw 9d+ar <o(e/ carr3in+ a 6lac. 6a+ and wearin+ 6loodied white (ants r#nnin+ towards the direction of the +ate1 he3 saw hi) cli)6 over it1 Jhen the3 went to his slee(in+ ,#arters% the3 saw Gonifacio 'avid dead% with an inC#r3 at the nec.1 !n their wa3 to ca(tainFs ho#se% the3 saw <o(e/ arrested 63 ca(tain and ?G4 a+ents1 I ue: J!? the a((ellant +#ilt of )#rder was (roven 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t% d#e to the ,#alif3in+ circ#)stances of treacher3 and evident (re)editation1 8e&%: @es1 Convicted :o)icide (Prision )a3or )ini)#) $ 3ears and one da3 I recl#sion te)(oral )a- 17 3rs an $ )onths 1 da3) Y P&R f#neral fees Y 80R inde)nit31 'irect evidence not needed if all circ#)stantial evidence s#((ort or are consistent with acc#sedFs +#ilt and inconsistent with his innocence (Peo(le v1 de 2#ia)1 his can s#r(ass direct evidence1 he re,#isites to warrant conviction 6ased on circ#)stantial evidence are5  here is )ore than one circ#)stance

/EO/LE v. /IMENTEL [2$$ SCRA 872 (1&&$)] Fact : 1&$31 #Can char+ed with s#6versions #nder RA 1H00 with warrant of arrest iss#ed1 !n "#ne 8% 1&&0% #Can was arrested and ca#+ht with 13$ cali6er revolver1 !n "#ne 17% 1&&0% he was char+ed with ille+al (ossession of firear)s and a))#nition in f#rtherance of s#6version (P' 1$66) #Can filed )otion to ,#ash invo.in+ (rotection vers#s do#6le Ceo(ard3 (Art1 444% Constit#tionL Misolas v1 Pan+aL E 9nrile v1 Sala/ar5 alle+ed (ossession a6sor6ed in s#6version1 4t was +ranted 63 the C E the CA1 I ue: J!? char+e #nder P' 1$66 6e ,#ashed on +ro#nd of do#6le Ceo(ard3 in view of the (revio#s char+e #nder RA 1H001 Rat"#: ?o1 11 A444 of the Constit#tion E R!C 11H state that for do#6le Ceo(ard3 to occ#r% ac,#ittal% conviction or dis)issal in (revio#s cases )#st have occ#rred1 4n this case% first case was not even arrai+ned 3et1

-.

61 c1

facts where 3o# derive inferences as (roven co)6ine all circ#)stance to (rod#ce conviction1 M#letaFs co= wor.erFs affidavit is hearsa3 6eca#se the3 were not (resented and cross=e-a)ined (PP v1 *9R?A?'9M) Circ#)stantial evidence are onl3 si+nificant with the inad)issi6le confession

/EO/LE v. 8ASSAN [18H SCRA 261 (1&$$)] Fact : 0s)an :assan% 18 3rs1 !ld of Sa)al ri6e in Ma)6o Cit3 was convicted of )#rder of Pichel1 Pichel was sta66ed to death at fr#it (aradise while sittin+ at his red honda )otorc3cle% waitin+ for friend "ose Sa)son who was 6#3in+ fr#its1 I ue: J!? conviction is valid

A.

WON ("t$e te t".#$"e (ere va&"%2 @es1 4nconsistencies )ean and even stren+then1 4t was not rehearsed WON a&")" (arra$te%2 ?o1 Positive identification over ali6i1 0na6le to (rove that the3 were in another (lace and i)(ossi6le to +o to cri)e scene WON t'ere (a treac'er1 a$% #t'er a**ravt"$* c"rcu. ta$ce 2 ?o1 reacher3 and ta.in+ advanta+e of s#(erior stren+th was not (roven as there was no witness or evidence1 he #nlicensed firear) and dwellin+ was f#rther not incl#ded in infor)ation1

H.

,.

WON accu e% a&")" " a%." ")&e +#r %e+e$ e 3rd5 Ali6i1 Altho#+h the co#rt considers the ali6i a wea. defence% (rosec#tion )#st convict the acc#sed 6ased on the stren+th of its own case not on the wea.ness of defence1

8e&%: Reversed1

/EO/LE v. TEM;LOR [161 SCRA 623 (1&$$)] Nature: A((eal fro) the C#d+)ent of the C*4 of A+#san del ?orte and G#t#an Cit31 Fact : !n 30 'ece)6er 1&$0% H530 PM% >icente e)6lor alias BRonaldD (acc#sed=a((ellant) went to "#li#s Ca+a)(an+Fs ho#se in A+#san del ?orte% to 6#3 ci+arettes1 Ca+a)(an+% while o(enin+ a (ac. of ci+arettes% was shotZ he acc#sed (and another (erson% Anecito 9llevera) de)anded >ictorina Ca+a)(an+ ("#li#sF wife) that she 6rin+s o#t her h#s6andFs firear)s1 he acc#sed fired two )ore shots at the fallen victi)1 >ictorina +ave a s#itcase to e)6lor% who then too. the 13$ cali6er which was inside% and fled1 4n A#+#st 1&$1% e)6lor% an ?PA% s#rrendered (it was act#all3 a )ass s#rrender of ?PAFs) after hidin+ in the )o#ntains1 4n 26 ?ove)6er 1&$1% he was arrested 63 G#enavista (olice at the (#6lic )ar.et and then detained at )#nici(al Cail1 Re+ardin+ the )#rder of Ca+a)(an+% e)6lorFs ali6i was that da3 #ntil the ne-t% he was with his father for drin.in+ and (#l#tan1 !n $ "#ne 1&$2% the acc#sed was convicted and sentenced to s#ffer reclusion perpertua% and to inde)nif3 the heirs of the victi) P12%0001 :e a((ealed1 [[[ 4n this a((eal% the a((ellant alle+es that the co#rt a ,#o erred5 (1) in findin+ that he was (ositivel3 identified 63 the (rosec#tion witness as the .iller% and (2) in reCectin+ his defense of ali6i1 I ue: J!? the acc#sed is +#ilt3 of )#rder1

8e&%: ?o1 Conviction reversed1 Ac,#itted1 he Medico <e+al fo#nd two sta6 wo#nds fro) front 6#t the Sa)son clai)ed that Pichel was sta66ed once fro) 6ehind1 Proced#re followed was also i)(ro(er1 he acc#sed was (resented to the witness alone and in confrontation% not (olice line #(1 :e was also denied ri+ht to co#nsel% (artic#larl3 when identification too. (lace;this ,#alifies for #nco#nselled confession1 he witness was also ,#estioned 2 da3s after incident and sworn 7 da3s after1 he fr#it vendor as well as the co)(anion of the acc#sed was not investi+ated1 4n fact% the3 did not (#rs#e other s#s(ect1 Also% the .nife was not tested1 *#rther nota6le are the facts that the a+e of the acc#sed was o6served witho#t )edical 6asis% that the acc#sed did not r#n awa3 and that he had no )otive% which% in Peo(le vs1 >er/o was considered i)(ortant when there is do#6t in the identit3 of c#l(rit and reiterated in Peo(le vs1 Pervelo which stated that identification is ten#o#s1 /EO/LE v. DELIM ["an#ar3 2&% 2003] Fact : Marlon% <eon E Ronald 'eli) were convicted for )#rder of Modesto 'eli)% resident of Gila% Sison% Pan+asinan1 Modesto is the ado(ted child of MarlonFs 'ad1 Marlon% Man#el E Ro6ert are 6rothers E <eon E Ronald are their ne(hews1 Aro#nd 6530 ()% "an#ar3 23% 1&&&% Modesto and fa)il3 were (re(arin+ to eat dinner when Marlon% Ro6ert and Ronald arrived1 Marlon (o.ed +#n% other two +ra66ed% ho+ tied and +a++ed Modesto1 he3 herded hi) o#t of the hose and went to the direction of Paldit1 <eon and Man#al +#arded Rita E Rand3 #ntil H a) and told the) to sta3 (#t1 he3 searched for hi) for 3 da3s and re(orted to (olice three da3s after the incident1 Rand3 with relatives fo#nd Modesto in the ho#sin+ (roCect in Paldit #nder 6#shes1 :e was dead d#e to +#n shot wo#nd on head1 I ue : 1. WON ca e " .ur%er #r C"%$a!!"$*2 M#rder5 when (ri)ar3 (#r(ose is to .ill% de(rivation is incidental and doesnFt constit#te .idna((in+ (0S v1 Ancheta)1 S(ecific intent5 active desire to do certain cri)inal acts or (artic#lar (#r(ose (e-a)(le% )#rder and .idna((in+;.ill and de(rive victi) of li6ert3) )otive5 reason which (ro)(ts acc#sed to en+a+e in (artic#lar cri)inal activit3 (e-1 Ridna( for ranso)= rasno)) essential for .idna((in+1 4nfor)ation5 descri6ed )#rder and .idna((in+ not s(ecified1 -. WON !r# ecut"#$ 'a% u++"c"e$t ev"%e$ce2 @es1 Prosec#tion (roved intent to .ill with their .nives and hand+#ns% 8 +#n shot wo#nds and 7 sta6 wo#nds (defensive)1 *#rther)ore% the (ieces of circ#)stancial evidence were convincin+5 Rita and Rand3 testified events1 Rita clai)ed she heard 3 +#nshots and accordin+l3% deco)(osin+ 6od3 was fo#nd with +#nshot wo#nds and sta6s1 WON t'ere (a c#$ !"rac12 @es1 Cons(irac3 is when two or )ore (ersons a+ree and decide to co))it a felon31 his is (roven 63 acts of cri)inal1 Gefore d#rin+ and after cri)e co))itted and that acc#sed had sa)e (#r(ose and #nited in e-ec#tionL act of one act of all1 Jharton cri)inal law;act#al (resence not necessar3 if thereFs direct connection 6et actor and cri)e

J.

8e&%: Conviction affir)ed with )odification

ESTRADA v. SANDIGAN;AYAN [36& SCRA 3&7 (2001)] I ue : 1. WON /&u$%er La( " u$c#$ t"tut"#$a& +#r )e"$* va*ue ?o1 As lon+ as the law affords so)e co)(rehensi6le +#ide or r#le that wo#ld infor) those who are s#6Cect to it what cond#ct wo#ld render the) lia6le to its (enalties% its validit3 will 6e s#stained1 he a)ended infor)ation itself closel3 trac.s the lan+#a+e of law% indicatin+ wK reasona6le certaint3 the vario#s ele)ents of the offense wKc the (etitioner is alle+ed to have co))itted1 Je discern nothin+ in the fore+oin+ that is va+#e or a)6i+#o#s that will conf#se (etitioner in his defense1 Petitioner however 6ewails the fail#re of the law to (rovide for the stat#tor3 definition of the ter)s Bco)6inationD and BseriesD in the .e3 (hrase Ba co)6ination or series of overt or cri)inal acts1 hese o)issions% accordin+ to the (etitioner% render the Pl#nder <aw #nconstit#tional for 6ein+ i)(er)issi6l3 va+#e and over6road and den3 hi) the ri+ht to 6e infor)ed of the nat#re and ca#se of the acc#sation a+ainst hi)% hence violative of his f#nda)ental ri+ht to d#e (rocess1 A stat#te is not rendered #ncertain and void )erel3 6eca#se +eneral ter)s are #sed herein% or 6eca#se of the e)(lo3)ent of ter)s witho#t definin+ the)1 A stat#te or act )a3 6e said to 6e va+#e when it lac.s co)(rehensi6le standards that )en of co))on intelli+ence )ost necessaril3 +#ess at its )eanin+ and differ in its a((lication1 4n s#ch instance% the stat#te is re(#+nant to the Constit#tion in two (2) res(ects I it violates d#e (rocess for fail#re to accord (ersons% es(eciall3 the (arties tar+eted 63 it% fair notice of what cond#ct to avoidL and% it leaves law enforcers #n6ridled discretion in carr3in+ o#t its (rovisions and 6eco)es an ar6itrar3 fle-in+ of the 2overn)ent )#scle1 A facial challen+e is allowed to 6e )ade to va+#e stat#te and to one which is over6road 6eca#se of (ossi6le Bchillin+ effectD #(on (rotected s(eech1 he (ossi6le har) to societ3 in (er)ittin+ so)e #n(rotected s(eech to +o #n(#nished is o#twei+hed 63 the (ossi6ilit3 that the (rotected s(eech of other )a3 6e deterred and (erceived +rievances left to fester 6eca#se of (ossi6le inhi6itor3 effects of overl3 6road stat#tes1 G#t in cri)inal law% the law cannot ta.e chances as in the area of free s(eech1

8e&%: @es% the acc#sed is +#ilt3 of )#rder1 "#d+)ent a((ealed fro) is A**4RM9' in all res(ects and civil inde)nit3 increased to P30R1 4t was (roven that he had )otive in .illin+ Ca+a)(an+5 he had .nowled+e that Ca+a)(an+ (ossessed a firear)L this was )otive eno#+h to .ill hi)% as (art of ?PAFs Ba+aw ar)asD ca)(ai+n or .illin+s (er(etrated 63 ?PA for the (#r(ose of ac,#irin+ )ore firear)s1 Moreover% (roof of )otive is not essential when the c#l(rit has 6een (ositivel3 identified1 Also% his fli+ht i)(lies +#ilt1 he (rosec#tion witness% >ictorina Ca+a)(an+% )a3 have )inor inconsistencies in her testi)on3 6#t this does not di)inish her credi6ilit3 I that is (art of 6ein+ h#)an 1 Jhat is i)(ortant is that she had (ositivel3 identified the acc#sed as the assailant and that her testi)on3 is corro6orated 63 other witnesses1 *#rther)ore% the acc#sedFs ali6i was #nacce(ta6le 6eca#se it was self=servin+ and #ncorro6orated1 4t cannot overr#le (ositive identification% it was )erel3 18=20 )in#tes awa3 fro) cri)e scene and Perol was at wor.1

,.

-.

WON t'e /&u$%er La( reFu"re &e ev"%e$ce +#r !r#v"%"$* t'e !re%"cate cr".e #+ !&u$%er a$% t'ere+#re v"#&ate t'e r"*'t #+ t'e accu e% t# %ue !r#ce ?o1 Sec1 7 (R#le of 9vidence) states that5 *or (#r(oses of esta6lishin+ the cri)e of (l#nder% it shall not 6e necessar3 to (rove each and ever3 cri)inal act done 63 the acc#sed in f#rtherance of the sche)e or cons(irac3 to a)ass% acc#)#late or ac,#ire ill=+otten wealth% it 6ein+ s#fficient to esta6lish 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t a (attern of overt or cri)inal acts indicative of the overall #nlawf#l sche)e or cons(irac31 4n a cri)inal (rosec#tion for (l#nder% as in all other cri)es% the acc#sed alwa3s has in his favor the (res#)(tion of innocence +#aranteed 63 the Gill of Ri+hts% and #nless the State s#cceeds in de)onstratin+ 63 (roof 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t that c#l(a6ilit3 lies% the acc#sed is entitled to an ac,#ittal1 he Breasona6le do#6tD standard has ac,#ired s#ch e-alted stat#re in the real) of constit#tional law as it +ives life to the '#e Process Cla#se which (rotects the acc#sed a+ainst conviction e-ce(t #(on (roof of reasona6le do#6t of ever3 fact necessar3 to constit#te the cri)e with which he is char+ed1 ?ot ever3thin+ alle+ed in the infor)ation needs to 6e (roved 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1 Jhat is re,#ired to 6e (roved 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t is ever3 ele)ent of the cri)e char+ed;the ele)ent of the offense1 Relative to (etitionerFs contentions on the (#r(orted defect of Sec1 7 is his s#6)ission that B(atternD is a Bver3 i)(ortant ele)ent of the cri)e of (l#nderLD and that Sec1 7 is Btwo= (ron+ed% (as) it contains a r#le of evidence and a s#6stantive ele)ent of the cri)e% B s#ch that witho#t it the acc#sed cannot 6e convicted of (l#nder I Je do not s#6scri6e to (etitionerFs stand1 Pri)aril3% all the essential ele)ents of (l#nder can 6e c#lled and #nderstood fro) its definition in Sec1 2% in relation to sec1 1 (ar1 (d)1 Sec1 7 (#r(orts to do no )ore than (rescri6e a r#le of (roced#re for the (rosec#tion of a cri)inal case for (l#nder1 Gein+ a (#rel3 (roced#ral )eas#re% Sec1 7 does not define or esta6lish an3 s#6stantive ri+ht in favor of the acc#sed 6#t onl3 o(erated in f#rtherance of a re)ed31 Jhat is cr#cial for the (rosec#tion is to (resent s#fficient evidence to en+ender that )oral certit#de e-acted 63 the f#nda)ental law to (rove the +#ilt of the acc#sed 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1

Senator aXada was onl3 sa3in+ that where the char+e is cons(irac3 to co))it (l#nder% the (rosec#tion need not (rove each and ever3 cri)inal act done to f#rther the sche)e or cons(irac3% it 6ein+ eno#+h if it (roves 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t a (attern of overt or cri)inal acts indicative of the overall #nlawf#l sche)e or cons(irac31 As far as the acts constit#tin+ the (attern are concerned% however% the ele)ents of the cri)e )#st 6e (roved and the re,#isite mens rea )#st 6e shown1 he a((lication of )iti+atin+ and e-ten#atin+ circ#)stances in the Revised Penal Code to (rosec#tions #nder the Anti=Pl#nder <aw indicates ,#ite clearl3 that mens rea is an ele)ent of (l#nder since the de+ree of res(onsi6ilit3 of the offender is deter)ined 63 his cri)inal intent1 *inall3% an3 do#6t as to whether the cri)e of (l#nder is a malum in se )#st 6e dee)ed to have 6een resolved in the affir)ative 63 the decision of Con+ress in 1&&3 to incl#de it a)on+ the heino#s cri)es (#nisha6le 63 reclusion perpetua to death1 he evil of a cri)e )a3 ta.e vario#s for)s1 here are cri)es that are% 63 their ver3 nat#re% des(ica6le% either 6eca#se life was callo#sl3 ta.en or the victi) is treated li.e an ani)al and #tterl3 deh#)ani/ed as to co)(letel3 disr#(t the nor)al co#rse of his or her +rowth as a h#)an 6ein+1 here are cri)es however in which the a6o)ination lies in the si+nificance and i)(lications of the s#6Cect cri)inal acts in the sche)e of the lar+er socio=(olitical and econo)ic conte-t in which the state finds itself to 6e str#++lin+ to develo( and (rovide for its (oor and #nder(rivile+ed )asses1 he le+islative declaration in R1A1 ?o1H68& that (l#nder is a heino#s offense i)(lies that it is a malum in se. *or when the acts (#nished are inherentl3 i))oral or inherentl3 wron+% the3 are mala in se and it does not )atter that s#ch acts are (#nished in a s(ecial law% es(eciall3 since in the case of (l#nder the (redicate cri)es are )ainl3 mala in se. 8e&%: PR9M4S9S C!?S4'9R9'% this Co#rt holds that RA H0$0 otherwise .nown as the Pl#nder <aw% as a)ended 63 RA H68&% is C!?S 4 0 4!?A<1 Conse,#entl3% the (etition to declare the law #nconstit#tional is '4SM4SS9' for lac. of )erit



lac. of s#fficient (rovocation on the (art of the (erson defendin+ hi)self

4f the intr#der was reall3 a ro66er% forcin+ his wa3 into the roo) of Ah Chon+% there wo#ld have 6een #nlawf#l a++ression on the (art of the intr#der1 here wo#ld have 6een a necessit3 on the (art of Ah Chon+ to defend hi)self andKor his ho)e1 he .nife wo#ld have 6een a reasona6le )eans to (revent or re(el s#ch a++ression1 And Ah Chon+ +ave no (rovocation at all1 0nder A11 of the RPC% there is nothin+ #nlawf#l in the intention as well as in the act of the (erson )a.in+ the defense1

/EO/LE v. OANIS [H7 Phil1 28H (1&73)] Fact : Chief of Police !anis and his co=acc#sed Cor(oral 2alanta were #nder instr#ctions to arrest one Gala+tas% a notorio#s cri)inal and esca(ed convict% and if over(owered% to +et hi dead or alive1 Proceedin+ to the s#s(ected ho#se% the3 went into a roo) and on seein+ a )an slee(in+ with his 6ac. toward the door% si)#ltaneo#sl3 fired at hi) with their revolvers% witho#t first )a.in+ an3 reasona6le in,#ir3 as to his identit31 he victi) t#rned o#t to 6e an innocent )an% ecson% and not the wanted cri)inal11 8e&%: Goth acc#sed are +#ilt3 of )#rder Rat"#: 9ven if it were tr#e that the victi) was the notorio#s cri)inal% the acc#sed wo#ld not 6e C#stified in .illin+ hi) while the latter was slee(in+1 4n a((rehendin+ even the )ost notorio#s cri)inal% the law does not (er)it the ca(tor to .ill hi)1 4t is onl3 when the f#+itive fro) C#stice is deter)ined to fi+ht the officers of law who are tr3in+ to ca(t#re hi) that .illin+ hi) wo#ld 6e C#stified1

/EO/LE v. CARMEN [388 SCRA 26H (2001)] Fact : he trial co#rt rendered a decision and the acc#sed= a((ellants were all fo#nd +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of the cri)e of M#rder after havin+ (erfor)ed a c#ltic healin+ (ra3=over which res#lted to the death of Rand3 <#nta3ao1 he3 were sentenced to s#ffer the (enalt3 of R9C<0S4!? P9RP9 0A1 I ue: J!? acc#sed=a((ellants can 6e held lia6le for rec.less i)(r#dence res#ltin+ in ho)icide% considerin+ that the infor)ation char+es the) with )#rder1 8e&%: @es1 Conviction )odified to rec.less i)(r#dence res#ltin+ in ho)icide1 Rillin+ a (erson wK treacher3 is )#rder even if there is no intent to .ill1 Jhen death occ#rs% itFs (res#)ed to 6e the nat#ral conse,#ence of (h3sical inC#ries inflicted1 4n )#rder ,#alified 63 treacher3% itFs re,#ired onl3 that there is treacher3 in the attac.% E this is tr#e even if the offender has no intent to .ill the (erson assa#lted !ne who co))its an intentional felon3 is res(onsi6le for all the conse,#ences which )a3 nat#rall3 and lo+icall3 res#lt therefro)% whether foreseen or intended or not1 4ntent is (res#)ed fro) the co))ission of an #nlawf#l act1 he (res#)(tion of cri)inal intent )a3 arise fro) the (roof of the cri)inal act1 :ence% the3 are lia6le for all the direct and nat#ral conse,#ences of their #nlawf#l act% even if the #lti)ate res#lt had not 6een intended1 he stran+e (roced#re res#lted in the death of the 6o31 h#s% acc#sed=a((ellants had no cri)inal intent to .ill the 6o31 heir lia6ilit3 arises fro) their rec.less i)(r#dence 6eca#se the3 o#+ht that to .now their actions wo#ld not 6rin+ a6o#t the c#re1 he3 are%

U.S. v. A8 C8ONG [18 Phil1 7$$ (1&10)] Fact : Ah Chon+ was a coo. in *t1 McRinle31 :e was afraid of 6ad ele)ents1 !ne evenin+% 6efore +oin+ to 6ed% he loc.ed hi)self in his roo) 63 (lacin+ a chair a+ainst the door1 After havin+ +one to 6ed% he was awa.ened 63 so)eone tr3in+ to o(en the door1 :e called o#t twice% BJho is there%D 6#t received no answer1 *earin+ that the intr#der was a ro66er% he lea(ed fro) his 6ed E called o#t a+ain% B4f 3o# enter the roo) 4 will .ill 3o#1D G#t at that (recise )o)ent% he was str#c. 63 the chair that had 6een (laced a+ainst the door% E 6elievin+ that he was 6ein+ attac.ed he sei/ed a .itchen .nife E str#c. E fatall3 wo#nded the intr#der who t#rned o#t to 6e his roo))ate1 8e&%: Ah Chon+ )#st 6e ac,#itted 6eca#se of )ista.e of fact1 Rat"#: :ad the facts 6een as Ah Chon+ 6elieved the) to 6e% he wo#ld have 6een C#stified in .illin+ the intr#der #nder A11% (ar1 1% of the RPC% which re,#ires% to C#stif3 the act% that there 6e5  #nlawf#l a++ression on the (art of the (erson .illed%  reasona6le necessit3 of the )eans e)(lo3ed to (revent or re(el it% E

,.

WON /&u$%er a %e+"$e% "$ RA D0@0 " a .a&u. !r#'")"tu.7 a$% "+ #7 ('et'er "t " ("t'"$ t'e !#(er #+ C#$*re t# # c&a "+1 "t. ?o1 4t is )al#) in se which re,#ires (roof of cri)inal intent1 Precisel3 6eca#se the constit#tive cri)es are )ala in se the ele)ent of )ens rea )#st 6e (roven in a (rosec#tion for (l#nder1 4t is noteworth3 that the a)ended infor)ation alle+es that the cri)e of (l#nder was co))itted Bwillf#ll3% #nlawf#ll3 and cri)inall31D 4t th#s alle+es +#ilt3 .nowled+e on the (art of (etitioner1 4n s#((ort of his contention 4n s#((ort of his contention that stat#te eli)inates the re,#ire)ent of mens rea and that is reason he clai)s the stat#te is void% (etitioner cites followin+ re)ar.s of Senator aXada )ade d#rin+ deli6eration on S1G1 ?o1H33 the the the the

therefore% +#ilt3 of rec.less i)(r#dence res#ltin+ in ho)icide and not of )#rder1 RPC A368% as a)ended% states that rec.less i)(r#dence consists in vol#ntaril3% 6#t wKo )alice% doin+ or failin+ to do an act fro) which )aterial da)a+e res#lts 63 reason of ine-c#sa6le lac. of (reca#tion on the (art of the (erson (erfor)in+ s#ch act1 Co)(ared to intentional felonies% s#ch as ho)icide or )#rder% what ta.es the (lace of the ele)ent of )alice or intention to co))it a wron+ or evil is the fail#re of the offender to ta.e (reca#tions d#e to lac. of s.ill ta.in+ into acco#nt his e)(lo3)ent% or occ#(ation% de+ree of intelli+ence% (h3sical condition% E other circ#)stances re+ardin+ (ersons% ti)e% E (lace1 he ele)ents of rec.less i)(r#dence are a((arent in the acts done 63 acc#sed=a((ellants which% 6eca#se of their lac. of )edical s.ill in treatin+ the victi) of his alle+ed ail)ent% res#lted in the latterOs death1 he acc#sed had no intention to ca#se an evil 6#t rather to re)ed3 the victi)Os ail)ent1 COs reliance on the r#le that cri)inal intent is (res#)ed fro) the co))ission of an #nlawf#l act is #ntena6le 6eca#se s#ch (res#)(tion onl3 holds in the a6sence of (roof to the contrar31 Conse,#entl3% treacher3 cannot 6e a((reciated for in the a6sence of intent to .ill% thereFs no treacher3 or the deli6erate e)(lo3)ent of )eans% )ethods% E )anner of e-ec#tion to ens#re the safet3 of the acc#sed fro) the defensive or retaliator3 attac.s co)in+ fro) the victi)1 !n the other hand% there is no )erit in acc#sed=a((ellantsO contention that the testi)on3 of (rosec#tion e3ewitness :one3 *e A6ella is not credi6le1 Second1 @es1 R#le 120 (Section 7 and 8) of the Revised R#les of Cri)inal Proced#re (rovides1 Ru&e: J:9R9*!R9% the decision of the R C% Gr1 17% Ce6# Cit3% is A**4RM9' with the M!'4*4CA 4!? that acc#sed=a((ellants are here63 declared +#ilt3 of rec.less i)(r#dence res#ltin+ in ho)icide E are each sentenced to s#ffer an indeter)inate (rison ter) of 7 )os1 of arresto mayor% as )ini)#)% to 7 3ears E 2 )os1 of prision correccional% as )a-i)#)1 4n addition% acc#sed=a((ellants are !R'9R9' Cointl3 E severall3 to (a3 the heirs of Rand3 <#nta3ao inde)nit3 in the a)o#nt of P80R% )oral da)a+es in the a)o#nt of P80%000100% and e-e)(lar3 da)a+es in the a)o#nt of P30R1

affect one (erson or several (ersons% the offense re)ains one and the sa)e1 4t cannot 6e s(lit into different cri)es and (rosec#tions1 he e-oneration of a((ellant 63 the M#nici(al Co#rt of the char+ed of sli+ht (h3sical inC#ries thro#+h rec.less i)(r#dence% (revents his 6ein+ (rosec#ted for serio#s (h3sical inC#ries thro#+h rec.less i)(r#dence in the C*4 of the (rovince where 6oth char+es are derived fro) the conse,#ence of one and the sa)e vehic#lar accident1 he second acc#sation (laces the a((ellant in the second Ceo(ard3 for the sa)e offense1

21 31 71 revolver

M=16 Ga63 Ar)alite )a+a/ine with a))o 13$0 (ietro 6eretta with $ a))o 6 live do#6le action a))o of 13$ cali6er

/ADILLA v. DI>ON [18$ SCRA 12H (1&$$)] Nature: Ad)inistrative Co)(laint in the S#(re)e Co#rt1 Fact : Pasa3 R C "#d+e Galta/ar 'i/on ac,#itted <o chi *ai who was arrested for violatin+ CG circ#lar no1 &60 sec1 6 no oneFs allowed to ta.e o#t forei+n e-chan+e in an3 for) #nless a#thori/ed 63 Central Gan. or international a+ree)ents1 o#ristsKnon=residents can onl3 6rin+ o#t a)o#nt e,#al to a)o#nt the3 6ro#+ht in1 if 3o# 6rin+ in a)o#nt +reater than Q3R% 3o# need to declare1 P#nisha6le 63 recl#sion te)(oral or +reater than or e,#al to P80R1 <o Chi *ai ca#+ht 3$0 (ieces of difference c#rrencies totalin+ to Q388%37&18H and was a6le to show onl3 two Central Gan. declarations1 Ac,#ittal 6ased on5 (1) no intent% (2) )one3 6elon+ed to) hi) and associates co)in+ fro) a6road not local1 I ue: J!? res(ondent C#d+e is +#ilt3 of +ross inco)(etent or +ross i+norance of the law in renderin+ the decision in ,#estion1 8e&%: Accordin+l3% the Co#rt finds the res(ondent +#ilt3 of +ross inco)(etence% +ross i+norance of the law and +rave and serio#s )iscond#ct affectin+ his inte+rit3 and efficienc3% and consistent with the res(onsi6ilit3 of this Co#rt for the C#st and (ro(er ad)inistration of C#stice and for the attain)ent of the o6Cective of )aintainin+ the (eo(leFs faith in the C#diciar3% it is here63 ordered that the Res(ondent "#d+e 6e dis)issed fro) service1 All leave and retire)ent 6enefits and (rivile+es to which he )a3 6e entitled are here63 forfeited with (reC#dice to his 6ein+ reinstated in an3 6ranch of +overn)ent service% incl#din+ +overn)ent=owned andKor controlled a+encies or cor(orations1 he res(ondent C#d+e has shown +ross inco)(etence or +ross i+norance of the law in holdin+ that to convict the acc#sed for violation of CG Circ#lar ?o1 &60% the (rosec#tion )#st esta6lish that the acc#sed had cri)inal intent to violate the law1 he res(ondent o#+ht to .now that (roof of )alice or deli6erate intent ()ens rea) is not essential in offenses (#nished 63 s(ecial laws% which are )ala (rohi6ita1 A C#d+e can not 6e held to acco#nt or answer% cri)inall3% civill3 or ad)inistrativel3% for an erroneo#s decision rendered 63 hi) in +ood faith1 G#t these circ#)stances which )a.e the stor3 concocted 63 the acc#sed so (al(a6l3 #n6elieva6le as to render the findin+s of the res(ondent C#d+e o6vio#sl3 contrived to favor the ac,#ittal of the acc#sed% there63 clearl3 ne+atin+ his clai) that he rendered the decision Bin +ood faith1D

Padilla clai)ed (a(ers of +#ns were at ho)e1 :is arrest for hit and r#n incident )odified to incl#de +ro#nds of 4lle+al Possession of firear)s1 :e had no (a(ers1 !n 'ec1 3% 1&&7% Padilla was fo#nd +#ilt3 of 4lle+al Possession of *irear)s #nder P' 1$66 63 the R C of An+eles Cit31 :e was convicted and sentenced to an indeter)inate (enalt3 fro) 1H 3ears1 7 )onths% 1 da3 of recl#sion te)(oral as )ini)#) to 21 3ears of recl#sion (er(et#a as )a-i)#)1 he Co#rt of A((eals confir)ed decision and cancelled 6ail6ond1 R C of An+eles Cit3 was directed to iss#e order of arrest1 Motion for reconsideration was denied 63 Co#rt of A((eals1 Padilla filed lots of other (etitions and all of a s#dden% the Solicitor 2eneral )ade a co)(lete t#rnaro#nd and filed BManifestation in <ie# of Co))entD (ra3in+ for ac,#ittal (na6a3aran si+#ro)1 I ue : 1. WARRANTLESS ARREST: WON '" (a "&&e*a& a$% c#$ eFue$t&17 t'e +"rear. a$% a..u$"t"#$ taCe$ "$ t'e c#ur e t'ere#+ are "$a%." ")&e "$ ev"%e$ce u$%er t'e e5c&u "#$ar1 ru&e ?o1 Anent the first defense% (etitioner ,#estions the le+alit3 of his arrest1 here is no dis(#te that no warrant was iss#ed for the arrest of (etitioner% 6#t that per se did not )a.e his a((rehension at the A6acan Grid+e ille+al1 Jarrantless arrests are sanctioned in Sec1 8% R#le 113 of the Revised R#les on Cri)inal Proced#re;a (eace officer or a (rivate (erson )a3% witho#t a warrant% arrest a (erson (a) when in his (resence the (erson to 6e arrested has co))itted% is act#all3 co))ittin+% or is atte)(tin+ to co))it an offense1 Jhen ca#+ht in fla+rante delicto with (ossession of an #nlicensed firear) and a))o% (etitionerFs warrantless arrest was (ro(er since he was act#all3 co))ittin+ another offence in the (resence of all those officers1 here was no s#(ervenin+ event or a considera6le la(se of ti)e 6etween the hit and r#n and the act#al a((rehension1 Geca#se arrest was le+al% the (ieces of evidence are ad)issi6le1 I$ ta$ce ('e$ (arra$t&e earc' a$% e"?ure #+ !r#!ert1 " va&"%:  Sei/#re of evidence in B(lain view%D ele)ents of which are (a) (rior valid intr#sion 6ased on valid warrantless arrest in which (olice are le+all3 (resent in (#rs#it of official d#ties% (6) evidence inadvertedl3 discovered 63 (olice who had the ri+ht to 6e there% (c) evidence i))ediatel3 a((arent% and (d) (lain view C#stified )ere sei/#re of evidence witho#t f#rther search (Peo(le v1 9varisto5 o6Cects whose (ossession are (rohi6ited 63 law inadvertedl3 fo#nd in (lain view are s#6Cect to sei/#re even witho#t a warrant)  Search of )ovin+ vehicle  Jarrantless search incidental to lawf#l arrest reco+ni/ed #nder section 12% R#le 126 of R#les of Co#rt and 63 (revailin+ C#ris(r#dence where the test of incidental search (not e-cl#ded 63 e-cl#sionar3 r#le) is that ite) to 6e searched )#st 6e within arresteeFs c#stod3 or area of i))ediate control and search conte)(oraneo#s with arrest1 Petitioner wo#ld nonetheless insist on the ille+alit3 of his arrest 63 ar+#in+ that the (olice)en who act#all3 arrested hi) were not at the scene of the hit and r#n1 he co#rt 6e+s to disa+ree1 4t is a realit3 that c#r6in+ lawlessness +ains )ore s#ccess when law enforcers f#nction in colla6oration with (rivate citi/ens1 *#rther)ore% in accordance with settled C#ris(r#dence% an3

/EO/LE v. ;UAN [22 SCRA 13$3 (1&6$)] Nature: A((eal fro) an order of the G#lacan C*4 Fact : Char+es )oved to ,#ash on the +ro#nd that he had alread3 6een ac,#itted of the sa)e offense 63 the "#stice of the Peace Co#rt I ue: J!? second case (laced the a((ellant twice in Ceo(ard3 for the sa)e offense% and is 6arred 63 the (revio#s ac,#ittal1 8e&%: @es1 !rder a((ealed fro) is reversed and the C*4 of G#lacan is directed to ,#ash E dis)iss the char+e in its Cri)inal Case ?o1 8273% no costs1 !nce convicted or ac,#itted of a s(ecific act of rec.less i)(r#dence% the acc#sed )a3 not 6e (rosec#ted a+ain for that sa)e act1 he essence of the ,#asi=offense of cri)inal ne+li+ence #nder RPC A368 lies in the e-ec#tion of an i)(r#dent or ne+li+ent act that% if intentionall3 done% wo#ld 6e (#nisha6le as a felon31 he law (enali/es the ne+li+ent or careless act% not the res#lt thereof1 he +ravit3 of the conse,#ence is onl3 ta.en into acco#nt to deter)ine the (enalt3L it does not ,#alif3 the s#6stance of the offense1 As the carelessness of the act is sin+le% whether the inC#rio#s res#lt sho#ld

/ADILLA v. COURT OF A//EALS [26& SCRA 702 (1&&H)] Nature: Petition for review on certiorari of a decision of the CA1 Fact : Padilla fi+#red in a hit and r#n accident in !ct 26% 1&&21 :e was later on a((rehended with the hel( (f a civilian witness1 0(on arrest followin+ hi+h (owered firear)s were fo#nd in his (ossession5 11 138H cali6er revolver with 6 live a))#nition

o6Cection% defect or irre+#larit3 attendin+ an arrest )#st 6e )ade 6efore the acc#sed enters his (lea1 2. LICENSE TO CARRY: WON t'e !et"t"#$er " aut'#r"?e%7 u$%er a M" "#$ Or%er a$% Me.#ra$%u. Rece"!t7 t# carr1 t'e u)<ect +"rear. ?o1 4n cri)es involvin+ ille+al (ossession of firear)% two re,#isites )#st 6e esta6lished% vi 15 (1) the e-istence of the s#6Cect firear) and% (2) the fact that the acc#sed who owned or (ossessed the firear) does not have the corres(ondin+ license or (er)it to (ossess1 he first ele)ent is 6e3ond dis(#te as the s#6Cect firear)s and a))#nitions were sei/ed fro) (etitionerOs (ossession via a valid warrantless search% identified and offered in evidence d#rin+ trial1 As to the second ele)ent% the sa)e was convincin+l3 (roven 63 the (rosec#tion1 4ndeed% (etitionerOs (#r(orted Mission !rder and Me)orand#) Recei(t are inferior in the face of the )ore for)ida6le evidence for the (rosec#tion as o#r )etic#lo#s review of the records reveals that the Mission !rder and Me)orand#) Recei(t were )ere aftertho#+hts contrived and iss#ed #nder s#s(icio#s circ#)stances1 !n this score% we lift fro) res(ondent co#rtOs incisive o6servation1 *#rther)ore% the Me)orand#) Recei(t is also #ns#((orted 63 a certification as re,#ired 63 the March 8% 1&$$ Me)orand#) of the Secretar3 of 'efense1 Petitioner is not in the Plantilla of ?on= 0nifor) (ersonnel or in list of Civilian A+ents of 9)(lo3ees of the P?P% which wo#ld C#stif3 iss#ance of )ission order (as stated in P' 1$66)1 <astl3% the M=16 and an3 short firear)s hi+her than 013$ cali6er cannot 6e licensed to a civilian1 /ENALTY: WON !e$a&t1 +#r ".!&e "&&e*a& !# e "#$ c#$ t"tute e5ce "ve a$% crue& !u$" '.e$t !r# cr")e% )1 t'e 19@D C#$ t"tut"#$ Anent his third defense% (etitioner fa#lts res(ondent co#rt Nin a((l3in+ P1'1 1$66 in a de)ocratic a)6ience ( sic) and a non= s#6versive conte-tN and adds that res(ondent co#rt sho#ld have a((lied instead the (revio#s laws on ille+al (ossession of firear)s since the reason for the (enalt3 i)(osed #nder P1'1 1$66 no lon+er e-ists1 :e stresses that the (enalt3 of 1H 3ears and 7 )onths to 21 3ears for si)(le ille+al (ossession of firear) is cr#el and e-cessive in contravention of the Constit#tion1 he contentions do not )erit serio#s consideration1 he trial co#rt and the res(ondent co#rt are 6o#nd to a((l3 the +overnin+ law at the ti)e of a((ellantOs co))ission of the offense for it is a r#le that laws are re(ealed onl3 63 s#6se,#ent ones1 4ndeed% it is the d#t3 of C#dicial officers to res(ect and a((l3 the law as it stands1 And #ntil its re(eal% res(ondent co#rt can not 6e fa#lted for a((l3in+ P1'1 1$66 which a6ro+ated the (revio#s stat#tes adverted to 63 (etitioner1 9,#all3 lac.in+ in )erit is a((ellantOs alle+ation that the (enalt3 for si)(le ille+al (ossession is #nconstit#tional1 he (enalt3 for si)(le (ossession of firear)% it sho#ld 6e stressed% ran+es fro) reclusion temporal )a-i)#) to reclusion perpetua contrar3 to a((ellantOs erroneo#s aver)ent1 he severit3 of a (enalt3 does not ipso facto )a.e the sa)e cr#el and e-cessive1 Moreover% ever3 law has in its favor the (res#)(tion of constit#tionalit31 he 6#rden of (rovin+ the invalidit3 of the stat#te in ,#estion lies with the a((ellant which 6#rden% we note% was not convincin+l3 dischar+ed1 o C#stif3 n#llification of the law% there )#st 6e a clear and #ne,#ivocal 6reach of the Constit#tion% not a do#6tf#l and ar+#)entative i)(lication% as in this case1 4n fact% the constit#tionalit3 of P1'1 1$66 has 6een #(held twice 63 this Co#rt1 "#st recentl3% the Co#rt declared that Nthe (ertinent laws on ille+al (ossession of firear)s [are not] contrar3 to an3 (rovision of the Constit#tion111N A((ellantOs +rievances on the wisdo) of the (rescri6ed (enalt3 sho#ld not 6e addressed to #s1 Co#rts are not concerned with the wisdo)%

efficac3 or )oralit3 of laws1 hat ,#estion falls e-cl#sivel3 within the (rovince of Con+ress which enacts the) and the Chief 9-ec#tive who a((roves or vetoes the)1 he onl3 f#nction of the co#rts% we reiterate% is to inter(ret and a((l3 the laws 8e&%: J:9R9*!R9% (re)ises considered% the decision of the CA s#stainin+ (etitionerOs conviction 63 the lower co#rt of the cri)e of si)(le ille+al (ossession of firear)s E a))#nitions is A**4RM9' 9TC9P that (etitionerOs indeter)inate (enalt3 is M!'4*49' to N10 3rs E 1 da3% as )in1 to 1$ 3rs% $ )onths E 1 da3% as )a-i)#)1 /e#!&e v. S".#$ D#ctr"$e: Altho#+h P' 1$66 is a s(ecial law% the (enalties therein were ta.en fro) the RPC% hence the r#les in said code for +rad#atin+ 63 de+rees of deter)inin+ the (ro(er (eriod sho#ld 6e a((lied1

)ista.e does not di)inish c#l(a6ilit3L sa)e +ravit3 a((lies% )ore (ro(er to #se error in (ersonae -. WON a&")"3 acce!ta)&e2 ?o1 4t was still ,#ite near the cri)e scene1 4t is overr#led 63 (ositive identification1 *#rther)ore% fli+ht indicates +#ilt WON c#rrect !e$a&t1 ".!# e%2 ?o1 0nder RPC A27$% the i)(osa6le (enalt3 is reclusion temporal% in its )a-i)#) (eriod to death1 here 6ein+ no a++ravatin+K)iti+atin+ circ#)stance% aside fro) the ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance of treacher3% the a((ellate co#rt correctl3 i)(osed recl#sion (er(et#a for )#rder1 he CA however erred in co)(#tin+ the (enalt3 for each of the three co#nts of fr#strated )#rder1 0nder RPC A80% the (enalt3 for a fr#strated felon3 is the ne-t lower in de+ree than that (rescri6ed 63 law for the cons#))ated felon3 ---1D Geca#se there are no a++ravatin+ or )iti+atin+ circ#)stance as the CA itself held% the (enalt3 (rescri6ed 63 law sho#ld 6e i)(osed in its )edi#) (eriod1

,.

/EO/LE v. SIMON [37 SCRA 888 (1&&7)] Nature: A((eal fro) a C#d+)ent of 2#a+#a% Pa)(an+a R C Fact : !ct1 22% 1&$$% Pa)(an+a1 Martin Si)on was convicted of violatin+ RA 6728 A44 A7 ('an+ero#s 'r#+s Act of 1&H2) thro#+h a ?ARC!M (oser=6#3er1 4t was a((ealed for reversal alle+in+ it was a fra)e=#( (testi)onies E evidence (roved otherwise) E evidence was inad)issi6le (held% 6eca#se there was no co#nsel)1 I ue: J!? correct (enalt3 a((liedS 8e&%: ?o1 Conviction )odified1 here was overla((in+ error in the law th#s the SC had to har)oni/e conflictin+ (rovisions 63 (rovidin+ for de+rees of +rad#ation1 R#le5 de+rees a((lied de(endin+ on ,#antit3 then a((l3 )iti+atin+ or a++ravatin+ circ#)stance1 <east (enalt3 sho#ld 6e (rision correccional so as not to de(reciate serio#sness of cri)e1 "#stified in a((l3in+ RPC (rovisions 6eca#se law ado(ted (enalties #nder RPC in their technical ter)s th#s si+nifications and effects will also a((l31 4t r#les in (eo(le v1 san+ :in Jai that when s(ecial law +rants discretion to SC to a((l3 (enalties% Code wonFt 6e held1 !therwise% SC sho#ld 6e +#ided 63 r#les in RPC that 6ein+ the e-(ert in cri)inal law ad)inistration1

8e&%: Conviction )odified

U.S. :. ;AUTISTA [6 Phil1 8$1 (1&06)] Nature: A((eal fro) the C#d+)ent of the Manila C*4 Fact : 4n 1&03 a C#nta was or+ani/ed and a cons(irac3 entered into 63 a n#)6er of *ili(inos in :on+.on+% for the (#r(ose of overthrowin+ the +overn)ent of the 0nited States in the Phili((ine 4slands 63 force of ar)s and esta6lishin+ a new +overn)ent1 *rancisco Ga#tista (1)% a close friend of the chief of )ilitar3 forces (of the cons(irators) too. (art of several )eetin+s1 o)as P#/on (2) held several conferences whereat (lans are )ade for the co)in+ ins#rrectionL he was a((ointed Gri+adier=2eneral of the Si+nal Cor(s of the revol#tionar3 forces1 Aniceto de 2#/)an (3) acce(ted so)e 6onds fro) one of the cons(irators1 he lower co#rt convicted the three )en of cons(irac31 Ga#tista was sentenced to 7 3ears i)(rison)ent and a P3%000 fineL P#/on and 'e 2#/)an to 3 3ears i)(rison)ent and P1%0001 I ue: J!? the acc#sed are +#ilt3 of cons(irac31

3.

/EO/LE v. SA;ALONES [2&7 SCRA H81 (1&&$)] Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of the Ce6# Cit3 R C T'e Ca e: Geron+a% Sa6alones% ca6anero and Ale+ar6e were convicted of 2 co#nts of )#rder and 3 co#nts of fr#strated )#rder of 2lenn tie)(o% Alfred nardo% re3 6olo% reo+elio (resores and nelson tie)(o1 A shootin+ incident on "#ne 1% 1&$8 in Man#ela Co)(% alisa3 Ce6# led to these deaths1 I ue : 1. WON !r# ecut"#$ ("t$e e a$% ev"%e$ce are cre%")&e @es1 R C findin+s were 6indin+ to co#rt with a((reciated testi)onies of two witnesses1 here was (ositive identification 63 s#rvivors who saw the) when the3 (eered d#rin+ l#lls in +#nfire1 he (lace was well=lit% whether fro) (ost of carFs headli+hts1 he e-traC#dicial confession has no 6earin+ 6eca#se the conviction was 6ased on (ositive identification1 4t is 6indin+% tho#+h% to the co=acc#sed 6eca#se it is #sed as circ#)stancial evidence corro6orated 63 one witness1 he inconsistencies are )inor and inconse,#ential which stren+then credi6ilit3 of testi)on31 *#rther)ore% in a6erratio ict#s ()ista.e in 6low)%

8e&%: "#d+)ent for Ga#tista and P#/on C!?*4RM9'1 "#d+)ent for de 2#/)an R9>9RS9'1 @es% Ga#tista and P#/on are +#ilt3 of cons(irac31 Ga#tista was f#ll3 aware of the (#r(oses of the )eetin+s he (artici(ated in% and even +ave an ass#rance to the chief of )ilitar3 forces that he is )a.in+ the necessar3 (re(arations1 P#/on vol#ntaril3 acce(ted his a((oint)ent and in doin+ so ass#)ed all the o6li+ations i)(lied 63 s#ch acce(tance1 his )a3 6e considered as an evidence of the cri)inal connection of the acc#sed with the cons(irac31 :owever% de 2#/)an is not +#ilt3 of cons(irac31 :e )i+ht have 6een hel(in+ the cons(irators 63 acce(tin+ 6onds in the 6#ndles% 6#t he has not 6een aware of the contents nor does he was% in an3 occasion% ass#)ed an3 o6li+ation with res(ect to those 6onds1 N#te: see RPC Art1 1365 Cri)es a+ainst (#6lic order5 cons(irac3 and (ro(osal to co))it co#( dF etat% re6ellion or ins#rrection1

/EO/LE v. :ENGCO [12H SCRA 272 (1&$7)]

Nature: A((eal fro) the C#d+)ent of the Manila C*4 Fact : Constantino <eneses% <eon 'avid% and three others (who did not file for an a((ealL incl#des 9dwin >en+co) were fo#nd 204< @ of M0R'9R of Charlie CeladeXa% who died 27 A#+#st 1&6H1 Goth were sentenced of recl#sion (er(et#a1 I ue: J!? cons(irac3 for )#rder was (resent a)on+ the acc#sed1

death1 9sco6er was co)(an3 +#ard E alle+ed )aster)ind1 A6#3en was for)er +#ard relieved d#e to a6sence E fo#nd slee(in+ on d#t31 I ue : 1. WON RTC c#$+#r.e% ("t' Art. 97 Sec 9 #+ t'e C#$ t"tut"#$ ?o1 Art &1 Sec & states that decision sho#ld have facts% not (resent in decision1 2enerali/ations and concl#sions witho#t detailed facts as 6asis1 A((ellate co#rt canFt chec. if findin+s were s#fficient and lo+ical1 "#stice and fairness over s(eed1 Peo(le v1 Gana3o5 decision sho#ld show evidence% facts 6ased on evidence and s#((ortin+ C#ris(r#dence and a#thorit3 -. WON E c#)er " *u"&t1 ?o1 !(enin+ of +ate is nor)al when so)eone .noc.s es(eciall3 if 3o# .now hi)1 :e )i+ht have lac.ed 6etter C#d+)ent or la-it3 in (erfor)ance of d#ties tho#+h1 he firin+ of the +#n as a rit#al to avoid s#s(icion is too ris.3 a rit#al1 4t can .ill1 8=10 )in#tes too short a ti)e to (lan a cons(irac31 A6#3en even as.ed P#n/alan to .ill 9sco6ar1 hen A6#3en (ointed the +#n at 9sco6ar and as.ed P#n/alan to tie hi)L he also tries to shoot hi)1 !fferin+ the infor)ation that he was not hit was also C#st to ass#re e)(lo3er who see)ed concerned1 Mrs Ch#aFs state)ent )a3 have 6een conf#sed ca#se it was ta.en last1 Perha(s she for+ot details d#e to a+itation1 WON /u$?a&a$ " *u"&t1 @es1 9-traC#dicial confession is inad)issi6le 6eca#se it was not (ro(erl3 (erfor)ed and was witho#t co#nsel1 Cons(irac3 was (roven1 :e was fetched and he fled with s#s(ects1 :e sho#ldFve +one to the (olice if innocent1 Peo(le vs1 Ro+el5 :o)icide thro#+h ro66er3% all (rinci(als in ro66er3 are lia6le for ho)icide #nless the3 tried (reventin+ it1

8e&%: @es1 A**4RM9' with )odification1 he acc#sed are (still) 204< @ of M0R'9R and are char+ed of recl#son (er(et#a1 the3 have to (a3 the heirs of the deceased in the s#) of P30%000 as )odified fro) the P12%000 as decided 63 the lower co#rt1 here was cons(irac3 6etween <eneses% 'avid% and the three others1 his cons(irac3 a)on+ the) is discerna6le fro) the wa3 the3 assa#lted CeladeXa% as well as their cond#ct so)eti)e 6efore and i))ediatel3 after the sta66in+ (e+1 >en+co chased CeladeXa and threw 6ottles at hi) three or fo#r ni+hts (rior to CeladeXaFs deathL 'avid left Manila for Cavite where he hid hi)self #ntil he was arrested) shows that the3 had a+reed to .ill hi)1 Cons(irac3 )a3 6e inferred tho#+h no act#al )eetin+ a)on+ the) is (roven1 he fact that the3 were acco)(lishin+ the sa)e #nlawf#l act% each doin+ a (art so that their acts% altho#+h a((arentl3 inde(endent% were (roven to 6e connected and coo(erative% indicates a closeness of (ersonal association and conc#rrence of senti)ent1 Also% acc#sed <eon 'avid% even if he did not assa#lt the victi) at the scene of the cri)e (as testified 63 a credi6le witness) )a3 6e +#ilt3 as well since his hidin+ ri+ht after the cri)e #ntil his arrest is a circ#)stance hi+hl3 indicative of his +#ilt1 /EO/LE v. :ALDE> [18& SCRA 183 (1&$$)] Nature: A#to)atic Review of the decision of R C San *ernando% <a 0nion1 *eliciano% "15 Fact : !n H "#ne 1&HH% 9leno Ma,#ilin+ was shot while at the 3ard of their ho#se1 9s)enia% the victi)Fs )other% and 'ionisio% the victi)Fs 6rother% saw 'anilo >alde/ and Si)(licio !rodio r#nnin+ down the hill awa3 fro) the 6a)6oo +roves1 he lower co#rt decided that the acc#sed are +#ilt3 of )#rder% i)(osin+ #(on each the) the ca(ital (enalt3 of death% da)a+es and costs1 I ue: J!? there was a cons(irac3 6etween the acc#sed in .illin+ Ma,#ilin+1 8e&%: @es1 "#d+)ent A**4RM9'1 G#t #nder the 1&$H Constit#tion% in view of the a6olition of ca(ital (#nish)ent% the a((lica6le (enalt3 is recl#sion (er(et#a1 he evidence of the (rosec#tion is )ore than ade,#ate to s#stain the findin+ of cons(irac3 6etween the two acc#sed1 4t does not )atter that the (rosec#tion has failed to show who was 6etween the two who act#all3 (#lled the tri++er that conse,#entl3 .illed the child1 he3 are lia6le as co=cons(irators since an3 act of a co=cons(irator 6eco)e the act of the other re+ardless of the (recise de+ree of (artici(ation in the act1 Also% there was (resence of treacher3% 6eca#se of the circ#)stances that the cri)e was done at ni+ht ti)e and that the acc#sed hid the)selves a)on+ the 6a)6oo1 9vident (re)editation is also an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance (the acc#sed had (lanned to .ill the victi)s so)e da3s 6efore)1

8e&%: ?o1 P#n/alan ac,#itted1 9liCorde +#ilt31 4n Peo(le v1 <#+=aw% cons(irac3 sho#ld 6e (roven thro#+h clear and convincin+ evidence1 4n Peo(le v1 'e Ro-as% it is esta6lished that it )#st 6e (roven that he (erfor)ed overt act to (#rs#e co)(letel31 >is6al testified that onl3 9liCorde chased :ierro1 P#n/alanFs onl3 (artici(ation was .ic.in+ which does not (rove that he )i+ht have .nown 9liCordeFs evil desi+n or intent to .ill1 4n Peo(le v1 A+a(ina3% there was no (roof that the acc#sed .new a6o#t the deadl3 wea(on and that it was to 6e #sed to sta6 victi)1 4n the case at 6ar% P#n/alan desisted fro) acts of a++ression and did nothin+ to assist 9liCorde in co))ittin+ )#rder

/EO/LE v. ;OTONA [307 SCRA H12 (1&&&)] Fact : Silverano% 6rother Sofronio and son ?icolas Gotona were char+ed with Gienvinido !liver in Gataan% 'el Car)en S#ri+ao del ?orte on "#ne 2H% $$1 Gienvinido was (la3in+ cards in SilveranoFs ho#se1 :is son "#lieto arrived to fetch hi) as (er his )otherFs instr#ctions1 !n their wa3 ho)e% 7 )en e)er+ed alon+ hi+hwa3% h#++in+ his father1 Reco+ni/in+ fo#r as the acc#sed% he hid and saw the) (#sh his father to the +ro#nd1 :e saw Silveriano (ossessed with a s)all% shar( (ointed 6olo1 hen he saw fo#r wash their hands in a (#)( well1 :e saw his 6loodied father on the road at a6o#t 7a)1 Arsenia% wife of Gienvinido said that her 6rother Silveriano and Sofronio had a +r#d+e a+ainst her h#s6and d#e to inherited land1 Silveriano al)ost sta66ed Gienvinido 6efore 6#t did not .ill hi)1 I ue: J!? acc#sed was +#ilt3 of )#rder 8e&%: Conviction affir)ed1 11 Circ#)stancial evidence will do in the a6sence of direct evidence  (eo(le v1 6ionat5 convicted (erson who was identified as the one who ho+ tied and too. awa3 victi) even if no e3ewitness1  Chain of events all lead to conviction with )otive5 inherited land that the3 were (lowin+  *o#r were (eo(le last seen with victi) and he was ne-t seen dead in the sa)e s(ot where he was attac.ed1  R C fo#nd "#lieto credi6le1 Peo(le v1 So6erano5 S#(re)e Co#rt res(ects R CFs fact#al concl#sion 21 Peo(le v1 Gionat5 Cons(irac35 act#al (lannin+ not a (recedent as lon+ as the3 have the sa)e (#r(ose and #nited in e-ec#tion  Co))on o6Cective5 .ill Gienvinido  Peo(le v1 S#)al(on+5 Act of one is act of all re+ardless of de+ree of (artici(ation th#s e,#all3 lia6le1 31 reacher35 ens#re e-ec#tion witho#t ris. to hi)self arisin+ fro) offended (art3Fs defense (RPC)1 Proven 63 s#dden and #ne-(ected attac. 71 9vident (re)editation sho#ld 6e directl3 esta6lished 6eca#se cons(irac3 was onl3 i)(lied and not (roven 81 Ali6i was wea. since the3 were still near the cri)e scene1 ?o sense in 2#ltian wa.in+ #( other (eo(le to re(ort that he co))itted a cri)e1

,.

/EO/LE v. NATIONAL [27$ SCRA 122 (1&&8)] Fact : ?acional% Milla)ino% M#sa% <#cer% Mira6ete and Militante )e)6er of ?PA char+ed with )#rder and V#irino and "oel <a+aron in 'ara+an Al6a3 on *e61 21% 1&$81 All e-ce(t Mira6ete were +iven conditional (ardon as (olitical (risoners1 <a+arons were s#s(ected +overn)ent infor)ers1 I ue: J!? Mira6ete is cri)inall3 lia6le

8e&%: @es1 Conviction affir)ed1 :e was identified 63 witnesses1 Rinco(an identified hi) as CPP=?PA )e)6er (resent d#rin+ (#lon+= (#lon+1 here was evident (re)editation as the (#lon+ (#lon+ decided to li,#idate two and assi+ned roles1 4n Peo(le v1 alla% cons(irac3 is said to e-ist once a+reed #(on e-(ressl3 or i)(liedl3 to co))it felon3;this was esta6lished 63 )eetin+ 6efore cri)e co))itted1 4n Peo(le v i)(le% it is said the cons(irators are lia6le for acts of others1 his is reiterated in Peo(le v1 A(awan% which states that all cons(irators are lia6le% and that act of one is act of all re+ardless of de+ree of (artici(ation1

/EO/LE v. ELIJORDE [306 SCRA 1$$ (1&&&)] Fact : 9liCorde and P#n/alan char+ed with )#rder of 9ric :ierro1 Altercation 6e+an when :ierro told Meneses not to to#ch hi) ca#se his clothes will +et dirt31 *ist fi+ht occ#rred1 :ierro hid1 After 30 )ins he went o#t to +o ho)e 6#t was attac.ed a+ain E sta66ed to death1 I ue: J!? P#n/alan is lia6le as cons(iratorS

LECARO> :. SANDIGAN;AYAN [308 SCRA 76& (1&&$)] Fact : *rancisco% Ma3or of Santa Cr#/% Marind#,#e% and son <enlie% RG chair and SG )e)6er% <ecaro/ were char+ed with 13 co#nts of estafa thro#+h falsification of (#6lic doc#)ents1 Alle+ed that *rancisco did not reco+ni/e a((oint)ent of Red as new RG chair in Matala6a and SG )e)6er1 Alle+ed that <eslie contin#ed to receive salar3 even after his ter) has e-(ired1 Convicted 63 Sandi+an6a3an

/EO/LE :. ESCO;ER [18H SCRA 871 (1&$$)] Fact : 9sco6er% P#n/alan and 3 others were acc#sed of co))ittin+ ro66er3 with ho)icide in Galintawa.% VC on 'ec1 3% $21 Mr1 >icenta Ch#aFs office was ro66ed of P8R and his children were sta66ed to

I

ue: J!? <ecaro/ is cri)inall3 lia6leS

/EO/LE v. DIO [131 SCRA 181 (1&$7)] Fact : 'io and o6ias are char+ed with ro66er3 with ho)icide for atte)(tin+ to steal Sei.o wrist watch of Civil 9n+ineer Cris(#lo Ale+a at the Pasa3 Cit3 (#6lic )ar.et on noonti)e of "#l3 27% 1&H11 Ale+a resisted th#s was sta66ed and he died1 I ue : 1. WON #++e$ e " r#))er1 ?o1 he3 were not a6le to carr3 o#t ro66er31 4t was not cons#))ated d#e to Ale+oFs resistance1 h#s its onl3 atte)(ted ro66er3 -. WON Deat' /e$a&t1 '#u&% )e ".!# e% ?o1 ?o a++ravatin+ circ#)stance th#s (#nish with nor)al (enalt31 Miti+ate d#e to atte)(t1 8e&%: Modified I Atte)(ted ro66er3 71 81 61

8e&%: ?o1 Ac,#itted 11 SG ter)5 6 3rs1 4f sectoralK+ro#( re( ter) is coter)in#s with sectoral ter) 21 RG ter)5 till last S#nda3% ?ove)6er 1&$8 or #ntil new officers have ,#alified 31 <enlie can hold over1  <aw doesnFt sa3 he can or is (revented fro) doin+ so1 h#s he can sta3 #ntil s#ccession ,#alifies  '#ld#lao v1 ra)os5 law a6hors vac##) in (#6lic offices  *ole3 v1 )cna65 hold over5 avoid hiat#s in (erfor)ance of +overn)ent f#nction  Garnes v1 :ol6roo.5 holdover to (revent (#6lic convenience fro) s#fferin+ d#e to vacanc3 71 Red not ,#alified1 !ath ad)inistered 63 Gatasan+ Pa)6ansa )e)6er whoFs not a#thori/ed to do so is invalid 81 lac. of cri)inal intent  a((oint)ent not reco+ni/ed since there were no a#thenticated co(ies of a((oint)ent (a(ers  *rancisco so#+ht advice of M4<2 Secretar3 Pi)entel re+ardin+ RedFs (a(ers5 Provincial Me)o Circ#lar $6=025 ?o a#thentication fro) President canFt ass#)e (ositionL Me)o=Circ1 $6=1H5 SG% S(l#n+% S(lala5 :old office% 6e co)(ensated #ntil re(laced 63 (resident or M4<2  9-ec#tive Silence on hold over for 30 3rs not e,#al to (rohi6ition  *rancisco5 well res(ected1 Perha(s he C#st )ade erroneo#s inter(retation1 Ma6#tol v Pasc#al and Ca6#n+cal v1 Cordova5 )isre(resentation is not e,#al to 6ad faith% th#s not lia6le  *alsification5 no doc#)ent state)ent fro) offended to narrate facts and facts were not (roven wron+ or false1  Cons(irac3 not (roven5 sho#ld 6e esta6lished se(aratel3 for cri)e and )#st )eet sa)e de+ree of (roof  Stron+ eno#+h to show co))#nit3 of cri)inal desi+n  Glood relation is not e,#ivalent to cons(irac3

child1 he3 failed to esta6lish how she co#ld have seen act#al contact in her (osition ManFs instinct is to r#n when ca#+ht1 Pri)o co#ld not have sta3ed or to satisf3 his l#st even if 11 seein+ Cora/on Child denied (enetration occ#rred Peo(le v1 >illa)or cons#))ation even when (enetration do#6ted5 (ainFs felt% discoloration of inner li(s of va+ina or red la6ia )inora or h3)enal ta+s not visi6le1 ?ow seen in case% Medico le+al officer% tho#+h (enetration not needed to (rove contact% no )edical 6asis to hold that there was se-#al contact1 :3)en intact1

/EO/LE v. LO/E> [312 SCRA 6$7 (1&&&)] Fact : *ederico <o(e/ was acc#sed of .illin+ Ro+elio Saldera E Rodolfo Pada(at E fr#strated )#rder of Mario Seldera1 he3 wor. in a far)land in ?ancala6aasan% 0)in+an% Pan+asinan1 !n their wa3 ho)e on ?ov1 18% 1&&1 at aro#nd & () the3 were )et 63 <o(e/ E another +#31 here were in trail 6eside Ganila river1 <o(e/ had a shot +#n E shot 31 hin.in+ the3 were dead% he left1 Mario s#rvived and identified <o(e/ I ue: J!? conviction correctS

/EO/LE v. TRINIDAD [16& SCRA 81 (1&$&)] Fact : rinidad acc#sed of 2 co#nts of )#rder E 1 co#nt fr#strated )#rder1 Acc#sed in )e)6er of 4?P in ?asi(it1 Cri)e occ#rred in G#t#an 6etween 9l Rio E A+fa while the3 were in a fierra 6o#nf for 'avao1 rinidad shot E .illed Soriano E <aron while he shot and inC#red an I ue: J!? conviction is (ro(erS

8e&%: Affir)ed1 M#rder and atte)(ted )#rder1 rinidad ali6i is wea. and overridden 63 an and Co))endadorFs (ositive identification1 ho#+h so)e discre(ancies in testi)onies are fo#nd% these are trivial1 'istance 6etween rinidad E 2 deceased i))aterial1 4)(ortant is that he shot the)1 an has no seen ill )otive to falsifia6l3 testif3 a+ainst rinidad1 4t is atte)(ted and not fr#strated )#rder 6eca#se he failed to e-ec#te all acts d#e to )ovin+ vehicle and this shielded anFs 6od3 and his wo#nd was not fatal th#s not s#fficient to ca#se death (Peo(le v1 Pilones)

/EO/LE v. LAMA8ANG [61 Phil1 H03 (1&38)] Fact : A#relio <a)ahan+ was ca#+ht o(enin+ with an iron 6ar a wall of a store of chea( +oods in *#entes St1 4loilo1 :e 6ro.e one 6oard and was #nfastenin+ another when a (atrollin+ (olice ca#+ht hi)1 !wners of the store were slee(in+ inside store as it was earl3 dawn1 Convicted of atte)(t of ro66er3 I ue: J!? cri)e is atte)(ted ro66er3S /EO/LE v. CAM/U8AN [March 30% 2000] Fact : Pri)o Ca)(#han was acc#sed of ra(in+ fo#r 3ear old Cr3sthel Pa)int#an1 Ca)(#han was ca#+ht 63 childFs )other on A(ril 28% 1&&6 at aro#nd 7() in their ho#se1 Ca)(#han% hel(er of Cora/onFs 6rother was alle+edl3 .neelin+ in front of the child with 6oth their (ants downa dn child was cr3in+ Ba3o.o% a3o.oD while Pri)o forced his (enis into childFs va+ina I ue: J!? cri)e is ra(eS

8e&%: Modified es(eciall3 da)a+es 11 Mario is a credi6le witness E )e)or3 of )assacre is dee(l3 etched in his )e)or3 th#s he re)e)6ered even )in#te details1 ?at#ral reaction is to re)e)6er assailants E )anner how cri)eFs co))itted (Peo(le v 2o)e/)1 Shot +#n wo#nds were verified1 PA2ASA states that there was 60\ ill#)ination of )oon at that ti)e1 62\ ill#)ination in Peo(le v1 P#e6las was fo#nd to 6e s#fficient in s#stainin+ identification of acc#sed1 Mario was also well=adC#sted to li+htin+ since heFs 6een wal.in+ for so)e ti)e when the3 were attac.ed (Peo(le v1 >acal)1 :e was identified not 63 na)e 6#t 63 .nowled+e of who acc#sed was who fre,#ented his (lace 6efore1 21 Ali6i is wea.1 :is alle+ed location was near eno#+h to cri)e scene th#s not i)(ossi6le to reach it1 4nconsistent witnesses1 !verridden 63 (ositive identification of a witness who doesnFt (osses ill )otive to falsel3 testif3 a+ainst acc#sed1 31 'efective infor)ation not assailed 6efore acc#sed waived ri+ht to do so1 9ach shot sho#ld 6e considered as one act th#s lia6le for three se(arate cri)es% Co)(le- cri)e (RPC=7$) onl3 when one act res#lts to different felonies1 here was treacher3 th#s Mario sho#ld have 6een for )#rder% 6#t atte)(ted not fr#strated ca#se wo#nds were not fatal as attested to 63 doctor 71 'a)a+es5 P80R civilian inde)nit3 fi-ed as (roven 63 death1 Moral da)a+es5 P80R1 e)(erate da)a+es5 )a3 6e witho#t (roof1 Mario5 no (roof of )oral da)a+aes1 9-e)(lar3 da)a+es5 onl3 when thereFs a++ravatin+ circ#)stances1 Act#al da)a+es re(resents #nearned inco)e

8e&%: ?o1 Atte)(ted tres(ass to dwellin+1 Atte)(t sho#ld have lo+ical relation to a (artic#lar and concrete offense which wo#ld lead directl3 to cons#))ation1 ?ecessar3 to esta6lish #navoida6le connection E lo+ical E nat#ral relation of ca#se and effect1 4)(ortant to show clear intent to co))it cri)e1 4n case at 6ar% we can onl3 infer that his intent was to enter 63 force% other inferences are not C#stified 63 facts1 2roi/ard5 infer onl3 fro) nat#re of acts e-ec#ted1 Acts s#sce(ti6le of do#6le inter(retation canFt f#rnish +ro#nd for the)selves1 Mind sho#ld not directl3 infer intent1 S(ain SC5 necessar3 that o6Cectives esta6lished or acts the)selves o6vio#sl3 disclose cri)inal o6Cective1

/EO/LE :. LI>ADA ["an#ar3 27% 2003] Fact : *reedie <i/ada was acc#sed of ra(in+ his ste( da#+hter Analia !rilloso in fo#r instances in their ho#se in ondo% Manila% so)eti)e in A#+#st 1&&$% on or a6o#t ?ov1 8% 1&&$% on or a6o#t !ct1 22% 1&&$ and on or a6o#t Se(te)6er 18% 1&&$1 Ph3sical e-a)ination showed no e-tra+enital (h3sical inC#ries1 :3)en intact1 I ue: J!? ?ov1 8% 1&&$ is cons#))ated ra(eS 8e&%: ?o1 Atte)(ted ra(e onl3 11 ?o (roof of introd#ction of (enis into (#dend#) of childFs va+ina

8e&%: ?o1 Modified to atte)(ted ra(e 11 Cons#))ated ra(e5 (erfect (enetration not essential1 Sli+ht (enetration is e,#ivalent to ra(e1 Mere to#chin+ of e-ternal +enitalia considered when its an essential (art of (enetration not C#st to#chin+ in ordinar3 sense (Peo(le v1 !rita)1 <a6ia )aCora )#st 6e entered for ra(e to 6e cons#))ated (Peo(le v1 9sco6er) 21 Atte)(ted I no (enetration or didnFt reach la6iaK)ere +ra/in+ of s#rface 31 *ailed to (rove that (enetration occ#rred1 MotherFs testi)on3 ,#estiona6le with re+ards to her (osition relative to Pri)o and

21 31 71 81 61

?ot act of lascivio#sness% <ewd is o6secene% l#stf#l% indecent% lechero#s RPC Art1 6 atte)(ted is 6ased on 7 ele)ents (re3es) ?ot (re(arator3 (devise )eans or )eas#re to acco)(lish desired end)1 Atte)(t sho#ld 6e e,#ivocal1 ?o need to co)(lete all acts C#st need to start act wK ca#sal relation to intended cri)e1 Acts )#st 6e directl3 related to cons#))ation of act and ascertaina6le fro) facts (Peo(le v1 <a)ahan+) Acc#sed had intended to have carnal .nowled+e of co)(lainant1 Acts not (re(arator3% he co))enced e-ec#tion 6#t failed to finish d#e to (resence of 3rd (art3% not s(ontaneo#s desistance1

I ue: J!? conviction is valid 8e&%: @es1 Conviction affir)ed Rat"#: >alid and stron+ testi)on3 of )edico=le+al officer whoFs an e-(ert1 Proof eno#+h that )ale or+an entered within la6ia of (#dend#) as re,#ired in Peo(le v1 Pastores

i)(ossi6le of acco)(lish)ent1 And #nder Article 7% (ara+ra(h 2 of the Revised Penal Code% s#ch is s#fficient to )a.e the act an i)(ossi6le cri)e1

/EO/LE v. SALEY [2&1 SCRA H18 (1&&$)] UR;ANO v. IAC [18H SCRA 1 (1&$$)] Fact : 0r6ano had a dis(#te with "avier d#e to latterFs o(enin+ of irri+ation s3ste) which flooded far)erFs (ala3 stora+e1 0r6ano hac.ed "avier with a 6olo 6#t the3 had a)ica6le settle)ent later on1 22 da3s after incident% "avier died d#e to tetan#s1 I ue: J!? 0r6ano is cri)inall3 lia6leS 8e&%: ?o1 Civil lia6ilities onl31 'eath wasnFt directl3 d#e to the hac.in+1 Pro-i)ate ca#se is that ca#se% wKc% in nat#ral E contin#o#s se,#ence% #n6ro.en 63 an3 efficient intervenin+ ca#se% (rod#ces inC#r3 E wKo wKc the res#lt wo#ldnFt have occ#rred1 he r#le is that the death of the victi) )#st 6e the direct% nat#ral% E lo+ical conse,#ence of the wo#nd inflicted #(on hi) 63 the acc#sed to 6e (roven 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t (6eca#se this is a cri)inal conviction)1 4nfection of wo#nd was efficient intervenin+ ca#se 6etween wo#ndin+ E hac.in+ wKc was distinct E forei+n to the cri)e1 he (etitioner at the ver3 least is +#ilt3 of sli+ht (h3sical inC#r31 G#t 6eca#se 0r6ano E "avier #sed the facilities of 6aran+a3 )ediators to effect a co)(ro)ise a+ree)ent% the cri)inal lia6ilit3 is wi(ed o#t 63 virt#e of P' 180$% A2(3) wKc allows settle)ent of )inor offenses1 /EO/LE v. A;AGON [11 SCRA 288 (1&$$)] Nature: A((eal fro) the C#d+)ent of the C*4 of Mas6ate Fact : !n A(ril 1H% 1&$1% while Celis <#(an+o and his co)(anions were cele6ratin+ the 6irthda3 of 4sa6elo Rada/a "r1% A6ner !n+onion E Mateo A6a+on arrived1 !n+onion% with a 6=inched do#6le=6laded .nife sta66ed <#(an+o 3 or 7 ti)es1 A6a+on also sta66ed <#(an+o several ti)es with a H=inch .nife1 Jhile <#(an+o was carried o#t% !n+onion% who was waitin+ o#tside% drew his firear) E fired 2 shots at <#(an+o E his co)(anions to scare the) off1 Jhen the3 ran awa3% !n+onion% A6a+on and their co)(anions a((roached and too. t#rns in sta66in+ the 6od3 of Celis <#(an+o with 6olos and .nives1 I ue 7 8e&% a$% Rat"#: 1. WON O$*#$"#$ a$% A)a*#$ are *u"&t1 #+ .ur%er Ye . :avin+ ad)itted the .illin+% !n+onion )#st clearl3 esta6lish that he acted in self=defense1 :owever% the n#)6er and nat#re of the sta6 wo#nds inflicted 63 )ore than one (erson 6elie his theor31 Accordin+ to testi)onies% the attac. 63 the assailants was #n(rovo.ed1 4t was also indicated that the sta66in+ was intentional1 4t is also ne+ated 63 the (h3sical evidence and other circ#)stances% s#ch as his fail#re to (resent the .nife #(on s#rrender% his fail#re to tell the (olice a#thorities that he .illed the deceased in self=defense% and the a6sence of an3 inC#r3 on the 6od3 of !n+onion1 ?ot one of the ele)ents of self=defense is (resent1 A((ellant !n+onionOs theor3 of self= defense is therefore #ntena6le1 Minor inconsistencies in the testi)on3 of (rosec#tion witnesses do not affect their credi6ilit31 A((ellant A6a+onOs defense was li.ewise #ntena6le% since it can 6e (roved that it was not (h3sicall3 i)(ossi6le for hi) to 6e at the scene of the cri)e -. WON c#$ !"rac1 ca$ )e e ta)&" 'e% Ye . A((ellants f#ll3 conc#rred in their actions1 he3 ca)e to the victi) one after the other and attac.ed hi) with #ndiverted (#r(ose1 he3 also left to+ether1 hat the assailants acted in concerted efforts with co))#nit3 of cri)inal (#r(ose to ens#re the death of the victi) is indicative of cons(irac3 6etween the)1 9ven if cons(irac3 had not 6een esta6lished% the lia6ilit3 of the two a((ellants wo#ld not chan+e for each inflicted on his own )#lti(le sta66in+ 6lows on the victi) res#ltin+ in )ortal inC#ries1 he3 acted as (rinci(als 63 direct (artici(ation1 reacher3 was li.ewise (roven 63 evidence since the attac. was i))ediate% s#dden and #ne-(ected1

U.S. v. ADIAO [3$ Phil1 H87 (1&88)] Fact : o)as Adiao% c#sto)s ins(ector% +ot a leather 6a+ costin+ P01$0 fro) 6a++a+e of 1 M#ra.a)i and .e(t it in his des. where it was fo#nd 63 other e)(lo3ees I ue: J!? act is cons#))ated theftS 8e&%: @es1 A++ravatin+ Circ#)stance% (#6lic (ossession 11 :e (erfor)ed all acts of e-ec#tion as re,#ired 63 RPC Art1 31 :e didnFt need to ta.e it o#t of the 6#ildin+ 21 S(anish S#(re)e Co#rt5 ta.in+ first ca#+ht 63 (olice still cons#))ated no (roof of contrar3L (ic.(oc.et +ot )one3 6#t ret#rned it later on% still cons#))atedL too. )one3 even if its on to( of safe% still cons#))ated1

/EO/LE v. 8ERNANDE> [7& Phil1 &$0 (1&28)] INTOD :. CA [218 SCRA 82 (1&&2)] Fact : 'o)in+o :ernande/% H0 3rs old char+ed of ra(in+ his & 3r old ste( +randda#+hter% Conrada "ocson with threat to .ill if sheKdoesnFt +ive in to his wish1 A++ravatin+5 (1) related% (2) +rave a6#se of confidence since the3 lived in sa)e ho#se1 I ue: J!? act is cons#))ated ra(e 8e&%: @es% (l#s there is an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance1 11 Peo(le v1 Rivers5 r#(t#re of h3)en not necessar3 as lon+ as there is (roof that thereFs so)e de+ree of entrance of )ale or+an within la6ia of P 21 Ph3sical e-a) findin+s5 h3)en intact% la6ia and va+inal o(enin+ infla)ed% a6#ndance of se)en% she felt intense (ain Fact : 4ntod and co)(an3 were tas.ed to .ill Palan+=(an+an d#e to land dis(#te1 he3 fired at her roo)1 :owever% she was in another cit3 then th#s the3 hit no one1 I ue: J!? he is lia6le for atte)(ted )#rderS 8e&%: ?o1 !nl3 i)(ossi6le cri)e1 4n the Phili((ines% Article 7(2) (rovides and (#nishes an i)(ossi6le cri)e;an act which% were it not ai)ed at so)ethin+ ,#ite i)(ossi6le or carried o#t with )eans which (rove inade,#ate wo#ld constit#te a felon3 a+ainst (erson or fa)il31 4ts (#r(ose is to (#nish cri)inal tendencies1 here )#st either 6e (1) le+al res(onsi6ilit3% or (2) (h3sical i)(ossi6ilit3 of acco)(lishin+ the intended act in order to ,#alif3 the act as an i)(ossi6le cri)e1 <e+al i)(ossi6ilit3 occ#rs where the intended acts even if co)(leted% wo#ld not a)o#nt to a cri)e1 h#s5 <e+al i)(ossi6ilit3 wo#ld a((l3 to those circ#)stances where5 (1) he )otive% desire and e-(ectation is to (erfor) an act in violation of the lawL (2) here is no intention to (erfor) the (h3sical actL (3) here is a (erfor)ance of the intended (h3sical actL and (7) he conse,#ence res#ltin+ fro) the intended act does not a)o#nt to a cri)e1 *act#al i)(ossi6ilit3 occ#rs when e-traneo#s circ#)stances #n.nown to actor or 6e3ond control (revent cons#))ation of intended cri)e1 *act#al i)(ossi6ilit3 of the co))ission of the cri)e is not a defense1 4f the cri)e co#ld have 6een co))itted had the circ#)stances 6een as the defendant 6elieved the) to 6e% it is no defense that in realit3% the cri)e was i)(ossi6le of co))ission1 <e+al i)(ossi6ilit3 on the other hand is a defense which can 6e invo.ed to avoid cri)inal lia6ilit3 for an atte)(t1 he fact#al sit#ation in the case at 6ar (resents a (h3sical i)(ossi6ilit3 which rendered the intended cri)e

/EO/LE v. ERI9A [80 Phil1 &&$ (1&2H)] Fact : "#lian 9riXa char+ed of ra(in+ 3 3rs E 11 )o1 old child1 'o#6t on whether act#al (enetration occ#rred1 Ph3sical e-a) showed sli+ht infla))ation of e-terior (arts of or+an indicatin+ effort to enter va+ina1 Mo) fo#nd childFs or+an covered with stic.3 s#6stance I ue: J!? cri)e is cons#))atedS 8e&%: ?o1 *r#strated onl3 11 Possi6le for )anFs or+an to enter la6ia of a 3 3ears and $ )onths old child (Renned3 v1 State) 21 ?o concl#sive evidence of (enetration so +ive acc#sed 6enefit of the do#6t1 *r#strated1

/EO/LE v. :ELASCO [H3 SCRA 8H7 (1&H6)] Fact : Acc#sed Ricardo >elasco char+ed of ra(in five 3ear old 9stelita <o(e/ on ?ov1 2% 1&6H% 8530 () at ?orth Ce)eter3% Manila1 Ph3sical e-a) showed5 fresh laceration of h3)en% va+inal o(enin+ (ainf#l and sensitive to to#ch% )#st have has se-#al interco#rse recentl3 6efore e-a)ination

Ju%*.e$t: "#d+)ent a((ealed fro) is affir)ed% 6#t the (enalties are )odified

/EO/LE v. ;O8OLST0CA;ALLERO [61 SCRA 1$0 (1&H7)] Fact : C#ni+#nda Goholst Ca6allero see.s reversal of the C#d+)ent of the C*4 of !r)oc Cit3 findin+ her +#ilt3 of (arricide;she alle+edl3

.illed her h#s6and% *rancisco Ca6allero% #sin+ a h#ntin+ .nife1 he co#(le was )arried in 1&86 and had a da#+hter1 he3 had fre,#ent ,#arrels d#e to the h#s6andOs +a)6lin+ and drin.in+ and there were ti)es when he )altreated and a6#sed his wife1 After )ore than a 3ear% *rancisco a6andoned his fa)il31 4n 1&8$% C#ni+#nda went carolin+ with her friends and when she was on her wa3 ho)e she )et her h#s6and who s#ddenl3 held her 63 the collar and acc#sed her of +oin+ o#t for (rostit#tion1 hen he said he wo#ld .ill her% held her 63 the hair% sla((ed her #ntil her nose 6led then (#shed her towards the +ro#nd1 She fell to the +ro#nd% he .nelt on her and (roceeded to cho.e her1 C#ni+#nda% havin+ earlier felt a .nife t#c.ed in *ranciscoOs 6elt line while holdin+ #nto his waist so she wo#ldnOt fall to the +ro#nd% +ra66ed the h#ntin+ .nife and thr#st it into her h#s6andOs left side% near the 6elt line C#st a6ove the thi+h1 :e died 2 da3s after the incident d#e to the sta6 wo#nd1 hen she ran ho)e and threw the .nife awa31 he ne-t da3% she s#rrendered herself to the (olice alon+ with the torn dress that she wore the ni+ht 6efore1 I ue: J!? C#ni+#nda% in sta66in+ her h#s6and% acted in le+iti)ate self=defense 8e&%: @es% she did1 Ac,#itted Rat"#: 11 G#rden if (roof of self=defense rests on the acc#sed1 4n this case% the location and nat#re of the sta6 wo#nd confir)s that the said victi)% the h#s6and% was the a++ressor1 Jith her h#s6and .neelin+ over her and cho.in+ her% acc#sed had no other choice 6#t to (#ll the .nife t#c.ed in his 6elt line and thr#st it into his side1 he fact that the 6low landed in the vicinit3 where the .nife was drawn fro) is a stron+ indication of the tr#th of the testi)on3 of the acc#sed1 Gased on the re=enact)ent of the incident% it was nat#ral for her to #se her ri+ht hand to l#n+e the .nife into h#s6andOs left side1 21 hree re,#isites of le+iti)ate self=defense are (resent U$&a(+u& a**re "#$. he h#s6and resortin+ to (#shin+ her to the +ro#nd then cho.in+ her C#st 6eca#se she was o#t carolin+ at ni+ht constit#tes #nlawf#l a++ression% here was i))inent dan+er of inC#r31 Rea #$a)&e $ece "t1 #+ .ea$ e.!&#1e%. Jhile 6ein+ cho.ed% C#ni+#nda had no other reco#rse 6#t to ta.e hold of the .nife and (l#n+e it into h#s6andOs side in order to (rotect herself1 Reasona6le necessit3 does not de(end #(on the har) done 6#t on the i))inent dan+er of s#ch inC#r31 LacC #+ u++"c"e$t !r#v#cat"#$. (rovocation is s#fficient when (ro(ortionate to the a++ression1 4n this case% there was no s#fficient (rovocation on the (art of the acc#sed (C#ni+#nda) to warrant the attac. of her h#s6and1 All that she did to (rovo.e an i)a+inar3 co))ission of a wron+ in the )ind of her h#s6and was to 6e o#t carolin+ at ni+ht1

of his ho#se with Severo also standin+ 631 Marianito was standin+ a few feet 6ehind his father with a +#n sl#n+ in his sho#lder1 :ostile% Pio told 2e)iniano that he was not +oin+ to +ive hi) (ala3 th#s 2e)iniano re)onstrated1 Pio then #nsheathed his 6olo and a((roached 2e)iniano fro) the left1 Severo too. an a-e and a((roached fro) the ri+ht1 At this% 2e)iniano held #( his hands and told Severo not to fi+ht1 Pio then sta66ed 2e)inianoOs nec. with the 6olo1 Jith 2e)iniano faced down on the +ro#nd% Severo hac.ed his 6ac. with the a-e1 Jhile this was +oin+ on% "#an s#ddenl3 e)6raced Marianito fro) 6ehind1 he3 +ra((led and rolled downhill where Marianito (assed o#t1 Jhen he ca)e to% he saw his )ortall3 wo#nded father and carried hi) a short distance1 2e)iniano died at a((ro-i)atel3 2()1 Pio is a f#+itive fro) C#stice in this case1 Severo and "#an were convicted of )#rder and sentenced to recl#sion (er(et#a1 he two were also convicted of lesions leves (for Marianito)1 !ther three were ac,#itted1 Severo and "#an a((ealed for the )#rder conviction1 he3 contend that 2e)iniano #nsheathed his 6olo first so Pio )et hi) and str#c.1 As 2e)iniano t#rned to flee% Pio str#c. a+ain on the left side and th#s 2e)iniano fell to the +ro#nd and died d#e to the 6leedin+1 Marianito was e)6raced 63 "#an 6eca#se he alle+edl3 reached for his +#n and tried to shoot Pio1 Jith this ar+#)ent% the3 shift the res(onsi6ilit3 of the .illin+ to Pio (who was not there and not triedIa f#+itive) and that Pio was onl3 actin+ in self=defense1 "#an contends he was C#st (rotectin+ Pio and Severo when he (revented Mariano fro) firin+ his +#n1 A few da3s after filin+ this a((eal however% Severo withdrew and in effect acce(ted (rosec#tionOs version1 So% this a((eal concerns "#an onl31 I ue: J!? "#an cons(ired with Pio and Severe in the .illin+ of 2e)iniano and is he deservin+ of recl#sion (er(et#aS 8e&%: @es% C#d+)ent affir)ed1 Considerin+ the trioOs orchestrated 6ehavior and "#anOs close relationshi( to Pio and Severo% concl#sion is that he acted in cons(irac3 with the)% (lannin+ the whole thin+% fro) the ti)e after Pio )et 2e)iniano in the )ornin+ to the event in the afternoon1 :e cannot invo.e Article 11% (ar 7 (C#stif3in+ circ#)stances) in e-(lainin+ his act of (reventin+ Marianito fro) shootin+ Pio and Severo as evidence shows he did this to ens#re that the .illin+ of 2e)iniano ha((ened witho#t an3 ris. to Pio and Severo1 :is )alicio#s intention was not to avoid an3 evil fro) Marianito 6#t to forestall an3 interference in the assa#lt done 63 Pio and Severo1 9ven tho#+h he did not ta.e direct (art in the .illin+% his cons(irac3 with the others )ade hi) a (rinci(al too1 Moreover% treacher3 was involved1 "#an wea.ened the victi)Os defense 63 disa6lin+ Marianito and ens#red the .illin+ witho#t an3 ris. to the)selves1 h#s% the act of one is the act of all% and "#an is also +#ilt3 of )#rder1

/EO/LE v. ;ERONILLA [&6 Phil1 866 (1&88)] Nature5 A((eal fro) the decision of the C*4 of A6ra% convictin+ the acc#sed of )#rder1 Fact : Arsenio GorCal was )a3or of <a Pa/ A6ra at the o#t6rea. of war and contin#ed to serve as )a3or d#rin+ the "a(anese occ#(ation1 'ec 1&% 1&77 acc#sed=a((ellant Man#el Geronilla was a((ointed Militar3 Ma3or of <a Pa/ 63 <t1 Col Arnold1 Si)#ltaneo#sl3% he received a )e)orand#) iss#ed 63 Arnold a#thori/in+ the) to a((oint a C#r3 of 12 6olo)en to tr3 (ersons acc#sed of treason% es(iona+e or aidin+ the ene)31 :e also received a list of all (#((et +overn)ent officials of A6ra% with a )e)orand#) instr#ctin+ all Militar3 Ma3ors to investi+ate said (ersons and +ather a+ainst the) co)(laints1 Geronilla% (#rs#ant to his instr#ctions (laced GorCal #nder c#stod3 and as.ed residents of <a Pa/ to file case a+ainst hi)1 :e also a((ointed a 12=)an C#r3 co)(osed of <a6#+#en as chair)an and others% (l#s Alverne and Gal)aceda were (rosec#torsL Pac#ldo as cler. of the C#r3% and 4nover)o as co#nsel for the acc#sed% later Att31 Garreras vol#ntaril3 a((eared as co#nsel for GorCal1 he C#r3 fo#nd GorCal +#ilt3 on all co#nts and i)(osed death (enalt31 Ma3or Geronilla forwarded the records of the case to :ead,#arters of 4nfantr3 for review1 Records were ret#rned on A(ril 1$% 1&78 with a((roval of Arnold1 !n the sa)e da3% Geronilla ordered the e-ec#tion of GorCal1 4))ediatel3 after the e-ec#tion% Geronilla re(orted the e-ec#tion to Arnold% the latter co)(le)entin+ Geronilla1 wo 3ears later% Ma3or Geronillo and others involved in the GorCal case were indicted 63 C*4 of A6ra for )#rder% for alle+edl3 cons(irin+ and confederatin+ in the e-ec#tion of GorCal1 Pres1 Ro-as iss#ed 91P1 no1 $% +rantin+ a)nest3 to all (ersons who co))itted acts (enali/ed% #nder RPC in f#rtherance of resistance to the ene)3 a+ainst (ersons aidin+ in the war efforts of the ene)31 All the acc#sed (e-ce(t <a6#+#en who filed and +ranted a)nest3 63 the A*P)% filed their a((lication to Second 2#erilla A)nest3 Co))ission% which denied their a((lication on the +ro#nd that the3 were ins(ired 63 (#rel3 (ersonal )otives% th#s re)andin+ case to C*4 for trial on )erits1 !n "#l3 10% 1&80 Geronillo% Pac#ldo% >elasco and Adriatico were convicted as cons(irator and co=(rinci(als of cri)e )#rder1 he3 a((ealed1 I ue: J!? acc#sed a((ellants are +#ilt3 of )#rderL and J!? the3 sho#ld 6e +ranted a)nest31 8e&%: he records are a)(le to show that Geronilla acted (#rs#ant to the orders of the 4nfantr3 :ead,#arters1 Altho#+h it was alle+ed 63 the state that there was a radio+ra) fro) certain Col1 >ol.)ann to <t1 Col1 Arnold% on the ille+alit3 of GorCalOs e-ec#tion% there are no s#fficient evidence to show that it was .nown to Geronilla1 *#rther)ore% the )essa+es of Col1 Arnold a((rovin+ the decisions of Geronilla (rove otherwise1 he testi)on3 of Rafael Gal)aceda% relative of GorCal was also #nrelia6le1 he state clai)s that the a((ellants held +r#d+es a+ainst late GorCal% 6#t co#rt said that the cond#ct of the a((ellants does not dis(ose that the3 were i)(elled 63 )alice1 4n fact% (rior to the e-ec#tion% Geronilla sent the decision for review1 he lower co#rt also fo#nd that GorCal was reall3 +#ilt3 of treasona6le acts1 he co#rt held that the acc#sed=a((ellants C#st acted #(on the orders of s#(eriors and cri)inal intent was not esta6lished1 9ven ass#)in+ the acc#sed=a((ellant are +#ilt3 of )#rder% the3 sho#ld not 6e denied of the a)nest3 on the +ro#nd that the sla3in+

/EO/LE v. DELIMA [76 Phil1 H3$ (1&22)] Fact : <oren/o ?a(oleon esca(ed fro) Cail1 Poiice)an *eli(e 'eli)a fo#nd hi) in the ho#se of "or+e Ale+ria% ar)ed with a (ointed (iece of 6a)6oo in the sha(e of a lance1 'eli)a ordered his s#rrender 6#t ?a(oleon answered with a stro.e of his lance1 he (olice)an dod+ed it% fired his revolver 6#t didnOt hit ?a(oleon1 he cri)inal tried to ran awa3% not throwin+ his wea(onL the (olice)an shot hi) dead1 'eli)a was tried and convicted for ho)icideL he a((ealed1 8e&%: he SC r#led that 'eli)a )#st 6e ac,#itted1 he co#rt held that the .illin+ was done in (erfor)ance of a d#t31 ?a(oleon was #nder the o6li+ation to s#rrender and his diso6edience with a wea(on co)(elled 'eli)a to .ill hi)1 he action was C#stified 63 the circ#)stances1

/EO/LE v. RICO8ERMOSO [86 SCRA 731 (1&H7)] Nature: A((eal fro) a C#d+e)ent of the Circ#it Cri)inal Co#rt of <#cena Cit3 Fact : !n the )ornin+ of "an#ar3 30% 1&68% 2e)iniano )et Pio and as.ed hi) if he co#ld have his share of the (ala3 that Pio harvested fro) tillin+ 2e)inianoOs land1 Pio told hi) to dro( 63 his ho#se an3ti)e to +et it so 2e)iniano said he will dro( 63 in the afternoon with his son Marianito1 hat afternoon% 2e)iniano sat o#tside PioOs ho#se to wait for the (ro)ised (ala31 Pio was standin+ 63 the door

too. (lace after act#al li6eration of the area fro) ene)3 control1 he co#rt held that an3 reasona6le do#6t as to whether a +iven case falls within the a)nest3 (rocla)ation shall 6e resolved in favor of the acc#sed1 31 NASSIF v. /EO/LE [H3 Phil1 6H (1&76)]

TA;UENA v. SANDIGAN;AYAN [121 SCRA 3$& (1&$3)] Fact :  4n a Presidential Me)orand#) (the Marcos Me)orand#)) dated "an1 6% 1&$6% President Marcos alle+edl3 co))anded (etitioner a6#ena% in his ca(acit3 as 2eneral Mana+er of the Manila 4nternational Air(ort A#thorit3 (M4AA)% Bto (a3 i))ediatel3 the Phili((ine ?ational Constr#ction Cor(oration% thr# this !ffice (!ffice of the President)% the s#) P88M in cash as (artial (a3)ent of M4AAFs acco#nt with said co)(an3 )entioned in a Me)orand#) of ( rade and 4nd#str3) Minister Ro6ert !n+(in to this !ffice dated "an1 H%1&$8PD a6#ena withdrew the s#) of 88M on three se(arate occasions (28M% 28M% 8M I with Adolfo Peralta) and delivered the) to 2i)ene/% MarcosFs (rivate secretar31  4t is witho#t dis(#te that a6#ena did not follow the nor)al (roced#res in withdrawal and deliver3 of the )one3 (no dis6#rse)ent sli(s and (aid in cold cash)1  a6#ena was onl3 iss#ed a recei(t after the third deliver3 and it did not )ention an3thin+ a6o#t the (#r(ose of the recei(t or the )one3 6ein+ #sed to (a3 P?CC% 6#t )erel3 ac.nowled+ed that 2i)ene/ had received the s#) of 88M fro) a6#ena on three occasions1 *#rther)ore% there was no recei(t fro) the P?CC reco+ni/in+ (a3)ent of de6t1  Prosec#tion5 there were no standin+ o6li+ations in favor of the P?CC at the ti)e of dis6#rse)ent of 88M1 P?CC said the)selves that the3 didnFt receive the P88M1  a6#ena clai)ed that he was onl3 co)(l3in+ with the direct order of Marcos ((l#s the Marcos )e)orand#) which contained sa)e order) to i))ediatel3 forward to the office of the President% 88M in cash% as (artial (a3)ent of M4AAOs o6li+ations to P?CC and that he 6elieved that M4AA indeed had those lia6ilities to P?CC1 4n short% that a6#ena acted in +ood faith1  Sandi+an6a3an reCected a6#enaOs clai) of +ood faith and fo#nd hi) +#ilt3 of )alversation 63 ne+li+ence% hence this case1 I ue: J!? a6#ena% in followin+ the orders of his s#(erior% was +#ilt3 of )alversation (or if 6eca#se of the C#stif3in+ circ#)stance of followin+ the orders of his s#(erior% in +ood faith% he wo#ld not 6e cri)inall3 lia6le% 6#t )erel3 civill3 lia6le)S 8e&%: a6#ena is )erel3 civill3 lia6le1 he ver3 fact that he was )erel3 followin+ the orders of his s#(erior is a C#stif3in+ circ#)stance1 Rat"#: 11 !n the (oint raised 63 a6#ena that he cannot 6e char+ed with intentional )alversation and 6e convicted 63 )alversation 63 ne+li+ence% the Co#rt r#led that the dolo and c#l(a of the offense is onl3 a )odalit3 in the (er(etration of the felon31 he sa)e felon3 is still there and conviction thereof is (ro(er1 21 !n the defense of +ood faith5 it is a valid defense a+ainst )alversation 6eca#se it wo#ld ne+ate cri)inal intent1 o constit#te a cri)e% the act )#st% e-ce(t in certain cri)es1116e acco)(anied 63 cri)inal intent or s#ch ne+li+ence or 71

81

61

H1

$1

&1

indifference to d#t3 or to conse,#ences as is e,#ivalent to cri)inal intent he )a-i) act#s non facit re#)% nisi )ens sit rea I a cri)e is not co))ited if the )ind of the (erson (erfor)in+ the act co)(lained of is innocent ()alversation cases5 0S v1 Catolico% 0S v1 9lvina)1 he Co#rt% 6ased on the evidence (resented% fo#nd that a6#ena had no other choice 6#t to act#all3 follow the order stated in the Marcos Me)orand#)% 6eca#se% as (resident of the Phili((ines% ind#6ita6l3 the head of +overn)ental a+encies s#ch as the M4AA and P?CC% Marcos is #ndenia6l3 the s#(erior of a6#ena1 a6#ena entitled to the C#stif3in+ circ#)stance of Nan3 (erson who acts in o6edience to an order iss#ed 63 a s#(erior for so)e lawf#l (#r(oseD 6eca#se he is onl3 actin+ in +ood faith% faithf#ll3 and efficientl3 carr3in+ o#t orders fro) the hi+hest official in the land1 Moreover% there was nothin+ in the Marcos Me)orand#) that )a3 invite s#s(icion = there was no ,#estion a6o#t the lawf#lness of the order contained in s#ch a )e)orand#)1 a6#ena had reason to 6elieve that the 88M was indeed (art of a d#e and de)anda6le de6t% a (ortion of a 6i++er lia6ilit3 to P?CC (e-istence of s#ch de6ts deter)ined fro) testi)onies)1 So even if the order was ille+al and a6#ena was not aware of the ille+alit3% he wo#ld not 6e lia6le 6eca#se there wo#ld onl3 6e a )ista.e of fact co))itted in +ood faith1 a6#ena followed the )e)orand#) to the letter% (a3in+ i))ediatel3 the P?CC% thro#+h this office (office of the (resident) the s#) of 88M1 a6#ena had reasona6le +ro#nd to 6elieve that the President was entitled to receive the )one3 6eca#se as Chief 9-ec#tive% Marcos e-ercised s#(ervision and control over +overn)ental a+encies (+ood faith in the (a3)ent of (#6lic f#nds relieves a (#6lic officer fro) the cri)e of )alversation)1 Jhile even a6#ena ad)itted that (roced#res were i+nored and that the dis6#rse)ent was #n#s#al% he is fo#nd to 6e e-c#sed fro) s#ch 6eca#se the Marcos Me)orand#) enCoined his 4MM9'4A 9 C!MP<4A?C91 !n the other hand% while this allows for the ne+ation of cri)inal intent% as a6#ena acted in +ood faith% he wo#ld still 6e civill3 lia6le (6#t heOs not cri)inall3 lia6le an3)ore% esca(in+ the harsher (enalties) (see (a+e 362)1 here is no showin+ that a6#ena had an3thin+ to do with the creation of the Marcos Me)orand#) = that even if the real (#r(ose 6ehind the )e)orand#) was to +et 88M fro) (#6lic f#nds% it is clear that he did and wo#ld not (rofit fro) s#ch and that he did not have an3thin+ to do with the creation of the )e)orand#)1 a6#ena case is a case concernin+ o6edience in +ood faith of a d#l3 e-ec#ted order1 he orderK)e)orand#) ca)e fro) the !ffice of the President and 6ears the si+nat#re of the (resident hi)self% in effect allowin+ for the (res#)(tion that s#ch order was re+#larl3 iss#ed and (atentl3 le+al1 *#rther)ore% the wordin+ of the )e)orand#) e-(ressed a certain #r+enc3 to its e-ec#tion;!6edienta est le+is essential (act swiftl3 witho#t ,#estion)1 Ma"$ Rat"#: *#rther)ore% the Co#rt itself raises the contention that the case involves a violation of the acc#sedOs ri+ht to d#e (rocess in the sense that it was o6vio#s that the Sandi+an6a3an was over/ealo#s in its atte)(t to convict (arties involved I as seen in the vol#)e of ,#estions as.ed% and the )anner the sa)e were (osed (cross e-a)inations characteristic of confrontation% (ro6in+ and insin#ation)1 o ,#ote "#stice Cr#/% BRes(ect for the Constit#tion is )ore i)(ortant that sec#rin+ a conviction 6ased on a violation of the ri+hts of the acc#sed1D Sandi+an6a3an was o6vio#sl3 6iased% den3in+ a6#ena and (arties involves the re,#ire)ent of the cold ne#tralit3 of an i)(artial C#d+e1 As a conse,#ence of s#ch violation of d#e

(rocess% the order of Sandi+an6a3an was fo#nd void1 ?ote that this defense was not raised 63 a6#ena1 :#t"$*:  *o#r conc#rred (?arvasa% >it#+% Ra(#nan% Mendo/a)  Si- dissented (Padilla% 'avide% Ro)ero% P#no% Melo% Pan+ani6an)  "#stice :er)osisi)a too. no (art as he was a si+nator3 to the SG decision  Re+alaso% Gellosillo and orres% "r% Pro hac vice ()eanin+ the3 Coin the )aCorit3 o(inion 6#t the3 reserve their ri+ht to chan+e their vote sho#ld a si)ilar case with the sa)e facts arise1) I.!&"cat"#$ #+ pro hac vice: a6#ena v1 Sandi+an6a3an is not (recedent for the (ro(osition that an3 (#6lic official who 6lindl3 follows orders of their s#(erior1 h#s% this case is not a#thoritative on Art1 11(6)1 Dec" "#$: a6#ena and Peralta ac,#itted1 Dav"%e7 %" e$t"$*: 'avide disa+rees with )aCorit3 that all the re,#isites of the si-th C#stif3in+ circ#)stance in art 11 of the RPC were (resent he si-th circ#)stance of the said article i)(lies 3 thin+s5 a) that the order was iss#ed 63 a s#(eriorL 6) s#ch order )#st 6e for so)e lawf#l (#r(ose andL c) )eans #sed 63 s#6ordinate to carr3 o#t said order )#st 6e lawf#l1 Accordin+ to 'avide% facts show that the de6t was onl3 3718M so order of Marcos had e-cess of 2018M = said order then had no fact#al or le+al 6asis and #nlawf#l1 R#.er#7 %" e$t"$*: :e also 6elieves that not all re,#isites were (resent to warrant a C#stif3in+ circ#)stance as a6#ena% 63 his own ad)ission% did not follow standard o(eratin+ (roced#res (no vo#chers% no a((roval 63 Co))ission on A#dit% non=iss#ance of a recei(t in 1st 2 deliveries% non=iss#ance of recei(t 63 P?CC% deliver3 to office of 2i)ene/ [not office in Malacanan+]% a stran+er to contract 6etween P?CC and M4AA)1 he entire (rocess% done with haste and with a total disre+ard of a((ro(riate a#ditin+ re,#ire)ents was not 6ased on nor)al (roced#re1 a6#enaOs ran. does not e-c#se hi) fro) i+norin+ s#ch1 /u$#7 %" e$t"$*: :e concentrates on the case involvin+ a )ista.e in fact% citin+ the Ah C:on+ case a)on+ others% and disc#ssin+ article 3 in so)e detail =sa3in+ that )ista.e in fact sho#ld not e-c#se the acc#sed fro) inc#rrin+ lia6ilit31 4t was also clear fro) the facts that it too. one )onth for a6#ena to co)(l3 with order (startin+ fro) the ti)e Marcos called hi) #( 63 (hone = to which the )e)orand#) containin+ the sa)e orders followed a wee. later)% which is )ore than eno#+h ti)e to co)(l3 with (roced#re1 :e also adds that if there was not eno#+h ti)e% a6#ena sho#ld have as.ed for )ore ti)e or at least co))#nicated s#ch (ro6le)s to the (resident1 Moreover% to ac,#it the (etitioners i)(l3 that (eo(le 6elieve that the (resident is alwa3s ri+ht% that he or she can do no wron+ = that the (resident is a6ove and 6e3ond the law1 /a$*a$")a$7 %" e$t"$*: :e is of the sa)e view as Ro)ero% 'avide and P#no 6#t also raises so)e (oints5 the defense of o6edience to a s#(eriorOs order is alread3 o6solete% as deter)ined 63 the ri6#nal in ?#re)6er+% in its C#d+)ent a+ainst ?a/i war cri)inals who (#t #( the defense that the3 were )erel3 followin+ orders1 he tri6#nal said that the tr#e test did not lie with the e-istence of an order 6#t whether a )oral choice was in fact% (ossi6le1 o allow this defense to hold in the a6#ena case sets a dan+ero#s (recedent in the co#ntr3 6eca#se it wo#ld de(rive the Co#rts the )oral a#thorit3 to convict an3 s#6ordinate 6eca#se he or

she was N)erel3 followin+ the orders of the his or her s#(erior (allowin+ the sa)e doctrine to 6e invo.ed in si)ilar cri)inal cases 6efore the SC and even in the inferior co#rts who have no choice 6#t to follow the doctrines set 63 the SC)1

81

hese circ#)stances% of his never havin+ seen the (erson 6efore% and of his havin+ )erel3 6een (resent at the trial% not 6ein+ necessaril3 s#fficient to e-cl#de the lawf#lness of a ,#estion which is otherwise lawf#lL tho#+h 4 will not sa3 that an in,#ir3 )i+ht not 6e in s#ch a state% as that these circ#)stances sho#ld have s#ch an effect1

I$ Re: M3NAG8TEN [$ 9n+1 Re(1 H1$] Fact : !n "an1 20% 1$73% the (risoner% 'aniel MO?a+hten shot 9dward 'r#))ond with a (istol1 he )ortal wo#nd ca#sed 63 the shot event#all3 led to the latterOs death1 Jitnesses were called to (rove that MO?a+hten was not in a so#nd state of )ind #(on co))ittin+ the act% that he was havin+ )or6id del#sions1 A (erson #nder a )or6id del#sion )i+ht have a )oral (erce(tion of ri+ht and wron+% 6#t in the case of MO?a+hten% it was a del#sion which carried hi) awa3 6e3ond the (ower of his control and left hi) no s#ch (erce(tion1 I ue: J!? at the ti)e the act co))itted% (risoner had #se of his #nderstandin+ so as to .now that he was doin+ a wron+ act 8e&%: ?o1 "#rors were of o(inion that the (risoner was not sensi6le at the ti)e he co))itted the act% or that he was violatin+ the law he followin+ ,#estions were (ro(o#nded5 11 Jhat is the law res(ectin+ alle+ed cri)es co))itted 63 (ersons afflicted with insane del#sionS As% for instance% where at the ti)e of the co))ission of the alle+ed cri)e% the acc#sed .new he was actin+ contrar3 to law% 6#t did the act co)(lained of with a view% #nder the infl#ence of insane del#sion% of redressin+ or reven+in+ so)e s#((osed +rievance or inC#r3 or of (rod#cin+ so)e s#((osed (#6lic 6enefitS 21 Jhat are the (ro(er ,#estions to 6e s#6)itted to the C#r3 when a (erson alle+ed to 6e afflicted with insane del#sion is char+ed with the co))ission of a cri)e and insanit3 is set #( as a defenseS 31 4n what ter)s o#+ht the ,#estion 6e left to the C#r3% as to the (risonerOs state of )ind at the ti)e when the act was co))ittedS 71 4f a (erson #nder an insane del#sion as to e-istin+ facts co))its an offense in conse,#ence thereof% is he there63 e-c#sedS 81 Can a )edical )an (S) conversant with the disease of insanit3 who never saw the (risoner (revio#sl3 to the trial% 6#t who was (resent d#rin+ the whole trial and the e-a)ination of all the witnesses% 6e as.ed his o(inion at the state of the (risonerOs )ind at the ti)e of the alle+ed cri)eS A$ (er )1 Mr7 Ju t"ce Mau&e: 11 here is no law that )a.es (ersons in the state descri6ed in the ,#estion not res(onsi6le for their cri)inal acts1 o render a (erson irres(onsi6le for cri)e on acco#nt of #nso#ndness of )ind% the #nso#ndness sho#ld% accordin+ to the law% as it has lon+ 6een #nderstood and held% 6e s#ch as rendered hi) inca(a6le fro) .nowin+ ri+ht fro) wron+1 21 he ,#estions to 6e s#6)itted to the C#r3 are those ,#estions of fact which are raised on record1 he3 are s#((osed to assist the C#r3 in co)in+ to a ri+ht concl#sion1 Jhat those ,#estions are% and the )anner of s#6)ittin+ the)% is a )atter of discretion for the C#d+e% a discretion to 6e +#ided 63 a consideration of all the circ#)stances attendin+ the in,#ir31 31 here are no ter)s which the C#d+e is 63 law re,#ired to #se1 71 Answer to first ,#estion is a((lica6le to 7th ,#estion

L#r% C'"e+ Ju t"ce T"$%a&: 11 :e is (#nisha6le accordin+ to the nat#re of the cri)e co))itted% if he .new at the ti)e of co))ittin+ s#ch cri)e that he was actin+ contrar3 to law 21 E 31 5 9ver3 )an is to 6e (res#)ed sane% and to (ossess a s#fficient de+ree of reason to 6e res(onsi6le for his cri)es% #ntil the contrar3 6e (roved to their satisfaction1 o esta6lish a defense of the +ro#nd of insanit3% it )#st 6e clearl3 (roved that% at the ti)e of the co))ittin+ of the act% the (art3 acc#sed was la6orin+ #nder s#ch a defect of reason fro) disease of the )ind% as not to .now the nat#re and ,#alit3 of the act he was doin+L or if he did .now it% that he did not .now he was doin+ what was wron+1 71 he ,#estion )#st de(end on the nat#re of the del#sion1 !n the ass#)(tion that he la6ors #nder s#ch (artial del#sion onl3 and is not in other res(ects insane% we thin. he )#st 6e considered in the sa)e sit#ation as to res(onsi6ilit3 as if the facts with res(ect to which the del#sion e-ists were real1 81 Je thin. the )edical )an% #nder the circ#)stances s#((osed% cannot in strictness 6e as.ed his o(inion in the ter)s a6ove stated% 6eca#se each of those ,#estions involves the deter)ination of the tr#th of the facts de(osed to% which it is for the C#r3 to decided% and the ,#estions are not )ere ,#estions #(on a )atter of science% in which case s#ch evidence is ad)issi6le1 G#t where the facts are ad)itted or not dis(#ted% and the ,#estion 6eco)es s#6stantiall3 one of science onl3% it )a3 6e convenient to allow the ,#estion to 6e (#t in that +eneral for)% tho#+h the sa)e cannot 6e insisted on as a )atter of ri+ht1

Ph3sical% Mental and Ps3chiatric 9-a)ination1N A((ellantOs co#nsel infor)ed the co#rt that acc#sed=a((ellant had 6een e-hi6itin+ a6nor)al 6ehavior for the (ast wee.s1 here were 2 letters of the warden re,#estin+ the sa)e1 he trial co#rt denied reconsideration of the order den3in+ the N'e)#rrer to 9vidence1N 'r1 Maria Soledad 2awidan% a resident (h3sician in the 'e(art)ent of Ps3chiatr3 at the Ga+#io 2eneral :os(ital% testified to the acc#sed 6ein+ confined and dia+nosed with NSchi/o(hrenic Ps3chosis% Paranoid 3(e; schi/o(hrenia% (aranoid% chronic% (aranoid t3(e1N he trial co#rt rendered a decision on "#ne 23% 1&&H1 4t #(held the (rosec#tion evidence and fo#nd acc#sed=a((ellant +#ilt3 of the cri)e char+ed and there63 sentenced hi) to death% I ue: J!? he was indeed insane

8e&%: Jhen a (erson co))its a felonio#s act the act is (res#)ed to have 6een done vol#ntaril31 4n the a6sence of evidence to the contrar3% the law (res#)es that ever3 (erson is of so#nd )ind and that all acts are vol#ntar31 An insane (erson is e-e)(t fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3 #nless he has acted d#rin+ a l#cid interval1 4n the e3es of the law% insanit3 e-ists when there is a co)(lete de(rivation of intelli+ence in co))ittin+ the act1 Mere a6nor)alit3 of the )ental fac#lties will not e-cl#de i)(#ta6ilit31 Since the (res#)(tion is alwa3s in favor of sanit3% he who invo.es insanit3 as an e-e)(tin+ circ#)stance )#st (rove it 63 clear and (ositive evidence1 here are certain circ#)stances that sho#ld have (laced the trial co#rt on notice that a((ellant )a3 not have 6een in f#ll (ossession of his )ental fac#lties e1+1 when he attac.ed Mararac% then went #( the )icro(hone1 Acc#sed=a((ellantOs histor3 of )ental illness was 6ro#+ht to the co#rts1 T# te t ('et'er t'e accu e% (#u&% 'ave a +a"r tr"a& there are two distinct )atters to 6e deter)ined (1) whether defendant is coherent to (rovide his co#nsel with infor)ation necessar3 (2) whether he is a6le to co)(rehend the si+nificance of the trial and his relation to it1 o (#t a le+all3 inco)(etent (erson on trial or to convict and sentence hi) is a violation of the constit#tional ri+hts to a fair trial1 he deter)ination of whether a sanit3 investi+ation or hearin+ sho#ld 6e ordered rests +enerall3 in the discretion of the trial co#rt1 4n the case at 6ar% when acc#sed=a((ellant )oved for s#s(ension of the arrai+n)ent on the +ro#nd of acc#sedOs )ental condition% the trial co#rt denied the )otion after findin+ that the ,#estions (ro(o#nded on a((ellant were intelli+entl3 answered 63 hi)1 he fact that acc#sed=a((ellant was a6le to answer the ,#estions as.ed 63 the trial co#rt is not concl#sive evidence that he was co)(etent eno#+h to stand trial and assist in his defense1 he trial co#rt too. it solel3 #(on itself to deter)ine the sanit3 of acc#sed=a((ellant1 he trial C#d+e is not a (s3chiatrist or (s3cholo+ist or so)e other e-(ert e,#i((ed with the s(eciali/ed .nowled+e1 4f the )edical histor3 was not eno#+h to create a reasona6le do#6t in the C#d+eOs )ind of acc#sed=a((ellantOs co)(etenc3 to stand trial% s#6se,#ent events sho#ld have done so1 !ne )onth after the (rosec#tion rested its case% there were letters re,#estin+ that acc#sed 6e confined in hos(ital% as well as the co#nselOs filin+ of )otion1 And des(ite all the overwhel)in+ indications of acc#sed=a((ellantOs state of )ind% the C#d+e (ersisted in his (ersonal assess)ent and never even considered s#6Cectin+ acc#sed=a((ellant to a )edical e-a)ination1 o to( it all% the C#d+e fo#nd a((ellant +#ilt3 and sentenced hi) to deathZ Ju%*.e$t: At this late ho#r% a )edical findin+ alone )a3 )a.e it i)(ossi6le for #s to eval#ate a((ellantOs )ental condition at the ti)e of the cri)eOs co))ission for hi) to avail of the e-e)(tin+ circ#)stance of insanit31 ?onetheless% #nder the (resent circ#)stances% acc#sed=a((ellantOs co)(etence to stand trial )#st

/EO/LE v. ESTRADA [333 SCRA 6&& (2000)] Nature: A#to)atic review of the death (enalt3 Fact : 'ece)6er 2H% 1&&7% at the St1 "ohnOs Cathedral% 'a+#(an Cit3% while the sacra)ent of confir)ation was 6ein+ (erfor)ed 63 the Gisho(% a )an fro) the crowd wal.ed towards the center of the altar and sat on the Gisho(Os chair1 Crisanto Santillan% who was an assistant saw this1 :e re,#ested the acc#sed to vacate% 6#t the latter ref#sed1 he3 called on the +#ard1 'es(ite re(eated re,#est% he did not )ove1 As the +#ard was atte)(tin+ to stri.e the victi) with his ni+htstic. to )a.e hi) leave acc#sed=a((ellant drew a .nife and sta66ed Mararac1 :e re(eated it a lot1 After% he +ot #( and sho#ted via the )icL ?o one can 6eat )e hereZ SP!1 *rancisco saw a )an% with red stains on his shirt and a .nife in one hand sittin+ on a chair1 :e advised hi) to dro( the .nife1 Acc#sed=a((ellant o6e3ed% Mararac% the sec#rit3 +#ard% was 6ro#+ht to the hos(ital where he e-(ired a few )in#tes #(on arrival1 Acc#sed=a((ellant% filed a N'e)#rrer to 9videnceN where he clai)s that5 (rosec#tion failed to (rove )#rderL that there was #nlawf#l a++ression 63 the victi)L and that acc#sed=a((ellant was of #nso#nd )ind1 4ns(ector >alde/ ("ail warden) re,#ested the co#rt to allow acc#sed=a((ellant% to 6e treated at the Ga+#io 2eneral :os(ital to deter)ine whether he sho#ld re)ain in Cail or 6e transferred to so)e other instit#tion1 Jhile )otion for reconsideration was (endin+% co#nsel for acc#sed=a((ellant filed a NMotion to Confine Acc#sed for

6e (ro(erl3 ascertained to ena6le hi) to (artici(ate in his trial )eanin+f#ll31 Re)anded to the co#rt a ,#o for the cond#ct of a (ro(er )ental e-a)ination on acc#sed=a((ellant% a deter)ination of his co)(etenc3 to stand trial% and for f#rther (roceedin+s1



here sho#ld 6e no a++ravatin+ circ#)stance 6eca#se he was fro) CA*20 and had an M=1 2rand Rifle1

C#st 

Co#rt affir)s decision with a )odification in (enalties1 

/EO/LE v. :ILLA JR. [331 SCRA 172 (2000)] Nature: A((eal to decision of R C that convicted hi) of 7 )#rders1 Fact : 'ionito *ernande/ was c#ttin+ +rass when his nei+h6or Rodolfo >illa% "r1% a )e)6er of the CA*20 ca)e o#t with his M=1 2arand rifle and shot 'ionito .illin+ hi) instantl3 (discovered later that 'ionito acc#sed hi) of stealin+ chic.ens)1 Ronald and Sheila% children of 'ionito% r#shed o#t and were also shot1 Sheila was onl3 shot in the thi+h and t#))31 Sa)#el 9clevia% atte)(ted to wrestle the rifle 6#t was also +#nned down1 >illa "r1 s#rrendered and was char+ed with )#lti(le )#rder1 :e (leaded not +#ilt3 and invo.ed self defense (sa3s that 'ionito was char+in+ at hi) with a 6olo)1 :is new law3er (he chan+ed law3ers in the )iddle) )oved for a (s3chiatric e-a)ination and it was +ranted1 :e was confined in the Mental :os(ital for eval#ation (for insanit3) for a )onth which res#lted in the findin+ of 4nsanit3 or Ps3chosis classified as Schi/o(hrenia1 :e was fo#nd to 6e inco)(etent to stand trial1 After 6 )onths% the doctors fo#nd hi) fit to stand trial1 After his release% he (leaded insanit3 as a defense% which was disre+arded1 he onl3 iss#e to 6e resolved is whether acc#sed=a((ellant was insane d#rin+ the co))ission of the cri)es as wo#ld e-e)(t hi) fro) cri)inal lia6ilit31 8e&%: Co#rt was not convinced that he was insane d#rin+ the co))ission of the cri)e since the eval#ation did not sa3 so in #ne,#ivocal ter)s1 'r1 Malsos was #ns#re when she testified1 4n order that insanit3 can 6e considered as an e-e)(tin+ circ#)stance% it )#st 6e shown to e-ist C#st 6efore or d#rin+ the co))ission of the offense1 4t )#st 6e shown 6e3ond do#6t that there was co)(lete de(rivation of reason or discern)ent and freedo) of the will at the ti)e of the co))ission of the cri)e% which the acc#sed failed to (rove1  4nsanit3 is evidenced 63 a deran+ed and (erverted condition of the )ental fac#lties which is )anifested in lan+#a+e and cond#ct1 An insane (erson has no f#ll and clear #nderstandin+ of the nat#re and conse,#ences of his acts1 Je are convinced that acc#sed=a((ellant was sane at the ti)e he (er(etrated the .illin+s1 he followin+ circ#)stances clearl3 (oint to saneness1 (a) 4))ediatel3 s#rrenderin+ to the PoliceL (6) :e showed re)orse d#rin+ his confine)entL (c) 2ave a sworn state)ent 6efore the Prosec#torOs !ffice after the cri)es narratin+ the incident (ad)it that he was of so#nd )ind)1 hese are hardl3 the acts of a (erson with a sic. )ind1  he law (res#)es ever3 )an to 6e of so#nd )ind1 h#s% a (erson acc#sed of a cri)e who (leads the e-e)(tin+ circ#)stance of insanit3 has the 6#rden of (rovin+ it1  he defense 6an.s heavil3 on the findin+s of the (s3chiatrists1 'octors did not sa3 that he was totall3 insane to warrant concl#sion that he was insane eno#+h to .ill all those (eo(le1 Je a+ree with the trial co#rt that the res#lts of the e-a)inations cond#cted 63 the (s3chiatrists on acc#sed= a((ellant a((ear to 6e 6ased on inco)(lete or ins#fficient facts1 Records show that the (s3chiatrists relied )ainl3 on the data s#((lied 63 acc#sed=a((ellant and his (olice escort1 4t co#ld 6e that he was insane while 6ein+ eval#ated and was contacted d#rin+ his detention (rior trial% )a36e d#e to +#ilt or reali/ations1 o 6e a defense it has to 6e there when cri)e was co))issioned1

/EO/LE v. MADARANG [332 SCRA && (2000)] Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of the R C G#r+os% Pan+asinan Fact : *erdinand Madaran+ 3 Ma+no was char+ed with (arricide for the .illin+ of his wife <ilia Madaran+ and was sentenced to recl#sion (er(et#a1 :e clai)s that he was s#fferin+ fro) a )ental illness at the ti)e he co))itted the felon3% and as s#ch% sho#ld not 6e held lia6le1 he3 have H children and she was (re+nant with her ei+hth child1 :e wor.ed a6road as a sea)an for 16 3ears1 Afterwards% he set #( a hardware store here in the Phils1 he 6#siness failed and he lost his entire fort#ne d#e to coc.fi+htin+1 he3 were forced to sta3 in the ho#se of Avelina Mirador% <iliaOs )other 6eca#se he co#ld no lon+er s#((ort his fa)il31 Se(t 3% 1&&3 = he and <ilia had a s,#a66le1 :e was Cealo#s of another )an and he was acc#sin+ her of infidelit31 4n the heat of the fi+ht and in the (resence of their children% he sta66ed her% res#ltin+ in her #nti)el3 death1 Avelina testified that she saw the acc#sed e)er+e fro) the ho#se holdin+ a 6olo1 She ran for safet3L '#rin+ the (eriod he sta3ed in her ho#se% she did not notice an3thin+ (ec#liar in his 6ehavior that wo#ld s#++est he was s#fferin+ fro) an3 )ental illness1 'r1 Jilson i6a3an declared that Madaran+ was co))itted to the ?ational Center or Medical :elath (?CM:) on "#l3 1&&7 #(on the order of the co#rt to deter)ine the fitness of the acc#sed to stand trial1 he ?CM: cond#cted three )edical and (s3chiatric eval#ations of the acc#sed d#rin+ his sta3 there1 :e was dia+nosed to 6e s#fferin+ fro) schi/o(hrenia1 :e also testified that it was hi+hl3 (ossi6le that the acc#sed was s#fferin+ fro) schi/o(hrenia (rior to his co))ission of the cri)e1 Schi/o(hrenia is a t3(e of (s3chosis% which is characteri/ed 63 i)(aired f#nda)ental reasonin+ del#sions% hall#cinations% etc1 he (atient )a3 6e inca(a6le of distin+#ishin+ ri+ht fro) wron+ or .now what he is doin+1 :e )a3 6eco)e destr#ctive or have a (ro(ensit3 to attac. if his hall#cinations are violent1 :owever% a schi/o(hrenic )a3 have l#cid intervals d#rin+ which he )a3 6e a6le to distin+#ish ri+ht fro) wron+1 Ma3 1&&6 = Madaran+Os third (s3chiatric eval#ation showed that his )ental condition had considera6l3 i)(roved1 :e was dischar+ed fro) the hos(ital and reco))itted to Cail to stand trial1 :e was convicted 63 the trial co#rt as his evidence failed to ref#te the (res#)(tion of sanit3 at the ti)e he co))itted the offense1 :e contends that at the ti)e he sta66ed his wife he was co)(letel3 de(rived of intelli+ence% )a.in+ his cri)inal act invol#ntar31 :is #nsta6le state of )ind co#ld alle+edl3 6e ded#ced fro) the followin+5  :e had no recollection of the sta66in+1 :ence% he was co)(letel3 #naware of his acts and )#st have co))itted the acts with the least discern)ent1  :is 6ehavior at the ti)e of the sta66in+ (roved he was then afflicted with schi/o(hrenia1 :e did not see) to reco+ni/e an36od3 and this is (ec#liar to (ersons who are insane 6eca#se a sane (erson who C#st co))itted a cri)e wo#ld have a((eared 31

re)orsef#l and re(entant after reali/in+ that what he did was wron+1 :e relies on 'r1 i6a3anOs o(inion that there was a hi+h (ossi6ilit3 that he was alread3 s#fferin+ fro) schi/o(hrenia (rior to his co))ission of the cri)e% :e also clai)s that the fact that he and his wife never en+a+ed in a fi+ht (rior to the da3 he .illed her )#st 6e considered1 he chan+e in his 6ehavior% when he #ncharacteristicall3 ,#arreled with his wife and t#rned violent on her% confir)s that he was insane when he co))itted the cri)e1 :e #r+es that he had no )otive to .ill his (re+nant s(o#se1 "ealo#s3 is not a s#fficient reason1

An act done 63 a (erson in a state of insanit3 cannot 6e (#nished as an offense% his is rooted on the )oral ass#)(tion of cri)inal law1 Man is endowed with free will and reason1 he consent of the will is that which renders h#)an actions la#da6le or c#l(a6le1 :ence% when there is a defect of the #nderstandin+% there can 6e no free act of the will1 :ar"#u te t u e% t# %eter."$e "$ a$"t1: 11 MO?a#+hten R#le5 Nto esta6lish a defense on the +ro#nd of insanit3% it )#st 6e clearl3 (roved that% at the ti)e of co))ittin+ the act% the (art3 acc#sed was la6orin+ #nder s#ch a defect of reason fro) disease of the )ind% as not to .now the nat#re and ,#alit3 of the act he was doin+% or% if he did .now it% that he did not .now he was doin+ what was wron+1N he criti,#es however5 Criticis)s5  a)6i+#o#s = )eanin+ of the words Nwron+N and N.nowN  6ased on an o6solete conce(t of insanit3 as onl3 affectin+ intellect#al fac#lties and not the whole (ersonalit3 incl#din+ the (atientOs will and e)otions1 Reason is onl3 one of the ele)ents of a (ersonalit31 21 4rresisti6le 4)(#lse test5 Nass#)in+ defendantOs .nowled+e of the nat#re and ,#alit3 of his act and .nowled+e that the act is wron+% if% 63 reason of disease of the )ind% defendant has 6een de(rived of or lost the (ower of his will which wo#ld ena6le hi) to (revent hi)self fro) doin+ the act% then he cannot 6e fo#nd +#ilt31N he criti,#es however5  4t is too restrictive as it covers onl3 i)(#lsive acts  he Nirresisti6leN re,#ire)ent is also restrictive as it re,#ires a6sol#te i)(air)ent of the freedo) of the will which cases are ver3 rare1  4t will not serve the (#r(ose of cri)inal law to deter cri)inals as the will to resist co))ission of the cri)e will not 6e enco#ra+ed1  4t is diffic#lt to (rove whether the act was the res#lt of an insane% irresisti6le i)(#lse1 '#rha) N(rod#ctN test5 Nan acc#sed is not cri)inall3 res(onsi6le if his #nlawf#l act was the (rod#ct of )ental disease or defect1N he criti,#es however5  2ave too )#ch (rotection to the acc#sed  Mere testi)on3 of a (s3chiatrist that the acc#sedOs act was the res#lt of a )ental disease wo#ld leave the co#rt with no choice 6#t to acce(t it as fact A<4 Ns#6stantial ca(acit3N test5 a (erson is not res(onsi6le for his cri)inal act if% as a res#lt of the )ental disease or defect% he lac.s s#6stantial ca(acit3 to a((reciate the

71

cri)inalit3 of his act or to confor) his cond#ct to re,#ire)ents of the law1 he criti,#es however5  0se of a)6i+#o#s words li.e Ns#6stantial ca(acit3N and Na((reciateN  9-cl#des (s3cho(aths or (ersons whose a6nor)alities are )anifested onl3 63 re(eated cri)inal cond#ct 81 A((reciation test (#sed in 0S federal co#rts)5 relies on the co+nitive testL shifts the 6#rden of (roof to the defense% li)ited the sco(e of e-(ert testi)on3% eli)inated the defense of di)inished ca(acit3 and (rovided for co))it)ent of acc#sed fo#nd to 6e insane1







Sta$%ar% a!!&"e% "$ /'"&"!!"$e c#urt : here )#st 6e a co)(lete de(rivation of intelli+ence at the ti)e of co))ittin+ the act1 he acc#sed is de(rived of reasonL he acted witho#t the least discern)ent 6eca#se there is a co)(lete a6sence of the (ower to discern or that there is a total de(rivation of the will1 Mere a6nor)alit3 of the )ental fac#lties will not e-cl#de i)(#ta6ilit31 I ue: J!? the acc#sed% invo.in+ insanit3% can clai) e-e)(tion fro) lia6ilit3 for the cri)e he co))itted 8e&%: ?o1 'ecision of the trial co#rt convictin+ the a((ellant of the cri)e of (arricide is A**4RM9' in toto1 Rat"#  ?one of the witnesses (resented 63 the acc#sed declared that he e-hi6ited an3 of the )an3 s3)(to)s associated with schi/o(hrenia i))ediatel3 6efore or si)#ltaneo#s with the sta66in+ incident1  Altho#+h 'r1 i6a3an o(ined that it was hi+hl3 (ro6a6le that the acc#sed was alread3 insane 6efore the co))ission of the cri)e% he also said that schi/o(hrenics have l#cid intervals d#rin+ which the3 are ca(a6le of distin+#ishin+ ri+ht fro) wron+1  :is clai) that he had no recollection of the sta66in+ incident a)o#nts onl3 to a )ere +eneral denial that can 6e )ade with facilit31  he fact that Avelina and her ne(hew were fri+htened at the si+ht of hi) holdin+ a 6olo does not% in an3 wa3% (rove that he was insane at that ti)e1  :is non=re(entant attit#de after he sta66ed his wife cannot 6e an indication of his insanit3 6eca#se even cri)inals of so#nd )ental condition can 6e non=re)orsef#l1  he fact that he and his wife never ,#arreled did not (rove his insanit31  4t cannot 6e said that Cealo#s3 is not a s#fficient reason to .ill a (re+nant s(o#se1  he acc#sed attri6#tes his loss of insanit3 on his 6ad fort#ne1 his is (#rel3 s(ec#lative and #ns#((orted 63 record1  Avelina testified that d#rin+ his sta3 in her ho#se% she did not notice an3 a6nor)al or irre+#lar 6ehavior on the (art of the acc#sed that co#ld have s#++ested that he was insane1  Since he had alread3 ad)itted to co))ittin+ the cri)e 6#t (leaded not +#ilt3 on the +ro#nd of insanit3% he is tried on the iss#e of insanit3 alone and if he is fo#nd to 6e sane% a C#d+)ent of conviction is rendered witho#t an3 trial on the iss#e of +#ilt1

 





Jilfredo GaXe/ was fo#nd 63 the R C to 6e +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of (arricide for the .illin+ of his father% Gernardo% and sentenced hi) to s#ffer the (enalt3 of death1 Acc#sed was livin+ in his (arentsO ho#se1 !ne da3% his sisters% 9lvira GaXe/=G#sta)ante and 9)elinda GaXe/=Antiado ca)e to the ho#se 6eca#se their father co)(lained that the acc#sed )ade tro#6le whenever dr#n.1 he3 were disc#ssin+ the (lan for (#ttin+ #( the acc#sed in another ho#se or slee(in+ ,#arters1 Afterwards% the acc#sed% who loo.ed dr#n. 6eca#se he was red in the face% ran into the .itchen% +ot 2 .nives% went into his fatherOs roo) E sta66ed hi)1 9lvira tried to ta.e awa3 the .nives 6#t he l#n+ed at her E sta66ed her1 9)elinda also tried to sto( hi)1 :e chased her while 9lvira loc.ed herself in their fatherOs roo)1 After the acc#sed had left% she r#shed their father to the hos(ital 6#t he was alread3 dead1 he acc#sed entered a (lea of insanit31 9lvira testified that the acc#sed had 6een sta3in+ in their fatherOs ho#se for 7 3ears after the acc#sed se(arated fro) his wifeL that he was confined at the Gic#tan Reha6ilitation Center for addiction to +asoline and was dischar+edL that he was also treated at the Ga+#io 2eneral :os(ital for addiction to +asoline% andL that he had not shown an3 indication that he was cra/31 'r1 2erona 444 of the ?CM: (?ational Center for Mental :ealth) testified that acc#sed was ad)itted to the ?CM: 20 da3s after the cri)eL that the acc#sed was s#fferin+ fro) schi/o(hrenia% descri6ed as a )ental disorder characteri/ed 63 tho#+ht dist#r6ances% hall#cination% s#s(icio#sness% and deterioration in areas of wor.% social relations and self=careL that schi/o(hrenia can 6e ca#sed 63 #se of s#6stances (inhalin+ +asoline and alcoholis))L that he co#ld not sa3 whether the acc#sed was insane at the ti)e he co))itted the cri)e1 Marina 2a6el=Gane/% )other of the acc#sed% testified that he had 6een confined for )ore than a 3ear at the Gic#tan Reha6 CenterL that he was also treated at the Ga+#io 2eneral :os(italL that after .illin+ his father% he was confined at the Mandal#3on+ Mental :os(ital for treat)entL that his wife left hi) and he 6la)ed his in=laws for his )arital tro#6lesL that he resorted to +asoline to for+et his (ro6le)s% EL that he was not a dr#n.ard1 he trial co#rt fo#nd hi) +#ilt3 of (arricide with the a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of dwellin+ and ha6it#al into-ication and sentenced hi) to s#ffer the (enalt3 of death

he was not a6le to (rove 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t his insanit3 at the ti)e i))ediatel3 (recedin+ the .illin+ or at the ver3 )o)ent of the .illin+1 9vidence )erel3 consisted of the testi)on3 of his )other re+ardin+ his treat)ents1 he testi)on3 of 'r1 2erona 444 is inconcl#sive as to whether the acc#sed was insane at the ti)e i))ediatel3 (recedin+ the .illin+ or at the ver3 )o)ent of the .illin+1 :e co#ld not have testified to this effect% considerin+ that he treated the acc#sed after the acc#sed was confine at the ?CM:1 -. WON t'ere e5" t t'e a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce #+ "$t#5"cat"#$ a$% %(e&&"$* "$ t'e c#.." "#$ #+ cr".e  ?o1 'wellin+ cannot 6e considered a++ravatin+ 6eca#se acc#sed and his father were livin+ in the sa)e ho#se where the cri)e was co))itted1 he rationale for considerin+ dwellin+ as an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance is the violation 63 the offender of the sanctit3 of the ho)e of the victi) 63 tres(assin+ therein to co))it the cri)e1 he reason is entirel3 a6sent in this case1 Re+ardin+ the a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of into-ication% it has not 6een shown that it is ha6it#al or intentional as re,#ired 63 RPC A181 9ven ass#)in+ that the acc#sed was dr#n. at the ti)e he co))itted the cri)e% it wasnFt shown that he is a ha6it#al and e-cessive drin.er or that he intentionall3 +ot dr#n.1 ?either can into-ication 6e )iti+atin+ 6eca#se there is no showin+ that he acc#sed was so dr#n. that his will (ower was i)(aired or that he co#ldnFt co)(rehend the wron+f#lness of his acts1 WON RTC *rave&1 erre% "$ ".!# "$* t'e %eat' !e$a&t1 u!#$ t'e accu e% "$ tea% #+ rec&u "#$ !er!etua #$ t'e a u.!t"#$ t'at 'e (a a$e at t'e t".e #+ t'e C"&&"$*.  ?o1 0nder RA H68&% the (enalt3 for (arricide is recl#sion (er(et#a to death1 Since in this case there was neither a++ravatin+ nor )iti+atin+ circ#)stances% the lesser (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a sho#ld 6e i)(osed1

,.

Ju%*.e$t: the decision of the R C is A**4RM9' with the M!'4*4CA 4!? that the acc#sed=a((ellant is sentenced to s#ffer the (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a

/EO/LE v. ;A9E> [301 SCRA 27$ (1&&&)] Nature: A((eal fro) decision of R C of 0rdaneta% Pan+asinan Fact :

I ue : 1. WON 'e (a "$ a$e at t".e #+ c#.." "#$ #+ cr".e a$% t'u e5e.!t +r#. cr"."$a& &"a)"&"t1 u$%er Art. 1-7 R/C  ?o1 Acc#sed )#st (rove that he was co)(letel3 de(rived of reason when he .illed his father in order to 6e considered e-e)(t fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3  4n Peo(le vs1 *or)i+ones5 Nit is necessar3 that there 6e a co)(lete de(rivation of intelli+ence in co))ittin+ the actL that the acc#sed 6e de(rived of reasonL that there 6e no res(onsi6ilit3 for his own actsL that he acts witho#t the least discern)entL that there 6e a co)(lete a6sence of (ower to discern111insanit3 at the ti)e of the co))ission of the act sho#ld a6sol#tel3 de(rive a (erson of intelli+ence or freedo) of will% 6eca#se )ere a6nor)alit3 of his )ental fac#lties does not e-cl#de i)(#ta6ilit31N  Peo(le vs1 Rafanan% "r5 N*or)i+ones esta6lished 2 distin+#isha6le tests5 (a) the test of co+nition111E (6) the test of volition11G#t o#r caselaw shows co))on reliance on the test of co+nition% rather than on a test relatin+ to Ofreedo) of the will1ON  G#rden to (rove his insanit3 at the ti)e of the co))ission of the act rests on the defense1 G#t

/EO/LE v. CA9ETA [30& SCRA 1&& (1&&&)] Nature: A((eal of the decision of the R C% Manila% Gr1 7&% convictin+ 9dwin CaXeta E Antonio A6es of the s(ecial co)(le- cri)e of ro66er3 wK ho)icide E sentencin+ each of the) to recl#sion (er(et#a% (a3 the heirs of the deceased the a)o#nt of P30R% as )oral E e-e)(lar3 da)a+es% and P1H12R% as act#al da)a+es E to ret#rn to M#Xo/ S#r(resa 2rande P80R1 his is a consolidation of 2 se(arate cri)inal cases filed a+ainst 9dwin E Antonio for the cri)e co))itted a+ainst eodorico M#Xo/ Fact : !ct1 21% 1&$1 = eodorico went to wor. as the deliver3 )an of a door=to=door service of cash )one3 of the fir) M#no/ S#r(resa 2rande1 :e had with hi) P80R to 6e delivered to clients% 6#t he was held #( 63 two )en% later identified as 9dwin and Antonio1 9dwin sta66ed hi) while Antonio +ra66ed the 6a+ with the cash inside1 he two ran in o((osite directions1 9dwin was ca#+ht 63 the )o6 while Antonio esca(ed% 6#t he was (ositivel3 identified 63 two witnesses1 Goth (lead not +#ilt3 to the char+es a+ainst the)1 4n the trial% 9dwin averred that he 6e e-a)ined 63 e-(erts of the ?ational Center for Mental :ealth to deter)ine whether he was )entall3 fit to #nder+o the ri+ors of trial1 he trial co#rt +ranted the

)otion and ordered the s#s(ension of trial (endin+ s#6)ission 63 the 'irector% ?ational Center for Mental :ealth% of his re(ort% which said that he was )entall3 fit1 he defense was that 9dwin was s#fferin+ fro) dr#+ (s3chosis% therefore he sho#ld 6e e-e)(ted fro) the cri)inal lia6ilit31 G#t the C convicted 6oth as (rinci(als of the cri)e co))itted and sentenced the) (see a6ove Nnat#reN)1 I ue : 1. WON E%("$ (a "$ a$e at t'e t".e #+ t'e cr".e  ?o% he wasnOt1 he re(ort of the ?ational Center for Mental :ealth and the testi)on3 of 'r1 Perfecto '1 Ch#a Chen+ 444 do not (rove insanit3 of acc#sed=a((ellant 9dwin Caneta1 he 6#rden of (roof lies on the defense% 6#t the3 were not a6le to (rove the insanit3 of 9dwin1 he defense of insanit3 re,#ires that the acc#sed s#ffered fro) a co)(lete de(rivation of reason in co))ittin+ the act1 here )#st 6e no conscio#sness of res(onsi6ilit3 for his acts% or that there 6e co)(lete a6sence of the (ower to discern1 he defense of insanit3 or i)6ecilit3 )#st 6e clearl3 (roved1 he law (res#)es ever3 )an to 6e sane1 -. WON t'e te t".#$1 #+ ("t$e Eva$*e&"$e7 ('# "%e$t"+"e% A$t#$"# A)e a #$e #+ t'e a a"&a$t ca&&e% KT#$1 G"&K7 '#u&% )e *"ve$ cre%e$ce  @es1 :e was (ositivel3 identified 63 e3ewitness 9van+eline Mico1 he (ositive identification of a )alefactor )a3 not 6e disre+arded C#st 6eca#se his na)e was not .nown to the witness1 *or the e3ewitness acco#nt is (re)ised on the fact that the witness saw the acc#sed co))it the cri)e% and not 6eca#se the witness .new his na)e1 he C% which had the o((ort#nit3 to o6serve the de)eanor of 9van+eline was convinced of her tr#stworthiness1 N he ti)e=tested doctrine is that a CFs assess)ent of the credi6ilit3 of a witness is entitled to +reat wei+ht even concl#sive and 6indin+ on the Co#rt% if not tainted with ar6itrariness or oversi+ht of so)e fact or circ#)stance of wei+ht and infl#ence1N











(doctorOs o(inion5 ca#sed 63 a 6l#nt instr#)ent li.e a f#ll3 erect (enis) 'ec1 &% 1&&65 a )an (later identified as 'ia/) went to *rancis GartOs f#neral and ca#sed a co))otion% recitin+ (oe)s% and sin+in+ the the)e fro) he <ion Rin+ (e)(hasi/in+ the word Ns#rrenderN *rancis GartFs father Gartolo)e went to the (olice to re(ort the incidentL the (olice went to the *#lache residence to o6serve the )an% E later invited hi) to head ,#arters for f#rther o6servation E ,#estionin+L the )an went with the) vol#ntaril3 After 6ein+ a((rised of his constit#tional ri+hts in Ce6#ano in the (resence of (olice)en% Att31 A6ellanosa and )edia)en% 'ia/ narrated in f#ll detail how he (er(etrated the cri)e ('eclared inad)issi6le 63 R C = Att31 A6ellanosa% who assisted 'ia/ d#rin+ c#stodial investi+ation was not 'ia/O inde(endent co#nsel) Reenact)ent of the cri)e was also done in the (resence of )edia)en% (#6lished in S#n Star 'ail3% #na#thenticated co(3 (resented in co#rt was declared inad)issi6le 6#t co#rt too. C#dicial notice C#st the sa)e 'ia/ tried to esta6lish the defense of insanit3 6#t 'r1 Jilson i6a3an ('ia/O witness% +ovOt (h3sician connected with the ?ational Center for Mental :ealth) testified that 'ia/ was dia+nosed with Pedo(hilia% not insanit3 Pedo(hilia I a se-#al disorder wherein the s#6Cect has stron+% rec#rrent and #ncontrolla6le fantasies which he tries to f#lfill% es(eciall3% when there are no (eo(le aro#nd o Person can still distin+#ish ri+ht fro) wron+ o Rillin+ not necessar3 altho#+h inC#ries )a3 6e inflicted on the victi) in an effort to re(el an3 resistance o 'ia/ did what he did in reven+e 6eca#se as a child% he was also a victi) of se-#al a6#se

(re)editationL failed to )ention the co))ission of se-#al a6#se or sodo)3% the 4nfor)ation desi+nated the cri)e as N)#rder in relation to RA H610N 6#t the act#al recital of facts in the co)(laint or infor)ation failed to )ention the se-#al a6#se or sodo)3  As a r#le% what controls is not the desi+nation of the offense 6#t its act#al descri(tion in the co)(laint or infor)ation1 he real nat#re of the cri)inal char+e cannot 6e deter)ined fro) the ca(tion or (rea)6le of the infor)ation of fro) the )ere reference to a (artic#lar (rovision of law alle+ed to have 6een violated 6eca#se the3 are concl#sions of law1 herefore% even if there is (ositive (roof of se-#al a6#se% 'ia/ cannot 6e convicted therefor 6eca#se s#ch was not alle+ed in the act#al recital of facts in the 4nfor)ation1 ,. WON D"a? (a a$e at t'e t".e #+ c#.." "#$ #+ act  'ia/ failed to overco)e the le+al (res#)(tion of sanit31  Jhen 'ia/ was confined at the ?ational Center for Mental :ealth% he was dia+nosed with (edo(hilia% not insanit31  Pedo(hilia is not insanit3L Pedo(hilia is a se-#al disorder wherein the s#6Cect has stron+% rec#rrent and #ncontrolla6le fantasies which he tries to f#lfill% es(eciall3 when there are no (eo(le aro#nd1 G#t the (erson can still distin+#ish ri+ht fro) wron+1  A defendant in a cri)inal case who inter(oses the defense of )ental inca(acit3 has the 6#rden of esta6lishin+ that fact% i1e1 he was insane at the ver3 )o)ent when the cri)e was co))itted1 :e )#st (rove it 63 clear and (ositive evidence1 (Peo(le v1 Gascos)  4n the case at 6ar% the defense of insanit3 as an e-e)(tin+ circ#)stance was not esta6lished and did not overco)e the le+al (res#)(tion that a (ersonOs acts are of his own free will and intelli+ence1 herefore% 'ia/ was sane at the ti)e of co))ission of the cri)e

Dec" "#$: "#d+)ent affir)ed% with the M!'4*4CA 4!? that the inde)nit3 is raised to P80%000100% in line with c#rrent r#lin+s1

I ue 7 8e&%7 Rat"# 1. WON t'e cr".e c#.."tte% (a .ur%er  @es1 he cri)e co))itted was still )#rder even witho#t the ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance of evident (re)editation 6eca#se there was treacher3 and a6#se of s#(erior stren+th% either of which wo#ld ,#alif3 the cri)e as )#rder Treac'er1 #r a&ev# "a  Jhen a cri)e a+ainst (ersons is co))itted e)(lo3in+ )eans% )ethods% or for)s in the e-ec#tion thereof which tend directl3 and s(eciall3 to ins#re its e-ec#tion% witho#t ris. to hi)self arisin+ fro) the defense which the offended (art3 )i+ht )a.e (Art1 1716% RPC)  he .illin+ of children who 63 reason of their tender 3ears cannot 6e e-(ected to (#t #( a defense is considered to 6e attended 63 treacher3 even if )anner of attac. isnFt (recisel3 shown1 (Peo(le v1 2on/ales citin+ Peo(le v1 >alerio% "r1)  herefore% the .illin+ of *rancis Gart )#st 6e dee)ed i(so facto ,#alified 63 treacher3 6eca#se of his inherent defenselessness1 (Peo(le v% Gacalto) A)u e #+ Su!er"#r Stre$*t'  Glatant ine,#alit3 of stren+th 6etween 'ia/ and the 6o3  G#t cannot 6e a((reciated even as +eneric a++ravatin+ circ#)stance 6ein+ necessaril3 a6sor6ed in treacher3 -. herefore% the cri)e co))itted is )#rder1 WON t'e %eat' !e$a&t1 '#u&% )e ".!# e%  N['ia/] sho#ld not 6e )eted the s#(re)e (enalt3 of death1N  he 4nfor)ation char+ed 'ia/ onl3 wK )#rder ,#alified 63 treacher3% a6#se of s#(erior stren+th E evident

Ju%*.e$t: Modified RTC M#rder in relation to se-#al a6#se (sodo)3) of a child attended 63 treacher3 'eath death inde)nit35 80R )oral da)a+es5 280R e-e)(lar3 dFs5 100R f#neral e-(enses5 70R SU/REME COURT M#rder

Cr".e

/EO/LE v. DIA> [320 SCRA 16$ (1&&&)] Nature: A#to)atic review of an A(ril 11% 1&&H Ce6# Cit3 R C decision which fo#nd 'ia/ +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of )#rder in relation to se-#al a6#se (sodo)3) of a child attended 63 treacher3% sentenced hi) to death1 !rdered hi) to (a3 the heirs of the victi)5 P80R (death inde)nit3)L 280R ()oral da)a+es)L 100R (e-e)(lar3 da)a+es)L 70R (f#neral e-(enses) Fact : 1&&61 At aro#nd $()% *rancis Gart *#lache (11)% his 6rother *el6art (10)% E 'ia/ (30)% a friend *rancis Gart .new fro) the hanta.an% a +a)in+ (lace near their store% went to Pier 3 to defecate1  *rancis Gart invited his 6rother to +o to Pier 7 6#t *el6art ref#sed1 Jhen he didnFt ret#rn 63 the afternoon of the followin+ da3% his (arents +ot worried E started to loo. for hi)1 A da3 after% the (olice received a re(ort that a 6od3 of a 3o#n+ 6o3 10=11 31o1 had 6een fo#nd at the G#lacao 6rid+e Nsic.enin+ state of n#dit3 E (h3sical a6#seN face was covered wK a 6i+ stone in an a((arent atte)(t to hide the 6od31 he a#to(s3 showed5 o ca#se of death5 intercranial he)orrha+e o other findin+s5 cont#sions% a6rasions E lacerations all over the 6od3L head fract#reL )#lti(le lacerations in his rect#)

Se$te$ce Da.a*e

Recl#sion (er(et#a death inde)nit35 80R )oral da)a+es[5100R e-e)(lar3 da)a+es5 28R f#neral e-(enses5 70R [to co)(ensate for the da)a+es to their feelin+s% not to enrich the)

/EO/LE v. MEDINA [2$6 SCRA 77 (1&&$)] Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of R C Gatan+as Cit3 convictin+ Al6erto Medina of the cri)e of )#rder of Andres 'alisa3 Fact : "#ne = !cto6er 1&$2% Medina was confined in the ?ational Mental :os(ital for schi/o(hrenifor) disorder% where he was s#6se,#entl3 released1 Relatives sa3 that his condition did not see) to i)(rove1 :e was referred to 'r1 Adi+#e for f#rther e-a)inations1 Ma3 20% 1&&1% 11 ()% a (art3 was attended 63 6oth 'alisa3 and Medina% as well as <arr3 Andal% where the 6oth 'alisa3 and Medina

danced the chacha to+ether1 Afterwards% 'alisa3 invited Andal to +o ho)e% with 'alisa3 wal.in+ in front of <arr31 he3 were wa3laid 63 Medina who sta66ed 'alisa31 'alisa3 fell down and the two +ra((led on the +ro#nd1 'alisa3 was a6le to r#n awa3 6#t he was chased and once )ore sta66ed re(eatedl3 63 Medina1 Andal was so st#nned that he wasnFt a6le to hel( 'alisa3% who was 6ro#+ht '!A to the hos(ital1 he C convicted Medina of )#rder E said that his defense of insanit3 is not )eritorio#s since 'r1 Adi+#e was not ,#alified as an e-(ert witness% that his sisterOs testi)on3 didnFt constit#te s#fficient (roof of insanit3% and that he was act#all3 )entall3 a+ile d#rin+ trial1 I ue : 1. WON Me%"$a (a "$ a$e t'ere+#re e5e.!t +r#. cr"."$a& &"a)"&"t1  ?o% he wasnOt% and the decision was not 6ased on the ,#alifications of 'r1 Adi+#e as a doctor 6#t as a witness1 Jhat )attered was the fail#re of 'r1 Adi+#eOs testi)on3 to esta6lish the le+al insanit3 of Medina as shown in the res#lts of the tests she cond#cted which )erel3 sa3s that Medina has a )ild de(ression and e)otional dist#r6ances1 he testi)on3 also did not esta6lish the co)(lete de(rivation of reason on MedinaFs (art1  A12% (ar1 1 RPC re,#ires co)(lete de(rivation of rationalit3 in co))ittin+ the act% i1e1 that the acc#sed 6e de(rived of reason% that there 6e no conscio#sness of res(onsi6ilit3 for his acts% or that there is a co)(lete a6sence of (ower to discern1 he doctorOs re(ort did not s#((ort the clai) that Medinao co#ld not distin+#ish ri+ht fro) wron+1  Also% the defense of insanit3 )#st 6e clearl3 (roved1 he (res#)(tion of law% (er Art1 $00% CC% alwa3s lies in favor of sanit3% and in the a6sence of (roof to the contrar3% ever3 (erson is (res#)ed to 6e of so#nd )ind1  Care )#st 6e ta.en to distin+#ish 6etween insanit3 or lac. of reason and fail#re to #se reason or +ood C#d+)ent d#e to e-tre)e an+er or (assion1  Moral insanit3 or )ere )ental de(ravit3 I res#lts not fro) the disease of the )ind 6#t fro) a (erverted condition of the )oral s3ste)L (erson is sane and is not e-e)(ted fro) the cri)inal lia6ilit3  Phili((ine case law relies on the test of co+nition which re,#ires a co)(lete de(rivation of intelli+ence and not onl3 the will in co))ittin+ the cri)inal act1 -. WON t'ere (a treac'er1 "$ t'e act c#.."tte% a a!!rec"ate% )1 t'e tr"a& c#urt.  @es1 Medina waited on the road E wa3laid the victi)% an attac. wKc was s#dden E #ne-(ected% E the )eans e)(lo3ed ens#red that its e-ec#tion is wKo ris. to the assailant arisin+ fro) an3 defense that the victi) )i+ht )a.e1 WON t'ere (a ev"%e$t !re.e%"tat"#$  ?o% there wasnOt1 he trial co#rt erred in a((reciatin+ evident (re)editation1 !nl3 a few )in#tes (assed since the ti)e the3 left the ho#se to the ti)e that the act was co))itted% th#s there is no s#fficient a)o#nt of ti)e to conte)(late and reflect #(on the conse,#ences of the act% therefore no evident (re)editation1 WON t'e tr"a& c#urt erre% "$ $#t a!!rec"at"$* Me%"$aL v#&u$tar1 urre$%er  @es% it sho#ld have 6een credited in favor of Medina1 Medina s#rrendered an ho#r after the incident to Col1

*altado then to the Gatan+as Police Station1 9vidence is s#fficient to esta6lish vol#ntar3 s#rrender5 11 offender was not act#all3 arrested 21 he s#rrendered to a (erson in a#thorit3 or to an a+ent of a (erson in a#thorit3 31 his s#rrender was vol#ntar3 Dec" "#$: >ol#ntar3 s#rrender di)inished (enalt3 to (rision )a3or in its )a-i)#) (eriod as )ini)#)% and recl#sion te)(oral in its )a-i)#) (eriod as )a-i)#)1

/EO/LE v. TA;UGOCA [2$8 SCRA 312 (1&&$)] Nature: A#to)atic review of a March 18% 1&&6 Coint decision 4la+an% 4sa6ela decision which fo#nd a6#+oca in two cri)inal cases +#ilt3 of 2 co#nts of ra(e co))itted a+ainst his own da#+hters sentenced hi) to recl#sion (er(et#e for the first E death for the second1 Fact : "ac,#eline E her 3 3o#n+er sisters "anet% "in.3 E Cewel lived #nder the sole care of their father after their )other died A#+#st 2$% 1&&11 March 2$% 1&&2% aro#nd 10()% "ac,#eline (123rs 3)os at the ti)e% 61 'ece)6er 2H% 1&H&)  a6#+oca wo.e #( "ac,#eline to scratch his 6ac.1  a6#+oca re)oved her shorts and #nderwear and )ade her lie 6eside hi)% then inserted his (enis in her va+ina1  a6#+oca told her not to tell an3one if she did not want to 6e har)ed1 'ece)6er &% 1&&7% earl3 )ornin+ = "in.3 (123rs &)os at the ti)e% 61 March 8% 1&$2)  "in.3 was cleanin+ so)e articles in their ho#se when a6#+oca a(roached her and too. off his clothes1  a6#+oca ordered her to lie down and re)oved her shorts and #nderwear then inserted his (enis into her va+ina1  "in.3 cried o#t E co)(lained to a6#+oca that she was in (ain1  a6#+oca e-(lained that it is ordinar3 to feel (ain 6eca#se it was her first ti)e to do it1  After a while% he did not contin#e% and told "in.3 that the3 wo#ld contin#e the followin+ da31 'ece)6er 10% 1&&7% dawn = "in.3  a6#+oca )ade another atte)(t to )olest "in.31  "in.3 resisted% ca#sin+ a6#+oca to C#st lie down E leave her alone1 'ece)6er 10% 1&&7% later on  "ac,#eline and "in.3 were watchin+ > in their +rand)otherOs (Perlita AleCandro)1  "in.3 told their lola a6o#t the se-#al a6#ses of their father1 his (ro)(ted "ac,#eline to reveal her si)ilar e-(erience 2 3rs (ast1 'ece)6er 12% 1&&7  heir +rand)other 6ro#+ht the) to the M#nici(al :ealth !fficer of ?a+#ilian for (h3sical e-a)ination1  'r1 Mar3ann M1 *ontanaresO findin+s s#++ested that in "ac,#elineOs case% she was forci6l3 a6#sed E the incident% the first 1 ha((ened lon+ a+o% 6ased on the healed scars of the h3)en% E in "in.3Os case that f#ll (enetration was #ns#ccessf#l altho#+h atte)(ts were done 6ased on the swollen v#lva of the victi)1

a6#+oca tried to clai) e-e)(tion fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3 on the +ro#nd of insanit3 6ro#+ht a6o#t 63 into-ication  "ac,#eline5 a6#+oca alle+edl3 onl3 ca)e to .now of what ha((ened to "ac,#eline when the (olice arrested hi) on 'ece)6er 10% 1&&71 "ac,#eline alle+edl3 infor)ed hi) on the date of his arrest that he was dr#n. on March 2$% 1&&2% a6#+oca s#r)ised that he was 6ased on "ac,#elineOs s#((osed state)ent1 "ac,#eline testified that a6#+oca did s)ell of li,#or and )a3 have had had a few drin.s then  "in.35 a6#+oca said that he had also 6een drin.in+ then and co#ld not recall what had ha((ened after he had finished drin.in+1 "in.3 testified that a6#+oca had 6een dr#n. on the ni+ht of 'ece)6er &% 1&&71 a6#+oca clai)ed that he started drin.in+ after his wife died% resortin+ to drin. when he re)e)6ered his wife and that 6efore her death% he did not drin.1 :e also clai)s that his children filed the co)(laints in reven+e for his Ncasti+atin+ or whi((in+N the) whenever the3 co))itted )ista.es1 I ue 7 8e&%7 Rat"# 1. WON Ta)u*#ca " *u"&t1 #+ ra!e  @es1 a6#+ocaOs +#ilt has 6een (roven 63 the (rosec#tion 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1  a6#+oca neither denied the char+es a+ainst hi) nor raised an3 a6sol#tor3 ca#se in his defense1  he cate+orical and #ntraversed testi)onies of "ac,#eline and "in.3 as to how a6#+oca co))itted the 6estial o#tra+e% and their identification of the acc#sed as their defiler re)ain #ncontroverted and f#ll3 esta6lish the char+es1 "ac,#elineOs fail#re to i))ediatel3 re(ort the cri)e does not necessaril3 cast do#6t on the credi6ilit3 of her char+e1 Je cannot e-(ect 3o#n+ "ac,#eline to disre+ard the threat on her life and i))ediatel3 cr3 ra(e in the face of her fatherOs threats and his constant (resence in her ho)e1  4t is hi+hl3 inconceiva6le that "ac,#eline wo#ld invent a char+e that wo#ld onl3 6rin+ sha)e and h#)iliation #(on the) and their fa)il3 and 6e the o6Cect of +ossi( a)on+ their class)ates and friends in order to +et even with their father or to e)(athi/e with her sister% es(eciall3 +iven o#r c#lt#re1  4t is a-io)atic in cri)inal law that in order to s#stain a conviction for ra(e% f#ll (enetration is not re,#ired1  2 for)s of inti)idation #nder Art1 338 RPC (Matri)onio)5 (1) threats% (2) over(owerin+ )oral infl#ence1  a6#+oca e-ercised over(owerin+ )oral infl#ence over the victi)s% 6ein+ their father1 his is s#fficient to inti)idate and force the) to s#6)it to his desires  *or ra(e to e-ist% it is not necessar3 that the inti)idation e)(lo3ed 6e so +reat or of s#ch character as co#ld not 6e resisted1 Jhat is necessar3 is that the inti)idation 6e s#fficient to cons#))ate the (#r(ose the acc#sed had in )ind1  4n the case at 6ar% with the (revio#s 6eatin+s "in.3 had +otten fro) a6#+oca% resistance co#ld not have 6een e-(ected fro) her1  a6#+ocaOs contention of consens#al se- is ridic#lo#sZ ?o showin+ that "in.3 is a se-#al (ervert or a wo)an of loose )orals1

,.

A.

  -.

Consent o6tained 63 fear of (ersonal violence is not consentZ herefore% a6#+oca is +#ilt3 of two (2) co#nts of ra(e1



WON t'e RTC 'a% <ur" %"ct"#$  @es1 a6#+ocaOs (osition that the the R COs C#risdiction to (#nish hi) is li)ited onl3 to the "in.3Os cri)inal co)(laint of fr#strated ra(e E cannot cover cons#))ated ra(e is a )eritless ar+#)ent1  Jhen it is said that the filin+ of the co)(laint 63 the offended (art3 in cases of ra(e is C#risdictional% what is )eant is that it is the co)(laint that starts the (rosec#tor3 (roceedin+% 6#t it is not the co)(laint which confers C#risdiction on the co#rt to tr3 the case1  he co#rtOs C#risdiction is vested in it 63 the "#diciar3 <aw1 (Peo(le v1 <eo(arte)  Since the (enalt3 for ra(e in the co)(laint filed 63 "ac,#eline is (ro(erl3 within the C#risdiction of the R C% the lower co#rt involved in this case )a3 hear and tr3 the offense char+ed in the infor)ation and )a3 i)(ose the (#nish)ent for it1  he ri+ht and (ower of a co#rt to tr3 the acc#sed for the cri)e of ra(e attaches #(on the fifin+ of the co)(laint% and a char+e in the alle+ations thereof as to the )anner of co))ittin+ the cri)e sho#ld not o(erate to divest the co#rt of C#risdiction alread3 ac,#ired1 (Peo(le v1 Gan+alao% et1al1)  herefore% the R C had C#risdiction1 WON t'e %eat' !e$a&t1 '#u&% )e ".!# e%  @es1 he onl3 (ossi6le 6asis of the (enalt3 #nder the r#les of +rad#atin+ (enalties #nder the RPC is the (resence of a (rivile+ed )iti+atin+ circ#)stance1 here was none shown to e-ist1  herefore% the death (enalt3 sho#ld 6e i)(osed1 WON %ru$Ce$$e "$ t'" ca e " a va&"% %e+e$ e  ?o1 a6#+ocaOs fee6le e-c#se of havin+ 6een #nder the infl#ence of li,#or in order to disclai) .nowled+e of his actions is #n6elieva6le1  :e did not co)(l3 with the evidentiar3 re,#ire)ents where63 he co#ld clai) into-ication as a )iti+atin+ circ#)stance1  he attendance of into-ication is affir)ed as an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance on the additional findin+ that it was ha6it#al1  herefore% dr#n.enness was not a valid defense1 4t was an a++ravatin+ circ#)stanceZ WON Ta)u*#ca (a a$e ('e$ 'e c#.."tte% t'e cr".e  @es1 a6#+oca failed to overthrow the (res#)(tion of sanit31 he law (res#)es ever3 )an to 6e sane1 he (erson acc#sed of a cri)e who (leads the e-e)(tin+ circ#)stance of insanit3 has necessaril3 the conse,#ent 6#rden of (rovin+ it1 (Peo(le v1 Catan3a+)  4n order for insanit3 to 6e ta.en as an e-e)(tin+ circ#)stance% there )#st 6e co)(lete de(reciation of intelli+ence in the co))ission of the act or that the acc#sed acted witho#t the least discern)ent1 Mere a6nor)alit3 of his )ental fac#lties does not (recl#de i)(#ta6ilit31 (Peo(le v1 So)  he defense did not (resent an3 e-(ert witness% (s3chiatric eval#ation re(ort% (s3cholo+ical findin+s or evidence re+ardin+ a6#+ocaOs )ental condition at the ti)e of co))ission of the offenses1





:is charade of a)nesia is a des(erate (lo3 for e-c#l(ation1 4n an3 case% a)nesia is not% in and of itself% a defense to a cri)inal char+e #nless it is shown 63 co)(etent (roof that the acc#sed did not .now of the nat#re and ,#alit3 of his action and that it was wron+1 *ail#re to re)e)6er is in itself no (roof of the )ental condition of the acc#sed when the cri)e was co))itted1 ( ho)as v1 State) herefore% a6#+oca was sane at the ti)e of co))ission of the cri)es1





 

Ju%*.e$t: Affir)ed with )odification1 4n accordance with Art1 $3 of the RPC as a)ended 63 Sec1 28 of RA H68& (rei)(osin+ the death (enalt3)% #(on finalit3 of this decision% the records will 6e forwarded i))ediatel3 to the !ffice of the President for the (ossi6le e-ercise of the (ardonin+ (ower1 RTC Cri)e 2 co#nts of ra(e co))itted a+ainst his own da#+hters Recl#sion (er(et#a ("ac,#eline) 'eath ("in.3) ?one SU/REME COURT sa)e



he defense (resented 3 doctors to (rove insanit3 6#t the doctors instead (roved that P#no had acted with discern)ent when he .illed Alin+ Ri.a31 'r1 Araceli Maravilla of 'r1 "ose Re3es Me)orial hos(ital said P#no was an o#t(atient who co#ld ver3 well live with societ3 even if he was afflicted with schi/o(hrenic reaction1 'r1 Re3naldo Ro6les stated that P#no had schi/o(hrenic reaction 6#t that this condition was Nnot sociall3 inca(acitatin+N 'r1 Carlso >icente of the ?ational Mental :os(ital testified that P#no acted wK discern)ent E co#ld distin+#ish ri+ht fro) wron+1 21 !cto6er 1&H0 = P#no was indicted for the )#rder in the Circ#it Cri)inal Co#rt at Pasi+% Ri/al1 Alle+ed in the infor)ation as a++ravatin+ circ#)stances were evident (re)editation% a6#se of s#(eriorit3 and disre+ard for se-1 P#no was sentenced to death and ordered to (a3 P22R to the heirs of the victi) ue: J!? P#no was insane when he .illed Alin+ Ri.a31

I

Sentence

sa)e

'a)a+es

"ac,#eline5 e-e)(lar3 E )oral da)a+es5 28R] "in.35 e-e)(lar3 da)a+es5 28R

,.

/EO/LE v. /UNO [108 SCRA 181 (1&$1)] Nature: A#to)atic review fro) the decision of circ#it cri)inal co#rt of Pasi+% Ri/al1 Fact :  $ Se(1 1&H0 = aro#nd 2() 9rnesto P#no entered the 6edroo) of H2 31o1 *rancisca Col also .nown as Alin+ Ri.a3% in <ittle Ga+io% 6arrio inaCeros% Mala6on% Ri/al1 Alin+ Ri.a3 was on the 6ed% when P#no entered E ins#lted her 63 sa3in+ NMan+.#.#la) .a% )a)6a6aran+% )a3roon .an+ 6#6#3o+1N hen% he re(eatedl3 sla((ed her and str#c. her on the head several ti)es with a ha))er #ntil she was dead1 he assa#lt was witnessed 63 :ilaria dela Cr#/ who was (resent in the roo) d#rin+ the attac.% and 63 <ina PaCes% a tenant in the ne-t roo)1 After .illin+ the old lad3 P#no went into the ne-t roo)% where the +irls had ta.en ref#+e E )ade the followin+ confession E threat N:#a+ .a3on+ )a+.a.a)alin+ t#)awa+ n+ (#lis at sa6ihin n#n3o na #)alis .a3o n+ 6aha3 at hindi nin3o ala) .#n+ sino an+ (#)ata3 sa )atanda1N !r accordin+ to <ina N(inata3 .o na an+ i3on+ )atanda1 :#a+ .a3on+ t#)awa+ n+ (#lis1 Pa+ t#)awa+ .a3o n+ (#lis% .a3o an+ (ahihi+antihan .o1N After P#no left% <ina called the (olice1 P#no fled to his (arentsO ho#se then later on to his second co#sin% eoti)oFs ho#se1  10 Se(1 1&H0 = P#noOs father s#rrendered hi) to the (olice1 :e was 6ro#+ht to the ?ational Mental :os(ital in Mandal#3on+% Ri/al1 :e was char+ed with )#rder in the )#nici(al co#rt1  P#noOs wife% his sister in law and his 2nd co#sin all testified in co#rt descri6in+ his a((earance [6loodshot e3es] and his 6ehavior i))ediatel3 6efore and after the) )#rder% [6o-in+ the do+% havin+ an i)a+inar3 6#)6le 6ee fl3in+ aro#nd hi)% sin+in+% etc11]

A.

8e&%: ?o1 Record fro) P#noOs sta3 at the ?ational Mental :os(ital stated that he had 6een an o#t (atient for schi/o(hrenia in 1&62% recovered% had a rela(se in 1&67% i)(roved and in 1&66 his sic.ness re)ained 0?4MPR!>9'1 reat)ent contin#ed in San <a/aro Co)(o#nd #( to 1&H0 where he was relieved of s3)(to)s and did not co)e 6ac. for )edication1 4t cited that he was ,#iet and as #s#al )ana+ea6le1 he re(ort stated that he Nis (resentl3 free fro) an3 social inca(acitatin+ (s3chotic s3)(to)sN% 6#t (ersons s#fferin+ fro) schi/o(hrenia )a3 retain so)e of the resid#al s3)(to)s 6#t it wo#ldnOt affect their discern)ent of ri+ht and wron+1 he co#rt sa3s5 Nin the li+ht of the strict r#le C#st stated and the circ#)stance s#rro#ndin+ the .illin+% we are led to the concl#sion that P#no was not le+all3 insane when he .illed% the victi)OO he co#rt cited that had he 6een a ho)icidal )aniac he wo#ld have .illed <ina and :ilaria too1 he evidence sho#ld (rove clearl3 that he was insane at the ti)e of the co))ission of the cri)e1 4nsanit3 e-ists when there is a co)(lete de(rivation of intelli+ence in co))ittin+ the act% that is% the acc#sed is de(rived of reason% he acts witho#t the least discern)ent 6eca#se there is a co)(lete a6sence of the (ower to discern% or total de(rivation of freedo) of wilt1 Mere a6nor)alit3 of the )ental fac#lties will not e-cl#de i)(#ta6ilit31 wo a++ravatin+ circ#)stances% dwellin+ and disre+ard of the res(ect d#e to the a+e of the victi) are off set 63 the )iti+atin+ circ#)stances of vol#ntar3 s#rrender and the offenderOs )ental illness ()ild schi/o(hrenic reaction) which di)inished hi) of his will (ower 6#t did not de(rive hi) of conscio#sness of his acts1 Ju%*.e$t: Medi#) (enalt3 for )#rder i)(osed1 'eath (enalt3 is set aside1 Acc#sed is sentenced to R9C<0S4!? P9RP9 0A MaCa "ar7 %" e$t"$*: he a((ellant sho#ld not 6e held lia6le for the cri)e of )#rder1 :e was )entall3 ill when he co))itted the alle+ed .illin+ of *rancisca Col (Alin+ Ri.a3)1 :is )edical records (ro(erl3 eval#ated E confir)ed #ndenia6l3 esta6lish the fact that he had 6een ailin+ with a (s3chotic disorder )edicall3 .nown as chronic schi/o(hrenia of the (aranoid t3(e1 :is record for treat)ent stated hi) to 6e N#ni)(rovedN #(on dischar+e and his o#t (atient record )erel3 stated hi) as Ni)(rovedN not NrecoveredN or N#ni)(rovedN1 A((ellant was treated 1$ ti)es in the ?ational Mental :os(ital and "ose Re3es Me)orial :os(ital in a s(an of $ 3ears% characteristic of the chronic nat#re of his )ental illness1 his was confir)ed 63 'r1 Carlos >icente1 A (erson with Chronic Schi/o(hrenia does not

H.

/EO/LE v. ;ONOAN [67 Phil1 $H (1&3H)] Nature: A((eal fro) a C#d+)ent of the C*4 of Manila Fact :  12 'ec1 1&37 = Celestino Gonoan )et Carlos 2#ison on Avenida Ri/al near a 6ar6ersho( close to o)Os 'i-ie Ritchen1 *rancisco Geech% who was at the ti)e in the 6ar6ersho(% heard Gonoan sa3 in a+alo+% N4 will .ill 3o#1N Geech t#rned aro#nd E saw Gonoan withdrawin+ his ri+ht hand% wKc held a .nife% fro) the side of 2#ison who said% N4 will (a3 3o#%N 6#t Gonoan si)(l3 re(lied sa3in+ that he wo#ld .ill hi) E then sta66ed 2#ison 3 ti)es on the left side1 he incident was witnessed 63 (olice)an 'a)aso Arnoco1 Gonoan was arrested on the da3 itself1 Gonoan ad)itted to sta66in+ 2#ison1 2#ison was ta.en to P2: where he died 2 da3s later1  8 "an#ar3 1&38 = Prosec#tin+ attorne3 of Manila filed an infor)ation char+in+ Celestino Gonoan with the cri)e of )#rder1  16 "an#ar3 1&38 = GonoanOs defense co#nsel o6Cected to the arrai+n)ent on the +ro#nd that the defendant was )entall3 deran+ed and was at the ti)e confined in the (s3cho(athic hos(ital1 he co#rt iss#ed and order re,#irin+ the 'irector of the hos(ital to re(ort on GonoanOs )ental condition1 A re(ort was rendered 63 'r1 ori6io "oson1  23 March 1&38 = the case was called for arrai+n)ent a+ain% the defense o6Cected and a+ain the co#rt filed another order re,#irin+ the doctor who e-a)ined Gonoan to a((ear in co#rt to re(ort on GonoanOs )ental condition1  26 March 1&38 = 'r1 ori6io a((eared 6efore the co#rt for the in,#ir31 he co#rt iss#ed another order as.in+ to s#))on other doctors fro) the hos(ital and to (#t Gonoan #nder another doctor% 'r1 "ose *ernande/% for closer o6servation1 'r1 *ernande/ filed his re(ort on 11 "#ne 1&381  2$ "#ne 1&38 the case was called a+ain% 'r *ernande/ showed #( in co#rt and re(orted that Gonoan was still not in a condition to defend hi)self1  21 "an#ar3 1&36 = 'r1 *ernande/ re(orted to the co#rt that Gonoan co#ld 6e dischar+ed fro) the hos(ital and a((ear for trial as he was Nconsidered a recovered case1N  2H *e6r#ar3 1&36 = Gonoan was arrai+ned and (leaded Nnot +#ilt3N and the trial was held1 o (rove )otive and )ental nor)alc3 of Gonoan the (rosec#tion called on 'a)aso Arnoco who testified that the reason for GonoanOs attac. was that 2#ison owed hi) P88 and wo#ld not (a3 hi) 6ac.1 Gonoan had 6o#+ht the .nife with which he sta66ed 2#ison for 80 centavos and had 6een waitin+ 2 da3s to .ill hi)1 :e ac,#ired this infor)ation when he arrested and ,#estioned Gonoan1 Gonoan was char+ed with the )#rder of Carlos 2#ison% and sentenced hi) to life i)(rison)ent and to (a3 P1R to inde)nif3 the heirs of 2#ison1  he defendant a((ealed the case and his co#nsel cited that the lower co#rt had erred in findin+ that Gonoan had de)entia inter)ittentl3 and not i))ediatel3 (rior to the co))ission of the offense% in findin+ that the acc#sed did not show an3 a6nor)alit3 either in 6ehavior% action% lan+#a+e% a((earance% or action that he was )entall3 deran+ed% in findin+ that the 6#rden of (roof la3 in the defendant to (rove that he was )entall3 deran+ed at the ti)e of the cri)e% and in not ac,#ittin+ Gonoan1 I ue: J!? Gonoan was insane at the ti)e of the co))ission of the cri)e1 8e&%: @es1 here are 3 different theories #sed

(1)

4nsanit3 as a defense in a confession and avoidance and as s#ch )#st 6e (roved 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1 Proof of insanit3 at the ti)e of co))ittin+ the cri)inal act sho#ld 6e clear and satisfactor3 in order to ac,#it the acc#sed on the +ro#nd of insanit31 (Phili((ines #ses this) (2) hat an affir)ative verdict of insanit3 is to 6e +overned 63 (re(onderance of evidence% and in this view% insanit3 is not to 6e esta6lished 6e3ond a reasona6le do#6t1 (3) Prosec#tion )#st (rove sanit3 6e3ond a reasona6le do#6t1 Jhen a defendant in a cri)inal case inter(oses the defense of )ental inca(acit3% the 6#rden of esta6lishin+ the fact rests #(on the defendant1 o (rove insanit3 the evidence )#st 6e clear and convincin+1 he co#rts need to distin+#ish insanit3 in law fro) (assion or eccentricit3% )ental wea.ness or )ere de(ression res#ltin+ fro) (h3sical ail)ent1 4n the se(arate re(orts +iven 63 'r1 ori6io "oson and 'r1 *ernande/ the3 6oth dia+nosed Gonoan to 6e #nsta6le% statin+ that Nhe will alwa3s have tro#6les and diffic#lties with this world of realities1N Gonoan was dia+nosed with de)entia (raeco- which is a )ental disease that dis,#alifies a (erson fro) le+al res(onsi6ilit3 for his actions1 4n these (eo(le ho)icidal attac.s are co))on 6eca#se of the del#sions that the3 are 6ein+ interfered with or that their (ro(ert3 is 6ein+ ta.en1 he co#rt was of the o(inion that Gonoan was de)ented at the ti)e he (er(etrated the serio#s offense char+e with and that conse,#entl3 he is e-e)(t fro) cri)inal lia6ilit31 Ju%*.e$t: "#d+)ent of the lower co#rt R9>9RS9'1 'efendant a((ellant ACV04 9' 6#t to 6e .e(t in confine)ent in the San <a/aro :os(ital or an3 other hos(ital for the insane1 I.!er"a&7 %" e$t"$*: N he dissentin+ o(inions% in esta6lishin+ the concl#sion that the acc#sed was then in the (ossession of his )ental fac#lties or% at least% at a l#cid interval% are 6ased on the fact ad)itted 63 the (arties and s#((orted 63 e-(ert testi)on3% that the acc#sed 6efore the co))ission of a cri)e% had 6een c#red of de)entia (raeco- and later of )anic de(ressive (s3chosis1N he inference of the )aCorit3 that the acc#sed was insane is not s#fficientl3 s#((orted 63 evidence1 ?o attention was +iven to the decision of the C#d+e who ori+inall3 tried the case% which sho#ld have 6een done 6eca#se he was a6le to o6serve Gonoan% the witnesses% the evidence and the testi)onies1 his co#rt +enerall3 +ives i)(ortance to the concl#sions drawn 63 the C#d+e who tried the case in first instance #nless there is a clear contradiction in the evidence and the decision% which is not the case here1 D"a?7 %" e$t"$*: he a((ellant co))itted the cri)e when he was sane or at least d#rin+ a l#cid interval1 :e had )otive to .ill 2#ison [88(h(]% as clearl3 stated 63 the arrestin+ (olice officer1 he law (res#)es that ever3one is sane% and insanit3 is an e-ce(tion% to 6e esta6lished 63 clear (roof and it is not #s#all3 (er)anent1 here is no evidence or record that can (rove that Gonoan was insane at the ti)e he co))itted the cri)e% or that he was contin#in+ to s#ffer fro) insanit3 fro) the date of the co))ission of the cri)e1 Jhere it is shown that the defendant e-(eriences l#cid intervals% the cri)e is ass#)ed to have 6een co))itted d#rin+ one of the)% #nless (roven otherwise1 C#$ce!c"#$7 %" e$t"$*: here is no evidence or record to (rove that Gonoan was insane at the ti)e he co))itted the cri)e% and there were no records to show that he had s#ffered a rela(se of the condition he had so#+ht treat)ent for at the San <a/aro hos(ital 3ears 6efore the cri)e was co))itted1 Gonoan had 6een sane for & 3ears [or at least Nsociall3 adC#sta6leN]1 he attac. of inso)nia

6efore the event is not clear (roof that he was insane or s#fferin+ a 6o#t with insanit3 at the ti)e of the cri)e% it )erel3 (resents a (ossi6ilit3% and the innocence to the acc#sed cannot 6e 6ased on a )ere (ossi6ilit31 he acc#sed when ,#estioned 63 the (olice i))ediatel3 after the cri)e did not e-hi6it insane 6ehavior1 4t cannot 6e said that Gonoan sta66ed 2#ison 6eca#se of a hall#cination 6eca#se 2#ison act#all3 owed hi) )one3 and this was confir)ed 63 the fact of his sa3in+ N4 a) +oin+ to (a3 3o#N 6efore he was sta66ed1 his shows the )otive for a++ression [ven+eance]

/EO/LE v. DUNGO [1&& SCRA $60 (1&&1)] Nature: A#to)atic review of the decision of the R C of Pa)(an+a convictin+ the acc#sed of )#rder1 Fact : !n March 16% 1&$H 6etween 2500 and 3500()% the acc#sed went to Mrs1 Si+#aOs office at the 'e(art)ent of A+rarian Refor)% A(alit% Pa)(an+a1 After a 6rief tal.% the acc#sed drew a .nife fro) the envelo(e he was carr3in+ and sta66ed Mrs1 Si+#a several ti)es1 After which he de(arted fro) the office with 6lood stained clothes% carr3in+ a 6loodied 6laded wea(on1 he a#to(s3 re(ort revealed that the victi) s#stained 17 wo#nds% 8 of which were fatal1 Rodolfo Si+#a% h#s6and of the deceased% testified that so)eti)e in *e6r#ar3 1&$H% the acc#sed Rosalino '#n+o in,#ired fro) hi) wh3 his wife was re,#irin+ so )an3 doc#)ents fro) hi)1 Rodolfo e-(lained to hi) the (roced#re at the 'AR1 he acc#sed% in defense of hi)self% tried to show that he was insane at the ti)e of the co))ission of the offense5  wo wee.s (rior to March 16% 1&$H% RosalinoOs wife noticed that he a((ears to 6e in dee( tho#+ht alwa3s% )altreatin+ their children when he was not #sed to it 6efore1 here were also ti)es that her h#s6and wo#ld infor) her that his feet and head were on fire when in tr#th the3 were not1  !n that fatef#l da3% Rosalino co)(lained of sto)achache 6#t the3 didnOt 6other to 6#3 )edicine as the (ain went awa3 i))ediatel31 hereafter% he went 6ac. to the store1 G#t when Andrea followed hi) to the store% he was no lon+er there1 Jorried% she loo.ed for hi)1 !n her wa3 ho)e% she heard (eo(le sa3in+ that a sta66in+ occ#rred1 She saw her h#s6and in her (arents=in=lawOs ho#se with (eo(le )illin+ aro#nd1 She as.ed her h#s6and wh3 he did the act% to which Rosalino answered% N hatOs the onl3 c#re for )3 ail)ent1 4 have cancer of the heart1 4f 4 donOt .ill the deceased in a n#)6er of da3s% 4 wo#ld die1D hat sa)e da3% the acc#sed went to Manila1 'r1 Santia+o and 'r1 9chave/ of the ?ational Center for Mental :ealth testified that the acc#sed was confined in the )ental hos(ital% as (er order of the trial co#rt dated A#+1 1H% 1&$H1 Gased on the re(orts of their staff% the3 concl#ded that Rosalino was (s3chotic or insane lon+ 6efore% d#rin+ and after the co))ission of the alle+ed cri)e and classified his insanit3 as an or+anic )ental disorder secondar3 to cere6ro=vasc#lar accident or stro.e1 G#t 'r1 Galat6at who treated the acc#sed for ail)ents secondar3 to stro.e% and 'r1 <i) who testified that the acc#sed s#ffered dor) occl#sive disease% concl#ded that Rosalino was so)ehow reha6ilitated after a series of )edical treat)ent in their clinic1 I ue: J!? the acc#sed was insane d#rin+ the co))ission of the cri)e char+ed1 8e&%: ?o1 *or insanit3 to relieve the (erson of cri)inal lia6ilit3% it is necessar3 that there 6e a co)(lete de(rivation of intelli+ence in

co))ittin+ the act% that he acts wKo the least discern)ent and that there 6e co)(lete a6sence or de(rivation of the freedo) of the will1 0nder Phili((ine C#risdiction% thereOs no definite test or criterion for insanit31 :owever% the definition of insanit3 #nder Sec 103&[ of the Revised Ad)inistrative Code can 6e a((lied1 4n essence% it states that insanit3 is evinced 63 a deran+ed and (erverted condition of the )ental fac#lties% which is )anifested in lan+#a+e or cond#ct1 An insane (erson has no f#ll and clear #nderstandin+ of the nat#re and conse,#ence of his act1 9vidence of insanit3 )#st refer to the )ental condition at the ver3 ti)e of doin+ the act1 :owever% it is also (er)issi6le to receive evidence of his )ental condition for a reasona6le (eriod 6efore and after the ti)e of the act in ,#estion1 he va+aries of the )ind can onl3 6e .nown 63 o#tward acts1 4t is not #s#al for an insane (erson to confront a s(ecified (erson who )a3 have wron+ed hi)1 G#t in the case at hand% the acc#sed was a6le to Mrs1 Si+#a1 *ro) this% it can 6e inferred that the acc#sed was aware of his acts1 his also esta6lished that the acc#sed has l#cid intervals1 Moreover% 'r1 9chave/ testified to the effect that the a((ellant co#ld have 6een aware of the nat#re of his act at the ti)e he co))itted it when he sho#ted (d#rin+ la6orator3 e-a)ination) that he .illed Mrs1 Si+#a1 his state)ent )a.es it hi+hl3 do#6tf#l that the acc#sed was insane when he co))itted the act1 he fact that the acc#sed was carr3in+ an envelo(e where he hid the fatal wea(on% that he ran awa3 fro) the scene of the incident after he sta66ed the victi) several ti)es% that he fled to Manila to evade arrest% indicate that he was conscio#s and .new the conse,#ences of his acts in sta66in+ the victi)1 ( his was ta.en fro) the COs decision)1 Ju%*.e$t: ,#estioned decision A**4RM9'1

des(eration wo#nded hi)self1 As his ene)ies see)ed to )#lti(l3 aro#nd hi)% he attac.ed ever36od3 that ca)e his wa31 I ue: J!? defendant acted while in a drea)1

Rat"#: @es1 he defendant acted while in a drea) E his acts% therefore% werenFt vol#ntar3 in the sense of entailin+ cri)inal lia6ilit31 he a((arent lac. of )otive for co))ittin+ a cri)inal act does not necessaril3 )ean that there are none% 6#t that si)(l3 the3 are not .nown to #s1 Altho#+h an e-tre)e )oral (erversion )a3 lead a )an to co))it a cri)e witho#t a real )otive 6#t C#st for the sa.e of co))ittin+ it1 4n the case at hand% the co#rt fo#nd not onl3 lac. of )otives for the defendant to vol#ntaril3 co))it the acts co)(lained of (read5 he loved his wife dearl3% he tried to attac. his father in whose ho#se the lived and the +#ests who) he invited)% 6#t also )otives for not co))ittin+ the acts1 'r1 Serafica% an e-(ert witness in the case% stated that considerin+ the circ#)stances of the case% the defendant acted while in a drea)% #nder the infl#ence of a hall#cination and not in his ri+ht )ind1 he wifeOs wo#nd )a3 have 6een inflicted accidentall31 he defendant did not drea) that he was assa#ltin+ his wife% 6#t that he was defendin+ hi)self fro) his ene)ies1 Ju%*.e$t: defendant not cri)inall3 lia6le for the offense1 4t was also ordered that he 6e confined in the +overn)ent insane as3l#) and will not 6e released #ntil the director thereof finds that his li6ert3 wo#ld no lon+er constit#te a )enace

8e&%: ?o1 :e is not an i)6ecile1 Accordin+ 'r1 *rancisco 2o)es% altho#+h he was fee6le)inded% he is not an i)6ecile as he co#ld still distin+#ish 6etween ri+ht E wron+ E even feel re)orse1 4n order that a (erson co#ld 6e re+arded as an i)6ecile wKin the )eanin+ of RPC A12 so as to 6e e-e)(t fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3% he )#st 6e de(rived co)(letel3 of reason or discern)ent E freedo) of will at the ti)e of co))ittin+ the cri)e1 (?ote that definition is sa)e as insanit3) As to the stran+e 6ehavior of the acc#sed d#rin+ his confine)ent% ass#)in+ it was not fei+ned to sti)#late insanit3% it )a3 6e attri6#ted either to his 6ein+ fee6le)inded or eccentric% or to a )or6id )ental condition (rod#ced 63 re)orse at havin+ .illed his wife1 A )an who co#ld feel the (an+s of Cealo#s3 E ta.e violent )eas#res to the e-tent of .illin+ his wife who he s#s(ected of 6ein+ #nfaithf#l to hi)% in the 6elief that in doin+ so% he was vindicatin+ his honor% co#ld hardl3 6e re+arded as an i)6ecile1 J!? the s#s(icions were C#stified% is of little or no i)(ortance1 he fact is that he 6elieved her faithless1 *#rther)ore% in his written state)ent% he readil3 ad)itted that he .illed his wife% E at the trial he )ade no effort to den3 of re(#diate said written state)ents% th#s savin+ the +overn)ent all the tro#6le E e-(ense of catchin+ hi) E sec#rin+ his conviction1 G#t 2 )iti+atin+ circ#)stances are (resent5 (assion or o6f#scation (havin+ .illed his wife in a Cealo#s ra+e) E fee6le)indedness1 Ju%*.e$t: 4n concl#sion% a((ellant is fo#nd +#ilt3 of (arricide E the lower co#rtFs C#d+)ent is here63 affir)ed wK the )odification that a((ellant will 6e credited with half of an3 (reventive i)(rison)ent he has #nder+one (6eca#se of the 2 )iti+atin+ circ#)stances)

/EO/LE v. ESTE/ANO [30H SCRA H0H (1&&&)] /EO/LE v. FORMIGONES [$H Phil1 68$ (1&80)] Nature: A((eal fro) the decision of the C*4 of Ca)arines S#r findin+ A6elardo *or)i+ones +#ilt3 of (arricide E sentencin+ hi) to recl#sion (er(et#a% to inde)nif3 the heirs of the deceased in the a)o#nt of P2R% and to (a3 costs1 Fact : 4n the )onth of ?ov1 1&76% A6elardo was livin+ on his far) in Ca)arines S#r wK his wife% "#lia A+ricola E their 8 children1 *ro) there the3 transferred in the ho#se of his half=6rother% Macarias *or)i+ones in the sa)e )#nici(alit3 to find e)(lo3)ent as harvesters of (ala31 After a )onth% "#lia was sittin+ at the head of the stairs of the ho#se when A6elardo% wKo (revio#s ,#arrel or (rovocation whatsoever% too. his 6olo fro) the wall of the ho#se E sta66ed his wife "#lia% in the 6ac.% the 6lade (enetratin+ the ri+ht l#n+ E ca#sin+ a severe he)orrha+e res#ltin+ in her death1 A6elardo then too. his dead wife E laid her on the floor of the livin+ roo) E then la3 down 6eside her1 4n this (osition% he was fo#nd 63 the (eo(le who ca)e in res(onse to the sho#ts )ade 63 his eldest da#+hter% 4rene *or)i+ones1 he )otive was ad)ittedl3 that of Cealo#s3 6eca#se accordin+ to his state)ent% he #sed to have ,#arrels with his wife for reason that he often saw her in the co)(an3 of his 6rother% MacariasL that he s#s(ected the 2 were )aintainin+ illicit relations 6eca#se he noticed that his wife had 6eco)e indifferent to hi)1 '#rin+ the (reli)inar3 investi+ation% the acc#sed (leaded +#ilt31 At the case in the C*4% he also (leaded +#ilt3 6#t didnFt testif31 :is co#nsel (resented the testi)on3 of 2 +#ards of the (rovincial Cail where A6elardo was confined to the effect that his cond#ct was rather stran+e E that he 6ehaved li.e an insane (erson% at ti)es he wo#ld re)ain silent% wal. aro#nd star. na.ed% ref#se to ta.e a 6ath E wash his clothes etc111 he a((eal is 6ased )erel3 on the theor3 that the a((ellant is an 4MG9C4<9 E therefore e-e)(t fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3 #nder RPC A121 I ue: J!? A6elardo is an i)6ecile at the ti)e of the co))ission of the cri)e% th#s e-e)(ted fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3 Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of the R C of :i)a)a3lan% ?e+ros !ccidental wKc fo#nd the defendants +#ilt3 of the cri)e of M0R'9R Fact : 9nri,#e Galinas was sta66ed E hac.ed to death for wKc 'o)inador% Rodri+o% R#6en% Rodne3% 'ante E Rene% all s#rna)ed 9ste(ano were char+ed wK )#rder1 Rodri+o died d#rin+ the trial E 6efore C#d+)ent co#ld 6e rendered1 'ante was never a((rehended hence% as a+ainst hi)% the case was never archived1 After trial% 'o)inador was ac,#itted on reasona6le do#6t1 !nl3 R#6en% Rodne3 E Rene were fo#nd +#ilt31 Accordin+l3% the 3 were sentenced to recl#sion (er(et#a E ordered to inde)nif3 the heirs of 9nri,#e Galinas in the a)o#nt of P100R for )oral da)a+es E P&18R for act#al da)a+es wKo s#6sidiar3 i)(rison)ent in case of insolvenc31 A t# t'e cr".e: he case was woven )ainl3 on the testi)on3 of *lorencio a3co% that on A(ril 16% 1&&1 at aro#nd 10 ()% he was on his wa3 ho)e in Garan+a3 4> :i)a)a3lan with <o(ito 2a#dia and 9nri,#e Galinas1 9n ro#te% the3 )et 'o)inador at the GM r#c.in+ co)(o#nd1 <o(ito than tal.ed to 'o)inador while he and 9ste(ano stood near631 S#ddenl3% Rodri+o a((eared witho#t an3 (rovocation sta66ed 9nri,#e in the sto)ach with a +#in#ntin+ (fi+htin+ 6olo)1 R#6en ar)ed with a cane c#tter and Rodne3% 'ante and Rene% each ar)ed with a 6olo followed s#it in hac.in+ 9nri,#e1 Jhile this was ha((enin+% 'o)inador told his co)(anions B@o# 6etter .ill hi)ZN <o(ito confir)ed the testi)on3 of *lorencio1 D#."$a%#rL ver "#$: hat on A(ril 16 1&&1 at 10()% he was at ho)e wK his wife E son Ro6erto1 he3 were a6o#t to eat s#((er when he heard 9nri,#e Galinas call o#t for his son Rodri+o to co)e down1 :e (ee(ed thro#+h the window E saw Rodri+o hac.in+ 9nri,#e1 Jhen 9nri,#e fell to the +ro#nd% Rodri+o fled1 Ro6ert :a#tea E <#/ C#e(as% 6oth residents of Garan+a3 4> corro6orated the testi)on3 of 'o)inador1 Acc#sed R#6en% Rene E Rodne3 invo.ed ali6i1 R#6en clai)ed that he was at the (rovincial hos(ital attendin+ to his wife who earlier #nderwent a caesarian o(eration1 Rene E Rodne3% sons of Rodri+o% clai)ed that the3 were at ho)e slee(in+ when the .illin+ occ#rred1

/EO/LE v. TANEO [8$ Phil1 288 (1&33)] Fact : Potenciano aneo and his wife lived in his (arentOs ho#se in 'olores% !r)oc1 !n "an#ar3 16% 1&32% a fiesta was 6ein+ cele6rated in the said 6arrio and +#ests were entertained in the ho#se% a)on+ the) were *red anner and <#is Malinao1 9arl3 that afternoon% Potenciano went to slee( and while slee(in+% he s#ddenl3 +ot #(% left the roo) 6olo in hand and% #(on )eetin+ his wife who tried to sto( hi)% wo#nded her in the a6do)en1 :e also attac.ed *red and <#is and tried to attac. his father% after which% he wo#nded hi)self1 PotencianoOs wife% who was H )onths (re+nant at that ti)e% died five da3s later as a res#lt of the wo#nd1 he trial co#rt fo#nd Potenciano +#ilt3 of (arricide and was sentenced to recl#sion (er(et#a1 4t a((ears fro) the evidence that the da3 6efore the co))ission of the cri)e% the defendant had a ,#arrel over a +lass of Nt#6aN with Collantes and A6adilla% who invited hi) to co)e down and fi+ht1 Jhen he was a6o#t to +o down% he was sto((ed 63 his wife and his )other1 !n the da3 of the co))ission of the cri)e% it was noted that the defendant was sad and wea.% had a severe sto)achache thatOs wh3 he went to 6ed in the earl3 afternoon1 he defendant stated that when he fell aslee(% he drea)ed that Collantes was tr3in+ to sta6 hi) with a 6olo while A6adila held his feet1 hatOs wh3 he +ot #( and it see)ed to hi) that his ene)ies were invitin+ hi) to co)e downL he ar)ed hi)self with a 6olo and left the roo)1 At the door% he )et his wife who see)ed to sa3 to hi) that she was wo#nded1 hen% he fancied seein+ his wife reall3 wo#nded and in

Rene% who was onl3 13 then% testified that he ca)e to .now a6o#t the incident that sa)e ni+ht when his )other awa.ened hi)1 Rodne3 on the other hand% was awa.ened 63 sho#ts that his father .illed 9nri,#e Galinas1 I ue 1. WON t'e &#(er c#urt erre% "$ *"v"$* cre%e$ce t# t'e te t".#$1 #+ !r# ecut"#$ ("t$e F&#re$c"# Ta1c# *indin+s of the C is 6indin+ E concl#sive on the a((ellate co#rt #nless so)e facts or circ#)stances of wei+ht E s#6stance have 6een overloo.ed% )isa((rehended or )isinter(reted% wKc isnFt tr#e in the (resent case1 *lorencioOs testi)on3 is clear E convincin+% as he was onl3 2 ar)s len+th awa3 fro) the victi) as well as fro) the assailants1 Ali6i of a((ellants were not s#((orted 63 an3 (ieces of evidence E th#s were not s#fficient to o#twei+h their (ositive identification 63 1 of the (rosec#tion witnesses1 -. WON c#$ !"rac1 'a% taCe$ !&ace Cons(irac3 )a3 6e ded#ced fro) the )ode and )anner in wKc the offense was co))itted and concerted acts of the acc#sed to o6tain a co))on cri)inal o6Cective si+nifies cons(irac31 ,. WON t'e a!!e&&a$t are *u"&t1 #+ .ur%er B!art"cu&ar&1 Re$e7 ('# (a 1,E Jith res(ect to acc#sed=a((ellant Rene 9ste(ano% the records show that he was onl3 13 3ears of a+e at the ti)e of the co))ission of the offense1 0nder A121 (ar1 3 of the RPC% a (erson over & 3ears of a+e E #nder 18 is e-e)(t fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3 #nless it is shown that he acted with '4SC9R?M9? 1 Scr#tin3 of records show that (rosec#tion failed to (rove that Rene acted wK discern)ent% what was onl3 esta6lished was his (resence E his s#((osed (artici(ation in the .illin+1

(+iven that the 'o,#ena was a Hth +rade (#(il% one of the 6ri+htest in his class% and was an officer in the CA (ro+ra))% and th#s convicted hi) of the cri)e of ho)icide1 he co#rt ordered hi) to 6e sent to the rainin+ School for Go3s #ntil he reaches the a+e of )aCorit31 h#s% the a((eal 63 the acc#sed% statin+ that to deter)ine whether or not there was discern)ent on the (art of the )inor% the followin+ )#st 6e ta.en into consideration5 a) he facts and circ#)stances which +ave rise to the act co))itted1 6) he state of )ind at the ti)e the cri)e was co))itted c) he ti)e he had at his dis(osal d) he de+ree of reasonin+ of the )inor I ue: J!? the acc#sed acted with discern)ent

Conchita and Re3 A+lida3 are credi6le witnesses1 A((ellant clai)s co#rt sho#ld have 6elieved hi) since he does not have an3 reason to .ill his son who has a 6ri+ht f#t#re% and that his witnesses ("ose Mata6an+ and SP!1 !(ina) are )ore credi6le1 Co#rt disa+rees1 Jhen the iss#e is one of credi6ilit3% an a((ellate co#rt will nor)all3 not dist#r6 the findin+s of the trial co#rt1 Mata6an+Os testi)on3 was 6asicall3 what a((ellant told hi) = 6iased and li)itedL while !(inaOs clai) that Conchita told hi) that shootin+ was accidental is not acc#rate% since she was still in a state of shoc. -. WON a!!e&&a$tL '##t"$* (a a$ acc"%e$t ('"c' .a1 )e u e% a a$ e5e.!t"$* c"rcu. ta$ce ?o% it cannot1 A(ellant contends that since his +#n accidentall3 went off while he was cleanin+ it% he sho#ld 6e ac,#itted on the 6asis of the e-e)(tin+ circ#)stance of accident #nder RPC A12(7)1 he co#rt is not (ers#aded1 4n A12(7)% cri)inal lia6ilit3 does not arise in a case where a cri)e is co))itted 63 an3 (erson who% while (erfor)in+ a lawf#l act with d#e care% ca#ses an inC#r3 63 )ere accident witho#t fa#lt or intention of ca#sin+ it1 9-e)(tion is 6ased on the lac. of cri)inal intent1 'eclarations of innocence of a((ellant contradicted 63 testi)onies of wife E s#rvivin+ son1 Gefore acc#sed can 6e e-e)(ted fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3 #nder A12 (7)% there sho#ld 6e5  A (erson (erfor)in+ a lawf#l act  '#e care  Ca#ses an inC#r3 to another 63 )ere accident  Jitho#t an3 fa#lt and intention of ca#sin+ it Act of firin+ a shot+#n (E an #nlicensed one at that) is not lawf#l1 Accident is an occ#rrence that Nha((ens o#tside the swa3 of o#r will% E altho#+h it co)es a6o#t thro#+h so)e act of o#r will% lies 6e3ond the 6o#nds of h#)anl3 foreseea6le conse,#encesD I connotes a6sence of cri)inal intent1 *irear) was a shot+#n that needs to 6e coc.ed first 6efore it can 6e fired1 A((ellant contends that he is onl3 +#ilt3 of rec.less i)(r#dence1 G#t the co#rt disa+rees1 Rec.less i)(r#dence consists of vol#ntaril3 doin+ or failin+ to do% witho#t )alice% an act fro) which )aterial da)a+e res#lts 63 reason of an ine-c#sa6le lac. of (reca#tion on the (art of the (erson (erfor)in+ or failin+ to (erfor) s#ch act1 4ntent is not lac.in+ in the instant case1 A((ellantOs e-ternal acts (rove )alice or cri)inal intent1 Ju%*.e$t: A((eal denied

8e&%: 'ecision affir)ed1 @es% the acc#sed acted with discern)ent1 Acc#sed )ista.es the discern)ent for (re)editation% or at least for lac. of intention% as a )iti+atin+ circ#)stance1 :owever% the '4SC9R?M9? that constit#tes an e-ce(tion to the e-e)(tion fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3 of a )inor #nder 18 3ears 6#t over nine% who co))its an act (rohi6ited 63 law% is his M9? A< CAPAC4 @ to #nderstand the difference 6etween ri+ht and wron+% and s#ch ca(acit3 )a3 6e .nown and sho#ld 6e deter)ined 63 ta.in+ into consideration all the facts and circ#)stances afforded 63 the records in each case% the ver3 a((earance% the ver3 attit#de% the ver3 co)(ort)ent and 6ehavior of said )inor% not onl3 6efore and d#rin+ the co))ission of the act% 6#t also after and even d#rin+ the trial1

/EO/LE v. AGLIDAY [36H SCRA 2H3 (2001)] Nature: An a((eal fro) decision of R C findin+ acc#sed Ricardo A+lida3 +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of (arricideL sentenced hi) to recl#sion (er(et#a Fact : Rec.less i)(r#dence consists of vol#ntaril3 doin+ or failin+ to do% witho#t )alice% an act fro) which )aterial da)a+e res#lts 63 reason of an ine-c#sa6le lac. of (reca#tion on the (art of the (erson (erfor)in+ or failin+ to (erfor) s#ch act1 !nce )alice is (roven% rec.lessness disa((ears1 !n *e61 28% 1&&& in the evenin+ A+lida3 shot his son Richard A+lida3 with an #nlicensed shot+#n% ca#sin+ his death1 Prosec#tion witness Conchita A+lida3% wife of a((ellant testified that while she was washin+ the dishes in the .itchen when her h#s6and shot her sonL shortl3 after a((ellant ran awa3 while she 6ro#+ht her son first to the Sto1 ?iXo :os(ital% then to the San Carlos :os(ital% then finall3 to the Re+ion 4 2eneral :os(ital where he died1 Gefore shootin+% she and a((ellant ,#arreled over her 6ein+ a la#ndr3 wo)an1 Richard was onl3 1& 3ears old and in 7th 3ear colle+e1 Another witness Re3 A+lida3% 6rother of Richard said that he was in the ho#se restin+ on a wooden 6ed when he saw a((ellant shoot his 6rother1 :e said that while his (arents were ,#arrellin+ he did not interfere% 6#t his 6rother did that is wh3 he was shot 63 a((ellant1 A((ellant clai)s% on the other hand that he was in the ho#se cleanin+ a ho)e)ade +#n to 6e #sed for evenin+ (atrol (he was a 6aran+a3 tanod) when the +#n accidentall3 went off% fatall3 hittin+ his son (in the +l#te#s )a-i)#sZZZ) after which he went to his son and e)6raced hi)1 Afterwards he s#rrendered1 he r#lin+ of trial co#rt +ave credence to (rosec#tion witnessesL dis6elieved that a((ellantOs shootin+ was an accident1 I ue7 8e&% a$% Rat"#: 1. ("t$e e are cre%")&e WON

[ 'a)a+es of P100R were also )odified and red#ced to P80%000% considerin+ that the (#r(ose of s#ch award is not to enrich the heirs 6#t to co)(ensate the) for the inC#ries to their feelin+s1 Jherefore% the decision a((ealed fro) is )odified and acc#sed=a((ellants R#6en and Rodne3 are fo#nd +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t% Rene 9ste(ano is ACV04 9'1

/EO/LE v. DO=UENA [6$ Phil1 8$0 (1&3&)] Nature: A((eal fro) an order of the Co#rt of *irst 4nstance of Pan+asinan (convictin+ >alentin 'o,#ena% 13 3rs% & )onths% and 8 da3s old% of ho)icideL havin+ acted with discern)ent in co))ittin+ the said act1) Fact : Getween 1=2 () of ?ov1 1&% 1&3$% "#an Ra+oCos and 9(ifanio Raran+ were (la3in+ volle36all in the 3ard of their school in S#al% Pan+asinan1 >alentin 'o,#ena% the acc#sed% interce(ted the 6all% and threw it a Ra+oCos% who was hit in the sto)ach1 Miffed% Ra+oCos chased 'o,#ena% and #(on catchin+ hi)% sla((ed 'o,#ena on the na(e% and (#nched hi) in the face1 After doin+ this% Ra+oCos went 6ac. to Raran+ to res#)e (la3in+ volle36all1 4ns#lted% 'o,#ena loo.ed for so)ethin+ to throw at Ra+oCos% findin+ none% he +ot his co#sinOs (Ro)#aldo Cocal) .nife% and confronted Ra+oCos1 Ra+oCoOs denied 'o,#enaOs re,#est for a fi+ht and res#)ed (la3in+1 'o,#ena sta66ed the #naware Ra+oCos in the chest% there63 .illin+ the latter1 he co#rt held that in co))ittin+ the act% the acc#sed acted with discern)ent and was conscio#s of the nat#re and conse,#ences of his acts% therefore his defense that he was a )inor was #ntena6le

US v. TANEDO [18 Phil1 1&6 (1&10)] Nature: A((eal fro) a C#d+)ent of the C*4 of arlac Fact : !n "an#ar3 26% 1&0&% Cecilio anedo% a landowner% went with so)e wor.ers to wor. on the da) on his land% carr3in+ with hi) his shot+#n E a few shells1 0(on reachin+ the da)% the acc#sed went on his wa3 to h#nt for wild chic.ens% )eetin+ the victi)% *eliciano Sanche/% the latterOs Mother E 0ncle1 he acc#sed went into the forest #(on the reco))endation of the deceased to contin#e his search for the el#sive wild chic.ens1 0(on seein+ one% anedo shot one% 6#t si)#ltaneo#sl3% he heard a h#)an cr3 o#t in (ain1 After seein+ that Sanche/ was wo#nded% anedo ran 6ac. to his wor.ers and as.ed one% Gernardino a+a)(a% to hel( hi) hide the 6od3% which the3 did 63

(#ttin+ it a)idst the tall co+on +rass% E later 6#r3in+ in an old well1 !nl3 1 shot was heard that )ornin+ E a chic.en was .illed 63 a +#nshot wo#nd1 Chic.en feathers were fo#nd at the scene of the cri)e1 here was no en)it3 6etween the acc#sed and the deceased1 Prior to the trial% the acc#sed denied all .nowled+e of the cri)e% 6#t later confessed d#rin+ the trial1 he lower co#rt fo#nd the acc#sed +#ilt3 of ho)icide% havin+ invited the deceased into the forest E intentionall3 shootin+ hi) in the chest1 Acc#sed was sentenced to 17 3rs% $ )os E 1 da3 of recl#sion te)(oral% accessories% inde)nifications E costs1 he acc#sed a((ealed1 I ue: J!? the acc#sed is +#ilt3

8e&%: @es1 'ecision is reversed1 Gindo3 is ac,#itted accordin+ to Article $% ?o1 $ of the Revised Penal Code Rat"#: 11 here is no evidence to show that Gindo3 deli6eratel3 and intentionall3 .illed !)a)da)1  ?o evidence that !)a)da) too. (art in the fi+ht 6etween Gindo3 and Pacas1  ?o evidence that Gindo3 was aware of !)a)da)Os (resence1  ?o evidence that there was disa+ree)ent or ill feelin+s 6etween Gindo3 E !)a)da)1 !n the contrar3% the3 were ne(hew E #ncle% E were on +ood ter)s with each other1 21 he witness for the defense corro6orates the defendant to the effect that Pacas and Gindo3 were act#all3 str#++lin+ for the (ossession of the 6olo% and that when the latter let +o% the for)er had (#lled so violentl3 that it flew towards !)a)da)% who was therefore hit in the chest% witho#t Gindo3Os seein+ hi)% 6eca#se !)a)da) had (assed 6ehind hi)1 he testi)on3 of this witness was not contradicted 63 an3 re6#ttal evidence add#ced 63 the fiscal1 31 4f% in the str#++le% the defendant had atte)(ted to wo#nd his o((onent% and instead of doin+ so% had wo#nded !)a)da)% he wo#ld 6e lia6le for his act% since whoever willf#ll3 co))its a felon3 or a )isde)eanor inc#rs cri)inal lia6ilit3% altho#+h the wron+f#l act done is different fro) that which he intended1 his is not the case here1 Gindo3 did not tr3 to wo#nd Pacas1 :e was onl3 tr3in+ to defend his (ossession of the 6olo% which Pacas was tr3in+ to wrench awa3 fro) hi)1 :is cond#ct was (erfectl3 lawf#l1

8e&%: ?o1 he idea that anedo intended to .ill Sanche/ is ne+ated 63 the fact that the chic.en and the )an were shot at the sa)e ti)e% there havin+ onl3 one shot fired1 Also% accordin+ to5  Article 1 of the Penal Code5 Cri)es or )isde)eanors are vol#ntar3 acts and o)issions (#nished 63 lawP  Article $5 :e who while (erfor)in+ a le+al act with d#e care% ca#ses so)e inC#r3 63 )ere accident witho#t lia6ilit3 or intention of ca#sin+ it1  Section 8H of Code of Cri)inal Proced#re5 A defendant in a cri)inal action shall 6e (res#)ed to 6e innocent #ntil the contrar3 is (roved% and in case of a reasona6le do#6t that his +#ilt is satisfactoril3 shown he shall 6e entitled to an ac,#ittal1 4n this case there is no evidence of ne+li+ence on the (art of the acc#sed% nor is it dis(#ted that the acc#sed was en+a+ed in a le+al act% nor is there evidence that the acc#sed intended to .ill the deceased1 he onl3 thin+ s#s(icio#s is his denial of the act and his conceal)ent of the 6od31 he co#rt ,#oted State vs1 <e++5 NJhere accidental .illin+ is relied #(on as a defense% the acc#sed is not re,#ired to (rove s#ch a defense 63 a (re(onderance of the evidence% 6eca#se there is a denial of intentional .illin+% and the 6#rden is #(on the state to show that it was intentional% and if% fro) a consideration of all the evidence% 6oth that for the state and the (risoner% there is a reasona6le do#6t as to whether or not the .illin+ was accidental or intentional% the C#r3 sho#ld ac,#it1N Co#rt held that the evidence was ins#fficient to s#((ort the C#d+)ent of conviction1 Dec" "#$: "#d+)ent of Conviction is ac,#itted% and dischar+ed fro) c#stod31 reversed% the acc#sed

was e-h#)ed fro) a shallow +rave% 2 .ilo)eters fro) where CochiseOs 6od3 was fo#nd1 !ne 63 one% the )en res(onsi6le for the .illin+ of Cochise E Gee6o) fell into the hands of the a#thorities1 <isin+% 2arcia E Manalili e-ec#ted e-traC#dicial state)ents1 0(on arrai+n)ent% all the acc#sed (leaded not +#ilt31 he (rosec#tion (resented 2 vital witnesses5 *roilan !li)(ia% who witnessed the a6d#ction of the 3o#n+ co#(le at 'a3ritOs :a) and G#r+er :o#seL E Ra#l Morales% the pahinante who testified on the .illin+ of Cochise1 4n their defense% the acc#sed (olice)en alle+e that there was ins#fficient evidence to s#stain their conviction1 9ach one also (resented an ali6i1 !n "#l3 1% 1&&2% the Co#rt held Manalili% <isin+% 2arcia% Man+a and 'i/on +#ilt3 of the cri)e of do#6le )#rder ,#alified with treacher3 and a++ravated 63 (re)editation and a6#se of (#6lic (osition 63 <isin+% Man+a and 'i/on1 he Co#rt also held <isin+% 'i/on and Man+a +#ilt3 of the cri)e of sli+ht ille+al detention a++ravated 63 #se of a )otor vehicle1 he acc#sed were ac,#itted of the cri)e of .idna((in+% since the #se of the car was done onl3 to facilitate the co))ission of the cri)e of sli+ht ille+al detention I ue 7 8e&% a$% Rat"#: 1. WON t'e e5tra<u%"c"a& tate.e$t #+ a!!e&&a$t Ma$a&"&"7 Garc"a a$% L" "$* (ere a%." ")&e. @es1 9-traC#dicial state)ents are% as a r#le% ad)issi6le as a+ainst their res(ective declarants% (#rs#ant to the r#le that the act% declaration% or o)ission of a (art3 as to a relevant fact )a3 6e +iven in evidence a+ainst hi)1  Gased #(on the (res#)(tion that no )an wo#ld declare an3thin+ a+ainst hi)self% #nless s#ch declarations were tr#e1  he res(ective e-traC#dicial state)ent of Manalili and 2arcia were e-ec#ted vol#ntaril31 he3 were assisted 63 a co#nsel and (ro(erl3 sworn to 6efore a d#l3 a#thori/ed officer1 he3 )erel3 relied on their e-traC#dicial state)ents and did not ta.e the witness stand1  <isin+ clai)s that he was coerced and tort#red into e-ec#tin+ the e-traC#dicial state)ent1 :owever% he did not (resent hi)self for (h3sical e-a)ination% nor did he file ad)inistrative char+es a+ainst his alle+ed tor)entors1  he followin+ are indicators of the vol#ntariness in the e-ec#tion of <isin+Fs e-traC#dicial state)ent5 4t contains )an3 details and facts which the investi+atin+ officer co#ld not have .nown witho#t the infor)ation +iven 63 <isin+1 4t 6ears corrections d#l3 initialed 63 <isin+1 4t tends to e-(lain or C#stif3 his cond#ct and shift the 6la)e to his co=acc#sed Manalili1 9-traC#dicial state)ents can also 6e #sed as evidence a+ainst several (ersons char+ed with the sa)e offense when the state)ents are in all )aterial res(ects identical and there co#ld have 6een no coll#sion a)on+ the (arties1  Ninterloc.in+ confessionsN  4n this case% the state)ents were inde(endentl3 e-ec#ted and rather identical with each other in their )aterial details1 he trial co#rtOs decision in convictin+ all the acc#sed was 6ased not )erel3 on the e-traC#dicial state)ents of the acc#sed alone 6#t )ainl3 on the e3ewitness acco#nt of the two witnesses% which the trial co#rt +ave wei+ht and credence as tr#e1 -. t'e !r# ecut"#$ ("t$e M#ra&e (ere cre%")&e. e WON Fr#"&a$7 O&".!"a a$% Rau&

/EO/LE v. LISING [2$8 SCRA 8&8 (1&&$)] Fact : 4n March 1&&0% Rodolfo Manalili% a 6#siness)an% as.ed *eli)on 2arcia% his town)ate% if he .new so)e6od3 who co#ld alle+edl3 affect the arrest of Ro6ert :errera% the s#s(ect in the .illin+ of his 6rother% 'elfin Manalili1 !n A(ril 21% 1&&0% 2arcia called #( Manalili and infor)ed hi) that he alread3 contracted a (olice)an to hel( hi)1 !n A(ril 22% 2arcia introd#ced Ro6erto <isin+% 9nrico 'i/on and another )an to Manalili1 '#rin+ the )eetin+% Manalili offered to (a3 the) P80R for the Co61 !n A(ril 23=27% <isin+Os +ro#( )et with >ic <is6oa and cond#cted a s#rveillance on the CastaXos residence in the ho(e of seein+ :errera1 *ailin+ to do so% the +ro#( was as.ed to ret#rn the ne-t da31 !n A(ril 28% the +ro#( saw a )an and a wo)an who ha((ened to 6e Cochise Gerna6e% 26 3ears old and a new +rad#ate of the 0P Colle+e of <aw% and Gee6o) CastaXos% 22 =3ears old and a +rad#atin+ st#dent of the 0P Colle+e of Mass Co))#nication% leave the CastaXos residence in a +reen 6o- t3(e <ancer car1 he +ro#( followed the <ancer car with <isin+% 'i/on and Man+a ridin+ in a 6lac. car and <is6oa and 2arcia in a )otorc3cle1 he <ancer car sto((ed at 'a3ritOs :a) and G#r+er :o#se on i)o+ Circle1 Ali+htin+ fro) the car% the3 were accosted 63 'i/on and Man+a1 !n "#ne 21% two sec#rit3 +#ards told the CAPC!M that their friends Ra#l Morales and "#n Medrano% 6oth e)(lo3ees of Ro6erto <isin+% infor)ed the) that <isin+ .illed a )an and a wo)an in their wareho#se1 !n "#ne 23% Ra#l Morales was (ic.ed #( and told his stor31 !n "#ne 28% the 6od3 of Cochise was e-h#)ed1 he ca#se of his death was )#lti(le sta6 wo#nds1 he ne-t da3% Gee6o)Os 6od3

/EO/LE v. ;INDOY [86 Phil1 18 (1&31)] Fact : !n Ma3 6% 1&30% 'onato Gindo3 offered so)e t#6a to i6a3% *a#stino PacasO wife1 She ref#sed and Gindo3 threatened to inC#re her if she did not acce(t1 Pacas ste((ed in to defend his wife and atte)(ted to ta.e awa3 fro) Gindo3 the 6olo he carried1 he dist#r6ance attracted the attention of 9)i+dio !)a)da)1 4n the co#rse of the str#++le% Gindo3 s#cceeded in disen+a+in+ hi)self fro) Pacas% wrenchin+ the 6olo fro) the latterOs hand% with s#ch violence that the (oint of the 6olo reached !)a)da)Os chest% who was then 6ehind Gindo31 he trial co#rt held that Gindo3 was +#ilt3 of the cri)e of ho)icide1 Gindo3 a((ealed% alle+in+ that the death of !)a)da) was ca#sed accidentall3 and witho#t )alicio#s intent1 I ue: J!? the cri)e of which Gindo3 was fo#nd +#ilt3 of can 6e )iti+ated on the +ro#nd of accident1

@es1 he testi)on3 of Ra#l Morales satisfied the trial co#rt 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t% as 6ein+ consistent and credi6le% s#fficient to convict all the acc#sed for the cri)e of )#rder1  :e testified (ositivel31  he oc#lar ins(ection cond#cted 63 the trial co#rt s#((orted MoralesO narration of the events1 he inconsistencies E discre(ancies in the testi)on3 referrin+ to )inor details and not #(on the 6asic as(ect of the cri)e do not i)(air the witnessO credi6ilit31 hese consistencies even tend to stren+then% rather than wea.en% the credi6ilit3 of the witnesses as the3 ne+ate an3 s#s(icion of a rehearsed testi)on31 he initial rel#ctance of the witnesses to vol#nteer infor)ation a6o#t a cri)inal case and their #nwillin+ness to 6e involved in the cri)inal investi+ation is of co))on .nowled+e and has 6een C#diciall3 declared as ins#fficient to affect credi6ilit31 A sworn state)ent or an affidavit doesnFt indicate the co)(lete details of the event1 4t is a )atter of C#dicial e-(erience that a sworn state)ent 6ein+ ta.en e- (arte is al)ost alwa3s inco)(lete E often inacc#rate1 'iscre(ancies 6etween the sworn state)ent E the testi)on3 do not necessaril3 discredit the witness1 4n case of discre(anc3% the latter (revails over the for)er1 Jhen it co)es to the iss#e of credi6ilit3 of the witnesses% the a((ellate co#rts +ive )#ch wei+ht to the findin+s of the trial co#rt since the latter had the ca(acit3 to e-a)ine and o6serve the witnesses1 ,. WON t'e +"$%"$* #+ c#$ !"rac1 a.#$* t'e a!!e&&a$t (a u++"c"e$t&1 !r#ve$. @es1 Cons(irac3 is a #nit3 of (#r(ose and intention in the co))ission of a cri)e1 Cons(irac3 e-ists when 2 or )ore (ersons co)e to an a+ree)ent concernin+ the co))ission of a felon3 and decide to co))it it1 Jhile direct evidence is not necessar3% cons(irac3 )a3 6e inferred fro) and (roven 63 acts of the acc#sed when d#rin+ and after said acts (oint to a Coint (#r(ose and desi+n% concerted action and co))#nit3 of interest C didnFt err in findin+ the e-istence of cons(irac3 in this case +iven the interloc.in+ confessions of Manalili% 2arcia E <isin+1 Jhere cons(irac3 is esta6lished% the act of one is the act of all1 he (recise )odalit3 or e-tent of (artici(ation of each individ#al cons(irator 6eco)es secondar31 he de+ree of act#al (artici(ation in the co))ission of cri)e is i))aterial1 WON Garc"a3 &"a)"&"t1 " ."t"*ate% )1 B1E '" &acC #+ "$te$t #r .#t"ve7 B-E '" act (ere .a%e u$%er t'e c#.!u& "#$ #+ a$ "rre " t")&e +#rce7 4 B,E '" v#&u$tar1 urre$%er7 (Gc (#u&% .aCe '". .ere&1 a$ acc#.!&"ce t# t'e cr".e ?o1 o 6e e-e)(t fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3% a (erson invo.in+ irresisti6le force or #ncontrolla6le fear )#st show that the force e-erted was s#ch that it red#ced hi) to a )ere instr#)ent who acted not onl3 witho#t will 6#t a+ainst his will1 S#ch co)(#lsion )#st 6e of so)e character as to leave the acc#sed no o((ort#nit3 for self=defense in e,#al co)6at or for esca(e1 2arciaOs (artici(ation and (resence fro) the ti)e the a6d#ction was hatched% #( to the .illin+ of the victi)s is #ndis(#ted1

/EO/LE BU.S.2E v. ELICANAL [38 Phil1 20& (1&16)] Nature: A((eal fro) the C#d+)ent of C*4 of lloilo Fact : 9d#ardo 9licanal% a 22=3ear old #ned#cated and so)ewhat (h3sicall3 wea. )an% was a )e)6er of the 4orcha Catal#na cr#isin+ the Phili((ine waters of lloilo #nder the ca(tainc3 of "#an ?o)o1 he first )ate was 2#iller)o 2#iloresa1 !n 'ece)6er 11% 1&17% 2#iloresa tells 9licanal that he was +oin+ to .ill the ca(tain 6eca#se he was ver3 an+r3 with hi)1 9licanal )istoo. the state)ent as a Co.e% as 2#iloresa was a +reat Co.er and was s)ilin+ at that ti)e1 ?o6od3 (aid attention for no one had an3 resent)ent a+ainst the ca(tain and the3 did not .now of an3 (lan directed a+ainst hi)1 he followin+ )ornin+% findin+ the ca(tain in his ca6in% 2#iloresa assa#lted hi) E atte)(ted to sei/e E hold his hands1 At the sa)e ti)e% he was callin+ the crew to co)e forward E hel( hi)1 At 2#iloresaOs re,#est% the rest of the crew wK the e-ce(tion of the acc#sed sei/ed the ca(tain E tied hi) wK ro(e1 After he had 6een rendered hel(less% 2#iloresa str#c. hi) in the nec. wK an iron 6ar% deliverin+ the wea(on to 9licanal% ordered hi) to co)e forward E assist in dis(osin+ of the ca(tain1 9licanal sei/ed the 6ar E while the ca(tain was still str#++lin+% str#c. hi) a 6low on the head wKc ca#sed his death1 9licanalOs defense d#rin+ the trial was that he was actin+ #nder the i)(#lse of an #ncontrolla6le fear of a +reater inC#r3 ind#ced 63 the threat of 2#iloresa1 :e was a6sol#tel3 overwhel)ed that in stri.in+ the 6low which .illed the ca(tain% he acted witho#t his own volition E was red#ced to a )ere instr#)ent in the hands of the chief )ate1 he trial co#rt ref#sed to acce(t his defense holdin+ that 2#iloresa did not e-ercise s#ch infl#ence over hi) that a)o#nted to an #ncontrolla6le fear or a de(rivation of his volition1 9licanal and others were convicted of )#rder and sentenced to death I ue 7 8e&% a$% Rat"#: 1. WON t'ere (a a t'reat %"recte% t# t'e accu e% t'at (#u&% %e!r"ve '". #+ '" #($ v#&"t"#$ a$% .aCe '". a .ere "$ tru.e$t #+ t'e !er #$ ('# t'reate$e% '".. ?one1 he evidence (resented failed to esta6lish a threat so 6ad that it de(rived the acc#sed of his volition1 ?either were the3 a6le to esta6lish a threat that was )ade #nder s#ch circ#)stances that the acc#sed co#ld reasona6l3 have e-(ected that he wo#ld s#ffer )aterial inC#r3 if he ref#sed to co)(l31 -. WON t'e c#urt erre% "$ ru&"$* t'at t'e cr".e c#.."tte% (a .ur%er "$ tea% #+ '#."c"%e. ?o1 4t a((ears #ndis(#ted that% at the ti)e the acc#sed str#c. the deceased with iron 6ar and there63 ca#sed his death% the latter was 6o#nd hand and foot and was hel(less and defenseless1 Jhile it is ,#ite tr#e that there was no treacher3 at the 6e+innin+ of the str#++le ter)inatin+ in the death of the ca(tain% this does not necessaril3 dis(ose the ,#estion of treacher31 N9ven tho#+h the 6e+innin+ of an attac. res#ltin+ in the death of the deceased is free fro) treacher3 of an3 sort% nevertheless it will 6e fo#nd (resent if% at the ti)e the fatal 6low is str#c.% the deceased is hel(less and #na6le to defend hi)self1N he cri)e was co))itted with treacher3 and that it was (ro(erl3 deno)inated )#rder instead of ho)icide1 WON t'e c#urt erre% "$ re+u "$* t# a!!&1 Art"c&e 11 #+ t'e /e$a& C#%e "$ +av#r #+ t'e accu e%.

?o1 he (ersonal ,#alities and characteristics of the acc#sed are )atters (artic#larl3 co+ni/a6le 63 the C% E the a((lication of this section is (ec#liarl3 wKin the C#risdiction of that co#rt1 Dec" "#$: here 6ein+ neither a++ravatin+ nor e-ten#atin+ circ#)stances% C#d+)ent a((ealed fro) is R9>9RS9' and the acc#sed is here63 sentenced to cadena (er(et#a1

/EO/LE v. LORENO [130 SCRA 311 (1&$7)] Nature: A((eal fro) the C#d+)ent of the C*4 of Ca)arines S#r Fact : Garan+a3 Ca(tain 9lias Mon+e% his fa)il3 E *rancisco *a6ie% their far) hel(er were ho)e (re(arin+ for the 6arrio dance when <oreno E a )an in a dar. sweater ca)e 63 their ho#se% sa3in+ there was a letter fro) the chief (he(e)1 9lias let the) in E when the3 read the letter% it said that the3 were ?PA1 he3 were )ade to lie on the +ro#nd while other )en went in the ho#se1 he alle+ed ?PA )e)6ers ro66ed the fa)il3 of several 6elon+in+s1 Moreover% the )an in the dar. sweater ra(ed the 2 da#+hters of 9lias% Cristina E Monica1 9lias% Cristina% Monica E *a6ie (ositivel3 identified <oreno as 1 of the ro66ers1 *a6ie also identified Marantal1 I ue: J!? <oreno and Marantal are e-e)(ted fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3 #nder the defenses of Article 12(8) and (6) 8e&%: ?o1 A((ellants 9#sta,#io <oreno and "i))3 Marantal clai)ed that the3 acted #nder the co)(#lsion of an irresisti6le force andKor #nder the i)(#lse of #ncontrolla6le fear of e,#al or +reater inC#r31 he3 ad)itted that the3 were in the ho#se of 9lias that ni+ht 6#t the3 were onl3 forced 63 a )an wearin+ 6lac. sweater and his five co)(anions who clai)ed to 6e )e)6ers of the ?PA% with the threat that if the3 did not o6e3% a((ellants and their fa)ilies wo#ld 6e .illed1 his was fo#nd #ntena6le1 A (erson who acts #nder the co)(#lsion of an irresisti6le force% li.e one who acts #nder the i)(#lse of #ncontrolla6le fear of e,#al or +reater inC#r3% is e-e)(t fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3 6eca#se he does not act with freedo)1 he force )#st 6e irresisti6le to red#ce hi) to a )ere instr#)ent who acts not onl3 witho#t will 6#t a+ainst his will1 he d#ress% force% fear or inti)idation )#st 6e (resent% i))inent and i)(endin+ and of s#ch a nat#re as to ind#ce a well=+ro#nded a((rehension of death or serio#s 6odil3 har) if the act is not done1 A threat of f#t#re inC#r3 is not eno#+h1 he co)(#lsion )#st 6e of s#ch character as to leave no o((ort#nit3 to the acc#sed for esca(e or self=defense in e,#al co)6at1 <oreno and Marantal had ad)itted their (artici(ation in the co))ission of the cri)es of ro66er3 and ra(e a+ainst 9lias and is fa)il31 *acts inconsistent with the a((ellantsF defense were esta6lished5 (a) havin+ 6een ar)ed with a firear)% (6) <oreno (ositionin+ hi)self near the (ost of the 6alcon3 witho#t (rior instr#ctions% (c) <oreno f#rnishin+ the rattan to tie the victi)s% and (d) <oreno (ointin+ his +#n to the other victi)s when Monica was 6ein+ ra(ed1 *#rther)ore% <oreno 6ro#+ht Geata% 9liasFs wife to the different roo)s to o(en the tr#n.s and closets% witho#t the threat and assistance of the )an in dar. sweater1 And lastl3% <oreno tried to )olest Cristina after 6ein+ ra(ed 63 the )an in dar. sweater1 Jhen Marantal .ic.ed *a6ie when the latter saw his face% it was d#e to the fact the *a6ie had reco+ni/ed hi) E the 6lows which he +ave to *a6ie who was still tied was a warnin+ not to re(ort his (resence E (artici(ation in the cri)e1 *#rther)ore% there was no showin+ that "i))3 Marantal raised a voice of (rotest nor did an act to (revent the co))ission of the cri)es1 All these de)onstrated the vol#ntar3 (artici(ation E the cons(irac3 of the a((ellants1 ?ot onl3 was their defense #ntena6le% 6#t the facts show that that there was cons(irac31

A.

Ju%*.e$t: *indin+ Manalili% 0sin+% 2arcia% Man+a and 'i/on +#ilt3 of do#6le )#rder I affir)ed1 *indin+ <isin+% 'i/on% Man+a +#ilt3 of sli+ht ille+al detention I )odified to .idna((in+ (considerin+ that a fe)ale victi) was involved)

,.

Ju%*.e$t: 'ecision of the lower co#rt R9>9RS9'1 ACV04 9' US v. CA;ALLEROS [7 Phil1 380 (1&08)] Nature: A((eal fro) a C#d+)ent of the C*4 of Ce6# Fact : Ro6ert Gac#li and A(olonio Ca6alleros were convicted as accessories to the cri)e of assassination or )#rder of fo#r A)erican school=teachers% havin+ 6#ried the cor(ses of the victi)s to conceal the cri)e1 he3 were alle+edl3 coerced1 I ue: J!? the defense #nder Art12(8) is tena6le /EO/LE v. FRONDA [222 SCRA H1 (1&&3)]

'efendants

?e(o)#ceno declared that the a((ellant +ave 6irth in her own ho#se and three her child into the thic.et to .ill it1 he trial co#rt +ave credit to this o(inion1 I ue: J!? Gandian is +#ilt3 of infanticide

Nature: A((eal fro) the decision of R C of A(arri% Ca+a3an Fact : Grothers% 9dwin E 9s)inio Galaan were ta.en 63 H ar)ed )en in fati+#e #nifor)s with lon+ firear)s% s#s(ected to 6e ?PA )e)6ers% acco)(anied 63 the acc#sed R#d3 *ronda and Roderic. Pad#a fro) the ho#se of *er)inio Galaan1 he ar)ed )en tied the hands of the deceased at their 6ac. l3in+ down face downward% in front of the ho#se of *er)inio1 he3 all (roceeded towards Sitio #lon+ (assin+ thro#+h the rice fields1 hree 3ears later% the 6odies or re)ains of the Galaan 6rothers were e-h#)ed1 Afterwhich% the re)ains% were 6ro#+ht to the ho#se of *reddie Arevalo% a reltive of the deceased where the3 were laid in state for the wa.e1 he R C declared *ronda +#ilt3 as a (rinci(al 63 indis(ensa6le coo(eration1 he a((ellant sa3s he was onl3 ta.en 63 the ar)ed )en as a (ointer E inter(oses the e-e)(tin+ circ#)stance #nder RPC A12(6) clai)in+ that all his acts were (erfor)ed #nder the i)(#lse of #ncontrolla6le fear and to save his life1 I ue: J!? *ronda can clai) the e-e)(tin+ circ#)stance of #ncontrolla6le fear1 8e&%: ?o1 *ear in order to 6e valid sho#ld 6e 6ased on a real% i))inent or reasona6le fear for oneFs life or li)61 (Peo(le vs1 A6anes) 4n the case at 6ar% the records indicate that a((ellant was seen 6ein+ handed 63 and receivin+ fro) one of the ar)ed )en a h#ntin+ .nife1 Also% as aforesaid% a((ellant was not a6le to e-(lain his fail#re to re(ort the incident to the a#thorities for )ore than three 3ears1 hese circ#)stances% a)on+ others% esta6lish the fact that the a((ellant conscio#sl3 conc#rred with the acts of the assailants1 4n order that the circ#)stance of #ncontrolla6le fear )a3 a((l3% it is necessar3 that the co)(#lsion 6e of s#ch a character as to leave no o((ort#nit3 to esca(e or self=defense in e,#al co)6at1 (Peo(le v1 <oreno) A((ellant had the o((ort#nit3 to esca(e when he was ordered 63 the ar)ed )en to +o ho)e after 6rin+in+ the victi)s to the )o#ntains1 :e did not1 4nstead he Coined the ar)ed )en when re,#ired to 6rin+ a s(ade with which he was ordered to di+ the +rave1 A((ellant also chose to re)ain silent for )ore than three 3ears 6efore re(ortin+ the .illin+ to the a#thorities1 Gased on these circ#)stances% Je hold that the conte)(oraneo#s and s#6se,#ent acts of a((ellant cannot 6e re+arded as havin+ 6een done #nder the i)(#lse of #ncontrolla6le fear1 U.S. v. :INCENTILLO [1& Phil1 11$ (1&11)]

8e&%: @es1 ?ot onl3 is Gac#liFs confession that he onl3 assisted in the 6#rial of the cor(ses 6eca#se he was co)(elled 63 the )#rderers% 6#t this was corro6orated 63 the onl3 e3ewitness to the cri)e% Sa6ate1 Sa6ate said that he was (resent when the A)ericans were .illedL that Gac#li was not a )e)6er of the +ro#( of )#rderers 6#t he was in the 6anana (lantation +atherin+ so)e 6ananasL that when he heard the shots he 6e+an to r#nL that he was% however% seen 63 'a)aso and 4sidro% the leaders of the 6andL that the latter called to hi) and stri.in+ hi) with the 6#tts of their +#ns forced hi) to 6#r3 the cor(ses1 As for Ca6alleros% there was no (roof that he too. an3 (art in the e-ec#tion of the cri)eL there was concl#sive (roof to the contrar31 Sa6ate and Gac#li declared that Ca6alleros did not ta.e an3 (art in the 6#rial of the aforesaid cor(ses% nor was he even in the (lace of the occ#rrence when the 6#rial too. (lace1 heir fail#re to re(ort the cri)e is not an offense (#nished 63 the Penal Code

8e&%: ?o1 4nfanticide and a6andon)ent of a )inor% to 6e (#nisha6le% )#st 6e co))itted willf#ll3 or conscio#sl3% or at least it )#st 6e the res#lt of a vol#ntar3% conscio#s and free act or o)ission1 he evidence does not show that the a((ellant% in ca#sin+ her childFs death in one wa3 or another% or in a6andonin+ it in the thic.et% did so willf#ll3% conscio#sl3 or i)(r#dentl31 She had no ca#se to .ill or a6andon it% to e-(ose it to death% 6eca#se her affair with a for)er lover% which was not #n.nown to her second lover% Rirol% too. (lace three 3ears 6efore the incidentL her )arried life with Rirol;she considers hi) her h#s6and as he considers hi) his wife;6e+an a 3ear a+oL as he so testified at the trial% he .new of the (re+nanc3 and that it was his and that the3Fve 6een ea+erl3 awaitin+ the 6irth of the child1 he a((ellant% th#s% had no ca#se to 6e asha)ed o her (re+nanc3 to Rirol1 A((arentl3% she was not aware of her child6irth% or if she was% it did not occ#r to her or she was #na6le% d#e to her de6ilit3 or di//iness% which ca#se )a3 6e considered lawf#l or ins#(era6le to constit#te the Hth e-e)(tin+ circ#)stance% to ta.e her child fro) the thic.et where she had +iven it 6irth% so as not to leave it a6andoned and e-(osed to the dan+er of losin+ its life1 4f 63 +oin+ into the thic.et to (ee% she ca#sed a wron+ as that of +ivin+ 6irth to her child in that sa)e (lace and later a6andonin+ it% not 6eca#se of i)(r#dence or an3 other reason than that she was overco)e 63 stron+ di//iness and e-tre)e de6ilit3% she co#ld not 6e 6la)ed 6eca#se it all ha((ened 63 )ere accident% with no fa#lt or intention on her (art1 he law e-e)(ts fro) lia6ilit3 an3 (erson who so acts and 6ehaves #nder s#ch circ#)stances (RPC A12(7))1 h#s% havin+ the fo#rth and seventh e-e)(tin+ circ#)stances in her favor% she is ac,#itted of the cri)e that she had 6een acc#sed of1

U.S. v. EIALTACION [3 Phil1 33& (1&08)] Nature: A((eal fro) a C#d+)ent of the C*4 G#lacan Fact : !n March 26% 1&03% <i6erate 9-altacion and G#enavent#ra anchinco were char+ed with re6ellion I willf#ll3 and ille+all3 6o#nd the)selves to ta.e (art in a re6ellion a+ainst the +overn)ent of the 0S% swearin+ alle+iance to the Rati(#nan Societ3 (whose (#r(ose was to overthrow the +overn)ent 63 force of ar)s)1 9-altacion and anchinco clai) that the3 were ca(t#red 63 ar)ed 6andits and were co)(elled to si+n doc#)ents (containin+ oath ta.en in the na)e of 2od and a covenant to carr3 o#t s#(erior orders of the Rati(#nan Societ3 and never diso6e3 the) #ntil their death in the defense of the )other co#ntr3) #nder threat of death1 9-altacion and anchinco re(orted the incident to the +overnor% lie#tenant of vol#nteers and the (resident of Me3ca#a3an1 Jitnesses testified to this fact as well1 I ue: :avin+ si+ned the said doc#)ents% are the defendants +#ilt3 of the cri)e of re6ellionS !r did defendants inc#r cri)inal lia6ilit3 when the3 si+ned the doc#)entsS 8e&%: ?o1 he evidence for the (rosec#tion and the doc#)ents si+ned 63 the acc#sed is not s#fficient to (rove the +#ilt of the latter or to C#stif3 the i)(osition #(on the) of the (enalt3 inflicted 63 the C#d+)ent of the co#rt 6elow1 he facts% esta6lished 63 the evidence% that the defendants were .idna((ed 63 6ri+ands who 6elon+ed to the Contreras Gand% and that the3 si+ned the said doc#)ents #nder co)(#lsion and while in ca(tivit3% relieve the) fro) all cri)inal lia6ilit3 fro) the cri)e of re6ellion of which the3 are char+ed1 he cond#ct of the defendants in (resentin+ the)selves to the a#thorities as soon as the3 were released is corro6orative of their innocence1 2#ilt of defendants was not esta6lished 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1

LAW 109 : CRIMINAL LAW 1 DIGESTS B/re0+"E /EO/LE v. URAL [86 SCRA 13$ (1&H7)] Fact : 0ral was convicted of )#rder 63 the Ma)6oan+a C*4 sentencin+ hi) to recl#sion (er(et#a% and orderinh i) to inde)nif3 the heirs of *eli- ?a(ola% in the s#) of P12R and to (a3 the costs1 he C#d+)ent of conviction was 6ased on the testi)on3 of Gri+ido Al6erto% for)er detention (risoner who witnessed what ha((ened1 0ral% a (olice)an% 6o-ed the deceased% *eli- ?a(ola% a detention (risoner% inside the Cail1 As a conse,#ence of the fistic 6lows% the deceased colla(sed on the floor1 he acc#sed ste((ed on the (rostate 6od3 and left1 After a while he ret#rned with a 6ottle (o#red its contents on the rec#)6ent 6od3 of the deceased% i+nited it with a )atch and left the cell a+ain1 As a conse,#ence% the victi) later on

/EO/LE v. ;ANDIAN [63 Phil 830 (1&36)] Nature: A((eal fro) a C#d+)ent of the C*4 of !riental Misa)is Fact : !ne )ornin+% >alentin A+#ilar saw his nei+h6or% "osefina Gandian% +ot to a thic.et a((arentl3 to res(ond to the call of nat#re1 *ew )in#tes later% Gandian e)er+ed fro) the thic.et with her clothes stained with 6lood 6oth in the front and 6ac.% sta++erin+ and visi6l3 showin+ si+ns of not 6ein+ a6le to s#((ort herself1 R#shin+ to her aid% he 6ro#+ht her to her ho#se and (laced her on the 6ed1 :e called on Adriano Co)co) to hel( the) Co)co) saw he 6od3 of a new6orn 6a6e near a (ath adCoinin+ the thic.et where the a((ellant had +one a few )o)ents 6efore1 She clai)ed it was hers1 'r1 9)ilio

died of the 6#rns1 he cri)e co))itted 63 a((ellant 0ral was )#rder 63 )eans of fire (incendio) (Art 27$(3)% RPC) 8e&%: he trial co#rt correctl3 held that the acc#sed too. advanta+e of his (#6lic (osition (Art 17(1)% RPC) 6#t it failed to a((reciated the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of Nno intention to co))it so +rave a wron+ as that co))itted1N (Art113(3)% RPC)1 he intention% as an internal act% is C#d+ed not onl3 63 the (ro(ortion of the )eans e)(lo3ed 63 hi) to the evil (rod#ced 63 his act% 6#t also 63 the fact that the 6low was or was not ai)ed at a vital (art of the 6od31 h#s% it )a3 6e ded#ced fro) the (roven facts that the acc#sed had no intent to .ill the victi)% his desi+n 6ein+ onl3 to )altreat hi)% s#ch that when he reali/ed the fearf#l conse,#ences of his felonio#s act% he allowed the victi) to sec#re )edical treat)ent at the )#nici(al dis(ensar31 <ac. of intent to co))it so +rave a wron+ offsets the +eneric a++ravatin+% circ#)stance of a6#se of his official (osition1 he trial co#rt (ro(erl3 i)(osed the (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a which is the )edi#) (eriod of the (enalt3 for )#rder (Arts 67(7) and 27$% RPC)

Re+ato )altreated hi)% while Salceda went inside the 6edroo) and ransac.ed the tr#n. where the )one3 was .e(t1 Ra)ire/ then in,#ired whether he fo#nd the )one3 and Salceda answered in the affir)ative1 Ra)ire/ called >ictor a liar and the latter called the) ro66ers to which Ra)ire/ res(onded 63 shootin+ >ictor1 he two (Ra)ire/ re)ained at lar+e) were convicted and fo#nd +#ilt3 of the s(ecial co)(le- cri)e of ro66er3 with ho)icide1 8e&%: here is no )erit in the contention that there was lac. of intent to co))it so +rave a wron+ as that co))itted1 4ntention is a )ental (rocess E is an internal state of )ind1 he intention )#st 6e C#d+ed 63 the action% cond#ct and e-ternal acts of the acc#sed1 Jhat )en do is the 6est inde- of their intention1 4n the case at 6ar% the aforesaid )iti+atin+ circ#)stance cannot 6e a((reciated considerin+ that the acts e)(lo3ed 63 the acc#sed were reasona6l3 s#fficient to (rod#ce the res#lt that the3 act#all3 )ade;the death of the victi)1 Jith res(ect to ni+htti)e and craft% it is o6vio#s that the cri)e was co))itted at ni+ht1 Craft involves intellect#al tric.er3 or c#nnin+ on the (art of the acc#sed1 Sho#tin+ fro) the o#tside that the3 wanted to 6#3 ci+s% the3 ind#ced the in)ates to o(en the door for the)1 *or lac. of necessar3 votes% the death (enalt3 cannot 6e i)(osed% th#s the (enalt3 is )odified to recl#sion (er(et#a1

/EO/LE v. /ARANA [67 Phil1 331 (1&3H)] Fact : Parana was convicted of the cri)e of )#rder with the (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a and to inde)nif3 the heirs of the deceased1 he a++ravatin+ circ#)stances that the a((ellant is a recidivist and that there was treacher3 )#st 6e ta.en into consideration1 Are )iti+atin+ circ#)stances attendantS 8e&%: he fact that the acc#sed was sla((ed 63 the deceased in the (resence of )an3 (ersons a few ho#rs 6efore the for)er .illed the latter% was considered a )iti+atin+ circ#)stance that the act was co))itted in the i))ediate vindication of a +rave offense1 Altho#+h the +rave offense (sla((in+ of the acc#sed 63 the deceased)% which en+endered (ert#r6ation of )ind% was not so i))ediate% it was held that the infl#ence thereof% 63 reason of its +ravit3 and the circ#)stances #nder which it was inflicted% lasted #ntil the )o)ent the cri)e was co))itted1 he other )iti+atin+ circ#)stance that the a((ellant had vol#ntaril3 s#rrendered hi)self to the a+ents of the a#thorities )#st 6e considered1 Ca e #+ v#&u$tar1 urre$%er. S#rrender is not )iti+atin+ when defendant was in fact arrested1 G#t where a (erson% after co))ittin+ the offense and havin+ o((ort#nit3 to esca(e% vol#ntaril3 waited for the a+ents of the a#thorities and vol#ntaril3 +ave hi)self #(% he is entitled to the 6enefit of this circ#)stance% even if he was (laced #nder arrest 63 a (olice)an then and there1

/EO/LE v. AMIT [32 SCRA &8 (1&H0)] Fact : Marcelo A)it was char+ed with the co)(le- cri)e of ra(e with ho)icide (Art1 338% RPC% as a)ended)1 :e (leaded +#ilt3 and the co#rt sentenced hi) to death% with accessories (rescri6ed 63 lawL to inde)nif3 the heirs and (a3 the costs1 :e clai)s that the (enalt3 of death sho#ld 6e red#ced to recl#sion (er(et#a 6eca#se of the )iti+atin+ circ#)stances of (lea of +#ilt3% vol#ntar3 s#rrender% and lac. of intention to co))it so +rave a wron+1 8e&%: <ac. of intention to co))it so +rave a wron+ as the one act#all3 co))itted% 6eca#se of its nat#re% )#st necessaril3 6e C#d+ed in the li+ht of the acts co))itted 63 hi) E the circ#)stances #nder which the3 are co))itted1 Sho#ld the3 show a +reat dis(ro(ortion 6etween the )eans e)(lo3ed to acco)(lish the cri)inal act% one the one hand% E its conse,#ences% on the other% the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance )#st 6e considered in favor of the acc#sed1 At the ti)e of the co))ission of the cri)e% the acc#sed was 32 3ears of a+e% while his victi) was 28 3ears his senior% and when the latter resisted his atte)(t to ra(e her 63 6itin+ and scratchin+ hi)% to s#6d#e her% the acc#sed 6o-ed her and then held her on the nec. and (ressed it down% while she was l3in+ on her 6ac. and he was on to( of her% these acts were reasona6l3 s#fficient to (rod#ce the res#lt that the3 act#all3 (rod#ced ; the death of the victi)1 he (enalt3 of death (rescri6ed in the last (ara+ra(h of Art1 338 of the RPC% as a)ended 63 RA1 2632 and 7111 6ein+ an indivisi6le (enalt3% it has to 6e i)(osed re+ardless of the (resence of )iti+atin+ circ#)stances% es(eciall3 in a case li.e the (resent where there are a++ravatin+ circ#)stances of ni+htti)e and a6#se of s#(erior stren+th (Art1 63(1)% RPC) 4llness of the offender considered )iti+atin+1 9-a)(le of illness of the nerves or )oral fac#lt31 NAltho#+h she is )entall3 sane% we% however% are inclined to e-tend o#r s3)(ath3 to the a((ellant 6eca#se of her )isfort#nes and wea. character1 Accordin+ to the re(ort she is s#fferin+ fro) a )ild 6ehavio#r disorder as a conse,#ence of the illness she had in earl3 life1 Je are willin+ to re+ard this as a )iti+atin+ circ#)stance #nder Art1 13% Revised Penal Code% either in (ara+ra(h & or in (ara+ra(h 101N

/EO/LE v. /AGAL [H& SCRA 8H0 (1&HH)] Pa+al and orcelino were convicted of the cri)e of ro66er3 with ho)icide1 he3 invo.e the )iti+atin+ circ#)stances of s#fficient (rovocation and (assion or o6f#scation1 8e&%: *irst% (rovocation and o6f#scation arisin+ fro) one and the sa)e ca#se sho#ld 6e treated as onl3 one )iti+atin+ circ#)stance1 Since the alle+ed (rovocation which ca#sed the o6f#scation of the a((ellants arose fro) the sa)e incident% that is% the alle+ed )altreat)ent andKor ill=treat)ent of the a((ellants 63 the deceased% those two )iti+atin+ circ#)stances cannot 6e considered as two distinct and se(arate circ#)stances 6#t sho#ld 6e treated as one1 Secondl3% the circ#)stance of (assion and o6f#scation cannot 6e )iti+atin+ in a cri)e which is (lanned and cal)l3 )editated 6efore its e-ec#tion% as in the case at 6ar1 hird% the )altreat)ent that a((ellants clai) the victi) to have co))itted a+ainst the) occ#rred )#ch earlier than the date of the co))ission of the cri)e1 Provocation in order to 6e )iti+atin+ )#st 6e s#fficient and i))ediatel3 (recedin+ the act1 h#s% where the acc#sed .illed his wife d#rin+ a ,#arrel% 6eca#se he% who had no wor.% resented her s#++estion to Coin her 6rother in the 6#siness of c#ttin+ lo+s% the 2 )iti+atin+ circ#)stances of (rovo= cation E o6f#scation cannot 6e considerin+ in favor of the acc#sed1 U.S. v. AM/AR [3H Phil1 201 (1&1H)] Fact : '#rin+ a fiesta% an old )an H0 3ears of a+e as.ed the deceased% Pato6o% for so)e roast (i+1 4n the (resence of )an3 +#ests% the deceased ins#lted the old )an% sa3in+5 N here is no )ore1 Co)e here and 4 will )a.e roast (i+ of 3o#1N A little later% while the deceased was s,#attin+ down% the old )an ca)e #( 6ehind hi) and str#c. hi) on the head with an a-1 8e&%: Jhile it )a3 6e )ere trifle to an avera+e (erson% it evidentl3 was a serio#s )atter to an old )an% to 6e )ade the 6#tt of a Co.e in the (resence of so )an3 +#ests1 he acc#sed was +iven the 6enefit of the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of vindication of a +rave offense1 4n this case% the a+e of the acc#sed and the (lace were considered in deter)inin+ the +ravit3 of the offense1 /EO/LE v. DIO6NO [63 Phil1 601 (1&36)] Fact : @# :ion+% a China)an% had elo(ed with the da#+hter of 9(ifanio 'io.no1 <ater when the @# :ion+ saw the 9(ifanio and his son% Ro)an% co)in+% @# :ion+ ran #(stairs in his ho#se1 G#t was ca#+ht 63 two and sta66ed #ntil @# :ion+Fs nei+h6or notified the (olice who res(onded to the cri)e1 8e&%: here are 3 )iti+atin+ circ#)stances1 *irst% the (resence of the fifth )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of RPC A13% that is% i))ediate vindication of a +rave offenseP)a3 6e ta.en into consideration in favor of the 2 acc#sed% 6eca#se altho#+h the elo(e)ent too. (lace on "an1 7% 1&38% E the a++ression on the Hth of said )onth E 3ear% the offense didnFt cease while (the a6d#cted da#+hterOs) wherea6o#ts re)ained #n.nown E her )arria+e to the deceased #nle+ali/ed1 herefore% there was no interr#(tion fro) the ti)e the offense was co))itted to the vindication thereof1 he acc#sed 6elon+s to a fa)il3 of old c#sto)s to who) the elo(e)ent of a da#+hter wK a )an constit#tes a +rave offense to their honor E ca#ses dist#r6ance of the (eace E tran,#ilit3 of the ho)e E at the sa)e ti)e s(reads #neasiness E an-iet3 in the )inds of the )e)6ers thereof1 he 6th )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of havin+ acted #(on an i)(#lse so (owerf#l as nat#rall3 to have (rod#ced (assion or o6f#scation% )a3 also 6e a((reciated1 hat the acc#sed saw @# :ion+ r#n #(stairs when he 6eca)e aware of their (resence% as if he ref#sed to deal with the) after havin+ +ravel3 offended the)% was certainl3 a sti)#l#s stron+ eno#+h to (rod#ce in their )ind a fit of (assion which 6linded the) and led the) to co))it the cri)e wK which the3 are char+ed1 >indication of +rave offense cannot co=e-ist wK (assion E o6f#scation1 G#t where there are other facts% altho#+h closel3 connected wK the fact #(on which one circ#)stance is (re)ised% the other circ#)stance )a3 6e a((reciated as 6ased on the other fact1 here are two facts which are closel3 connected% na)el35 (1) elo(e)ent% which is a +rave offense to a fa)il3 of old c#sto)s% E (2) ref#sal to deal with hi)% a sti)#l#s stron+ eno#+h to (rod#ce in his )ind a fit of (assion1 h#s% the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of vindication of a +rave offense was 6ased on the fact of elo(e)ent E that of (assion on the fact that the deceased% instead of )eetin+ hi) E as.in+ for for+iveness% ran awa3 fro) the acc#sed1

/EO/LE v. REGATO [12H SCRA 2$H (1&$7)] Fact : Re+ato% Salceda% E Ra)ire/ arrived to+ether at the residence of >ictor *lores and (retended to 6#3 ci+arettes1 Jhen *elicisi)a *lores o(ened the door% the3 went inside the ho#se and de)anded of >icto to 6rin+ o#t their )one31 Jhen he ref#sed% Ra)ire/ and

he Hth circ#)stance of RPC A13% consistin+ of havin+ s#rrendered hi)self i))ediatel3 to the a+ents of (ersons in a#thorit3% sho#ld also 6e ta.en into consideration in favor of 9(ifanio1 Goth sho#ld 6e +ranted the 6enefits of the indeter)inate sentence (rovided in Act ?o1 7103% as a)ended 63 Act ?o1 7228% which (rescri6es a (enalt3 the )ini)#) of which shall 6e ta.en fro) that ne-t lower to (rision )a3or% or (rision correccional of fro) 6 )os E 1 da3 to 6 3rs1 0nder the circ#)stances of the case% the3 are th#s sentenced to an indeter)inate (enalt3 fro) 1 3ears E 2 da3s of (rision correccional to $ 3ears E 1 da3 of (rision )a3or% creditin+ the) with one=half of the ti)e d#rin+ which the3 have #nder+one (reventive i)(rison)ent E to inde)nif3 the heirs of the deceased1

31 his s#rrender was vol#ntar3 A s#rrender to 6e vol#ntar3 )#st 6e s(ontaneo#s% showin+ the intent of the acc#sed to s#6)it hi)self #nconditionall3 to the a#thorities either 6eca#se (a) he ac.nowled+es his +#ilt or (6) he wishes to save the) the tro#6le and e-(ense necessaril3 inc#rred in his search and ca(t#re1 4n the case% the 6aran++a3 ca(tain had to +o to the ho#se of Ra6anillo to ta.e the latter to the (olice station1 he latter did not (resent hi)self vol#ntaril3 to the for)er% who is a (erson in a#thorit3 (#rs#ant to Art1 182 of the RPC% as a)endedL neither did he as. the for)er to fetch hi) at his ho#se so he co#ld s#rrender1 he fact alone that he did not resist 6#t went (eacef#ll3 with the 6aran++a3 ca(tain does not )ean that he vol#ntaril3 s#rrendered1 Gesides% vol#ntar3 s#rrender (res#((oses re(entance1 Ju%*.e$t: here 6ein+ no )iti+atin+ nor a++ravatin+ circ#)stance the (enalt3 is the )edi#) (eriod of that (rescri6ed 63 law for that offense1 Acc#sed is fo#nd +#ilt3 of ho)icide% and not )#rder% and a((l3in+ the 4ndeter)inate Sentence <aw% he is here63 sentenced to s#ffer an indeter)inate (enalt3 ran+in fro) 10 3rs of (rision )a3or as )ini)#) to 1H 3rs and 7 )os of recl#sion te)(oral as )a-i)#) with all accessories thereof% and to inde)nif3 the heirs1

considered in his favor 6eca#se the ca#ses which )iti+ate cri)inal res(onsi6ilit3 for the loss of self=control are s#ch which ori+inate fro) le+iti)ate feelin+s% and not those which arise fro) vicio#s% #nworth3 and i))oral (assions1

U.S. v. DELA CRU> [22 Phil1 72& (1&12)] Fact : he acc#sed% in the heat of (assion% .illed his co))on=law wife #(on discoverin+ her in fla+rante in carnal co))#nication with a co))on ac,#aintance1 8e&%: 4n this a case% the acc#sed was entitled to the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of (assion or o6f#scation1 he facts in this case )#st 6e distin+#ished fro) the case of 01S1 vs1 :ic.s where it was fo#nd that the acc#sed% deli6eratel3 and after d#e reflection resolved to .ill the wo)an who had left hi) for another )an1 Jith a clean and well= (re(ared wea(on% he enetered the ho#se% dis+#isin+ his intention and cal)in+ her 63 his a((arent re(ose and tran,#ilit3% do#6tless in order to s#ccessf#ll3 acco)(lish his cri)inal desi+n1 4n this case% the ca#se of the alle+ed (assion and o6f#scation of the acc#sed was his ve-ation% disa((oint)ent and an+er en+endered 63 the ref#sal of the wo)an to contin#e to live in illicit relations with hi)% which she had a (erfect ri+ht to do1 4n the (resent case% however% the i)(#lse was ca#sed 63 the s#dden revelation that she was #ntr#e to hi)% and his discover3 of her in fla+rante in the ar)s of another1 Ju%*.e$t: Modified 63 a findin+ that the co))ission of the cri)e was )ar.ed with the e-ten#atin+ circ#)stance of (assion and o6f#scation% (enalt3 is red#ced fro) 17 3rs $ )os and 1 da3 of recl#sion te)(oral to 12 3rs and 1 da3 of recl#sion te)(oral1

/EO/LE v. RA;ANILLO [30H SCRA 613 (1&&&)] Fact : Ra6anillo E the deceased Morales were drin.in+ wK their friends1 !ne friend started a water fi+ht +a)e E Ra6anillo Coined the f#n% accidentall3 do#sin+ Morales wK water1 Morales re(ri)anded hi) 6eca#se water +ot into his ear E the3 ar+#ed which led into a fistfi+ht1 he3 were (acified E #shered to their res(ective ho#ses1 he (rosec#tionFs version of the events was +iven credit 63 the co#rt which clai)ed that after 30 )in#tes after% while Morales E so)e friends were havin+ a conversation in the terrace of the ho#se of Morales% Ra6anillo went o#t his ho#se wK a 1=)eter sa)#rai E hac.ed Morales who died that sa)e da31 Ra6anillo offered his testi)on3 to (rove the )iti+atin+ circ#)stances of (assion E o6f#scation% dr#n.enness% E vol#ntar3 s#rrender there63 ad)ittin+ havin+ .illed Morales1 8e&%: *or (assion E o6f#scation to 6e )iti+atin+% the sa)e )#st ori+inate fro) lawf#l feelin+s1 *ro) the version of the facts 63 the (rosec#tion% clearl3 the assa#lt was )ade in a fit of an+er1 he t#r)oil E #nreason that wo#ld nat#rall3 res#lt fro) a ,#arrel or fi+ht sho#ld not 6e conf#sed with the senti)ent or e-cite)ent in the )ind of a (erson inC#red or offended to s#ch a de+ree as to de(rive hi) of his sanit3 and self=control1 he e-cite)ent wKc is inherent in all (ersons who ,#arrel E co)e to 6lows doesnFt constit#te o6f#scation1 Moreover% the act (rod#cin+ o6f#scation )#st not 6e far re)oved fro) the co))ission of the cri)e 63 a considera6le len+th of ti)e% d#rin+ which the acc#sed )i+ht have re+ained his nor)al e,#ani)it31 4n this case% 30 )in#tes intervened 6etween the fi+ht and the .illin+1 :avin+ 6een act#ated )ore 63 the s(irit of reven+e or an+er than of a s#dden i)(#lse of nat#ral or #ncontrolla6le f#r3% (assion and o6f#scation cannot 6e a((reciated1 o 6e )iti+atin+% the acc#sedFs state of into-ication sho#ld 6e (roved or esta6lished 63 s#fficient evidence1 4t sho#ld 6e s#ch an into-ication that wo#ld di)inish or i)(air the e-ercise of his will(ower or the ca(acit3 to .now the inC#stice of his act1 he acc#sed )#st then show that (1) at the ti)e of the co))ission of the cri)inal act% he has ta.en s#ch ,#antit3 of alcoholic drin.s as to 6l#r his reason and de(rive hi) of a certain de+ree of self=controlL and (2) s#ch into-ication is not ha6it#al or s#6se,#ent to the (lan to co))it the felon31 he acc#sed )erel3 testified that he Coined his friends de 2#/)an and Soriano in a drin.in+ session% 6#t onl3 for a short ti)e1 he fact that he was a6le to res#)e his ro#tine wor. thereafter% 6elie his clai) that he was heavil3 dr#n. at the ti)e he attac.ed the victi)1 he re+#larit3 of Ra6anilloFs alcohol inta.e co#ld even have increased his tolerance for alcohol to s#ch an e-tent that he co#ld not easil3 +et dr#n.1 *or vol#ntar3 s#rrender to 6e considered% the followin+ re,#isites )#st conc#r5 11 the offender was not act#all3 arrestedL 21 he s#rrendered to a (erson in a#thorit3 or to an a+ent of a (erson in a#thorit3L and

/EO/LE v. MUIT [11H SCRA 6&6 (1&$2)] Fact : he deceased% orrero and the M#itFs wife was r#)ored to 6e havin+ an affair1 1 da3% orrero and his fa)il3 were a)ica6l3 invited 63 M#it to his ho#se to rest1 G#t later% an ar+#)ent 6ro.e 6etween the two when M#it as.ed orrero a6o#t his fre,#ent )eetin+s with his wife1 Jhen orrero wal.ed awa3 to avoid )ore ar+#)ents% M#it drew his +#n and shot hi)1 :e was held 6ac. 63 2#6atan 6#t was still a6le to fire a second shot which (roved to 6e fatal1 :e fired a third shot 6#t 6eca#se 2#6atan had held hi) ti+hter this ti)e% the shot was fired to the s.31 Acc#sed clai)s that the second fatal shot was #nintentional and was the direct conse,#ence of the act of 2#6atan in e)6racin+ hi) fro) 6ehind and was th#s an accident1 8e&%: 4t was not an accident1 2#6atan testified that he e)6raced a((ellant aro#nd the chest in s#ch a wa3 that a((ellant he was still free to #se his ri+ht hand which was holdin+ the +#n1 :owever% the )iti+atin+ circ#)stances of vol#ntar3 s#rrender% and (assion and o6f#scation can 6e a((reciated1 here can 6e no ,#estion that the acc#sed was driven stron+l3 63 Cealo#s3 6eca#se of the r#)ors re+ardin+ the a)oro#s relationshi( 6etween his wife and the victi)1 he feelin+ of resent)ent res#ltin+ fro) rivalr3 in a)oro#s relations wK a wo)an is a (owerf#l sti)#lant to Cealo#s3 and is s#fficient to (rod#ce loss of reason E self=control1 4n other words% it is a (owerf#l insti+ator of Cealo#s3 E (rone to (rod#ce an+er and o6f#scation1 Ju%*.e$t: M#rder is (#nisha6le 663 recl#sion te)(oral in its )a-i)#) (eriod to death1 Considerin+ the two )iti+atin+ circ#)stances and no a++ravatin+ circ#)stance% the (enalt3 ne-t lower to that (rescri6ed is i)(osa6le1 h#s% he is +iven the indeter)inate (enalt3 of ei+ht 3ears of (rision )a3or% )ini)#) to 17 3rs and $ )os of recl#sion te)(oral% as )a-1

/EO/LE v. GERMINA [2&0 SCRA 176 (1&&$)] Fact : he a((ellant went to the ho#se of the victi)1 A heated conversation too. (lace 6etween victi)Fs relatives and a((ellant concernin+ a ,#arrel 6etween the acc#sedFs 6rother and victi)1 Jhen the victi) arrived% a((ellant drew his +#n1 >icti)Fs relatives sca)(ered to safet3 and victi) tries to r#n 6#t tri((ed1 Jhen the a((ellant ca#+ht #( with hi)% the a((ellant shot hi) at the na(e1 A((ellant was convicted of )#rder 6eca#se of the (resence of treacher3% the victi)% havin+ 6een shot at the 6ac.1 8e&%: he )ere fact that the victi) was shot at the 6ac. while atte)(tin+ to r#n awa3 fro) his assailant wo#ld not (er se ,#alif3 the cri)e to )#rder1 4f )#rder was his 6ent% he wo#ldnFt have +one to the ho#se of the victi) not wo#ld he en+a+e the victi)Fs relatives to a heated ar+#)ent1 h#s% the cri)e is not attended 63 treacher3 (aleviosa)1 Moreover% (assion cannot co=e-ist with treacher3 6eca#se in (assion% the offender loses his control and reason while in treacher3% the )eans e)(lo3ed are conscio#sl3 ado(ted1 !ne who loses his reason and self=control co#ld not deli6eratel3 e)(lo3 a (artic#lar )eans% )ethod or for) of attac. in the e-ec#tion of the cri)e1 h#s% witho#t treacher3% the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of (assion as well as vol#ntar3 s#rrender )a3 6e a((reciated1

/EO/LE v. /INCA [31 SCRA 2H0 (1&&&)] U.S. v. 8IC6S [17 Phil1 21H (1&0&)] Fact : *or a6o#t 8 3ears% the acc#sed and the deceased lived illicitl3 in the )anner of h#s6and and wife1 Afterwards% the deceased se(arated fro) the acc#sed and lived with another )an1 he acc#sed enra+ed 63 s#ch cond#ct% .illed the deceased1 8e&%: 9ven if it is tr#e that the acc#sed acted with o6f#scation 6eca#se of Cealo#s3% the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance cannot 6e Fact : he acc#sed alle+ed that the victi) do#sed hi) wK alcohol1 Jhile a6oard a tric3cle wK a friend% the acc#sed s(otted the victi)1 :e +ot off the tric3cle E +ot a (iece of wood% waited for the victi) E once near% he s#ddenl3 str#c. the victi) on the head1 :e was fo#nd +#ilt3 of )#rder1 !n iss#e is the attendance of )odif3in+ circ#)stances1 8e&%: *or treacher3 to 6e considered a ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance% two conditions )#st conc#r5 (1) offender e)(lo3ed s#ch )eans% )ethod

or )anner of e-ec#tion as to ens#re his safet3 fro) the defensive or retaliator3 acts of the victi)L and (2) the said )eans% )ethod or )anner of e-ec#tion was deli6eratel3 ado(ted1 he essence of treacher3 is the deli6erateness and #ne-(ected of the attac.% which +ive the ha(less% #nar)ed and #ns#s(ectin+ victi) no chance to resist or to esca(e1 4n the case at 6ar% the a((ellant str#c. the dr#n. victi) fro) 6ehind1 he attac.% 6ein+ s#dden and deli6erate and the victi) 6ein+ #tterl3 #ns#s(ectin+ and th#s #na6le to (#t #( an3 resistance% was treachero#s indeed1 *or evident (re)editation to 6e a((reciated as an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance% there )#st 6e clear E convincin+ (roof of5 (1) ti)e when the offender deter)ined to co))it the cri)e% (2) an act )anifestl3 indicatin+ that he cl#n+ to his deter)ination% E (3) a s#fficient la(se of ti)e 6etween s#ch deter)ination E the e-ec#tion that allowed the cri)inal to reflect #(on the conse,#ences of his act1 hese were not esta6lished 63 the evidence in the case at 6ar1 *or vol#ntar3 s#rrender to 6e a((reciated as a )iti+atin+ circ#)stance% the followin+ re,#isites )#st conc#r5 (1) the offender has not 6een act#all3 arrested% (2) the offender s#rrendered to a (erson in a#thorit3% and (3) the s#rrender was vol#ntar31 4f the onl3 reason for the s#((osed s#rrender is to ens#re the safet3 of the acc#sed whose arrest is inevita6le% the s#rrender is not s(ontaneo#s and hence not vol#ntar31 A((ellantFs actions after the incident are not )ar.s of vol#ntar3 s#rrender1 'en3in+ to the (olice an3 (ersonal .nowled+e of the cri)e% he even tried to distance hi)self fro) the (lace of the incident 63 +oin+ to a+6ilaran1 :e onl3 went to the (olice station to Bclear his na)e1D S#ch acts do not show an3 intent to s#rrender #nconditionall3 to the a#thorities1 4nto-ication )a3 6e considered either a++ravatin+ or )iti+atin+% de(endin+ #(on the circ#)stances attendin+ the co))ission of the cri)e1 4nto-ication has the effect of decreasin+ the (enalt3% if it is not ha6it#al or s#6se,#ent to the (lant to co))it the conte)(lated cri)eL on the other hand% when it is ha6it#al or intentional% it is considered a++ravatin+1 A (erson (leadin+ into-ication to )iti+ate (enalt3 )#st (resent (roof to the co))ission of the cri)e% s#fficient to (rod#ce the effect of o6f#scatin+ reason1 At the sa)e ti)e% that (erson )#st show (roof of not 6ein+ a ha6it#al drin.er and not ta.in+ the alcoholic drin. with the intention to reinforce his resolve to co))it the cri)e1 A((ellant 6elatedl3 (leads that into-ication sho#ld )iti+ate his (enalt3 and relied )erel3 on the (rosec#tionFs narrated facts which s#((osedl3 showed that he was into-icated at the ti)e of attac. and that no evidence was (resented to show that his state of into-ication was ha6it#al nor s#6se,#ent to the (lan to co))it said felon31 A((ellant cannot si)(l3 rel3 on these state)ents of the (rosec#tion1 :e )#st hi)self (resent convincin+ (roof of the nat#re and effects of his into-ication1 4t was not (roven that alcohol had 6l#rred his reason;an ele)ent essential for into-ication to 6e considered )iti+atin+ (:alerrrZ !ne 6eerSZ <o#s3 drin.er n)n n#nPG#ti ( c nic.iZ :ehe11) /EO/LE v. AMAGUIN [22& SCRA 166 (1&&7)] Fact : Celso and 2ildo A)a+#in% to+ether with others% attac.ed Pacifico and 'iosdado !ros1 '#rin+ the fra3% 2ildo was ar)ed with a .nife and an B4ndian tar+et1D And C#st as the3 were a6o#t to finish off the !ro 6rothers% Jillie% the eldest of the A)a+#inFs% a((eared with a revolver and delivered the co#( de +race1 he3 invo.e the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of vol#ntar3 s#rrender1 8e&%: Jhile it )a3 have ta.en 6oth Jillie and 2ildo a wee. 6efore t#rnin+ the)selves in% the fact it% the3 vol#ntaril3 s#rrendered to the (olice 6efore arrest co#ld 6e effected1 *or vol#ntar3 s#rrender to 6e a((reciated% the followin+ )#st 6e (resent5 (a) offender has not 6een act#all3 arrestedL (6) offender s#rrendered hi)self to a (erson in a#thorit3L and (c) the s#rrender )#st 6e vol#ntar31 All these re,#isites a((ear to have attended their s#rrender1

/EO/LE v. DULOS [23H SCRA 171 (1&&7)] Fact : '#los% acc#sed=a((ellant% (aid S#san E Alice P100 each to entertain so)e )ale +#ests1 Alice left earl3% while S#san sta3ed1 S#san was offered P800 to chec. in wK 1 of '#losF +#ests1 Jhen she +ot the )one3% she chan+ed her )ind E ar+#ed wK her c#sto)er1 Alice fo#nd o#t E called 2ara% a Militar3 Police assi+ned at the said hotel as watch)an to intervene1 Jhen '#los fo#nd o#t a6o#t it he confronted S#san wK her 6o3friend Pa#l1 Pa#l a(olo+i/ed sa3in+ that his +irlfriend does not acce(t inti)ate dates1 he two with Alice E so)e other friend left to +o ho)e1 '#los followed the) with a +#n and the3 fled 6#t '#los was a6le to overta.e the)1 '#los de)anded the )one3 6ac. and S#san +ave hi) 6ac. P1001 She (leaded with '#los and later tried wrestin+ the +#n 6#t she was violentl3 (#shed1 Pa#l (leaded for )erc3 6#t '#los instead shot hi) twice1 8e&%: he +eneric )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of vol#ntar3 s#rrender cannot 6e a((reciated in acc#sed=a((ellantFs favor1 4t is necessar3 that Bit )#st 6e s(ontaneo#s and )ade in s#ch )anner that it shows the intent of the acc#sed to s#rrender #nconditionall3 to the a#thorities either 6eca#se he ac.nowled+es his +#ilt or 6eca#se he wishes to save the) the tro#6le and e-(enses necessaril3 inc#rred in his search and sei/#re1 :ere there was no conscio#s effort on the '#los (art to vol#ntaril3 s#rrender to the )ilitar3 a#thorities when he ca)e to Ca)( Sion+co% 'inai+% Ma+#indanao after the incident1 :e was not (laced #nder c#stod3 63 the )ilitar3 a#thorities as he was free to roa) aro#nd as he (leased1 :e went to said ca)( to ta.e #( residence% not to vol#ntaril3 s#rrender to the a#thories1 <i.ewise% his clai) that he s#rrendered his +#n to a certain MaCor Ger)ones% one of his +#ests at the !ld 4)(erial :otel% is not s#6stantiated 63 evidence1 9ven if it were% that fact co#ld not 6e a((reciated in his favor1 Jhere an acc#sed )erel3 s#rrendered the +#n he #sed in .illin+% witho#t s#rrenderin+ his (erson to the a#thorities% there is no vol#ntar3 s#rrender (Peo(le v1 Palo)

he re,#isites of vol#ntar3 s#rrender are5 (a) that the offender had not act#all3 6een arrestedL (6) that the offender s#rrendered hi)self to a (erson in a#thorit3 or the latterOs a+entL and (c) that the s#rrender was vol#ntar31 he testi)on3 of the a((ellant is not dis(#ted 63 the (rosec#tion that while in hidin+% #(on the advise of his (arents% he vol#ntaril3 s#rrendered on "an#ar3 7% 1&6$% so he was detained in the )#nici(al Cail of :a+ono31 he Co#rt a+rees that the a((ellant is entitled to this )iti+atin+ circ#)stance1 :owever% he cannot 6e credited with the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of a (lea of +#ilt3 to a lesser offense of the char+e of ho)icide as invo.ed #nder the si-th assi+ned error1 he re,#isites of the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of vol#ntar3 (lea of +#ilt3 are5 11 that the offender s(ontaneo#sl3 confessed his +#iltL 21 that the confession of +#ilt was )ade in o(en co#rt% that is% 6efore the co)(etent co#rt that is to tr3 the caseL and 31 that the confession of +#ilt was )ade (rior to the (resentation of evidence for the (rosec#tion1 4n the (resent case the a((ellant offered to enter a (lea of +#ilt3 to the lesser offense of ho)icide onl3 after so)e evidence of the (rosec#tion had 6een (resented1 :e reiterated his offer after the (rosec#tion rested its case1 his is certainl3 not )iti+atin+1

/EO/LE v. JOSE ET AL. [3H SCRA 780 (1&H1)] Fact : Consolacion "avier Panit% who lives near her (arentOs ho#se% heard her )other% *lorentina sho#tin+ B@o#r father is +oin+ to .ill )eD1 She E her si6lin+s Al)a and Man#el went to their (arentsO ho#se E fo#nd the lifeless 6od3 of his )other E his father% acc#sed=a((ellant% wo#nded in the a6do)en1 9d#ardo "avier% acc#sed=a((ellant ad)itted .illin+ his wife in their 6edroo) with the #se of a shar( 6olo 6eca#se he co#ld not slee( for al)ost a )onth1 :e clai)ed that when the .illin+ too. (lace% his )ind went totall3 6lan. E he did not .now what he was doin+1 :e clai)s that he was insane at the ti)e of the incident1 :is defense of insanit3 as an e-e)(tin+ circ#)stance was reCected1 '#rin+ trial% the defense never alle+ed the a6ove=clai)ed )iti+atin+ circ#)stances of illness (inso)nia) E (assion E o6f#scation% th#s wea.enin+ the case of acc#sed=a((ellant1 4n this a((eal% he now alle+es these )iti+atin+ circ#)stances1 8e&%: *or the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of illness of the offender to 6e a((reciated% the law re,#ires the (resence of the followin+ re,#isites5 (1) illness )#st di)inish the e-ercise of the will=(ower of the offenderL and (2) s#ch illness sho#ld not de(rive the offender of conscio#sness of his acts1 Since acc#sed=a((ellant has alread3 ad)itted to the .illin+% it is inc#)6ent #(on hi) to (rove the clai)ed )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of illness1 4n this case% however% aside fro) the testi)on3 of the acc#sed that his )ind went 6lan. when he .illed his wife d#e to loss of slee(% no )edical findin+ was (resented re+ardin+ his )ental condition at the ti)e of .illin+1 his Co#rt can hardl3 rel3 on the 6are alle+ations of acc#sed=a((ellant% nor on )ere (res#)(tions and conCect#res1 ?o clear and convincin+ evidence was shown that acc#sed=a((ellant was s#fferin+ an illness which di)inished his e-ercise of will=(ower at the ti)e of the .illin+1 !n the other hand% it is clear that acc#sed=a((ellant was aware of the acts he co))itted1 *irst% he re)e)6ered .illin+ his wife in their 6edroo) with the #se of a 6olo% where he )an+led her nec. twiceL he re)e)6ered tr3in+ to co))it s#icide% 63 wo#ndin+ hi)self with the sa)e 6olo he #sed in .illin+ his wifeL and he re)e)6ered 6ein+ 6ro#+ht to the hos(ital1 Since he re)e)6ered the vital circ#)stances s#rro#ndin+ the +hastl3 incident% fro) the ti)e of the

/EO/LE v. CRISOSTOMO [160 SCRA 7H (1&$$)] Fact : Jhile Crisosto)o was (assin+ near the ho#se of 2eroni)o% he )et the latter E invited hi) to have a drin. in the (lace of a friend1 2eroni)o declined the offer1 S#ddenl3 Crisosto)o r#shed towards Ro)eo who was then standin+ near a store facin+ the street wK his 6ac. towards Crisosto)o E shot hi) at a distance of 1 )eter1 8e&%: 0nder RPC A18 of the RPC% into-ication of the offender shall 6e ta.en into consideration as a )iti+atin+ circ#)stance when the offender co))itted a felon3 in a state of into-ication% if the sa)e is not ha6it#al or s#6se,#ent to the (lan to co))it said felon31 !therwise when ha6it#al or intentional% it shall 6e considered as an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance1 he alle+ation of the a((ellant that he was dr#n. when he co))itted the offense is self=servin+ and #ncorro6orated1 Gesides% a((ellant ad)itted that at that ti)e he was onl3 di//3% and that he was on the wa3 to another drin.in+ s(ree1 !6vio#sl3 he had not dr#n. eno#+h1 :e re)e)6ers the details of the shootin+% the ti)e it started and ended% how )#ch wine he i)6i6ed and the (ersons who were with hi)1 :e reali/ed the +ravit3 of the offense he co))itted so he fled and hid fro) the a#thorities1 :e so#+ht sanct#ar3 in the cha(el of Sto1 Rosario% 6oarded a tric3cle +oin+ to the (o6lacion and too. a <a Mallorca 6#s to Manila1 All these are acts of a )an whose )ental ca(acit3 has not 6een i)(aired1 As the fifth assi+ned error a((ellant ar+#es that he sho#ld 6e credited with the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of vol#ntar3 s#rrender statin+ that altho#+h he hid hi)self fro) the a#thorities for 10 da3s% he vol#ntaril3 s#rrendered to the a#thorities thereafter #(on the advice of his (arents1

.illin+ #( to the ti)e he was 6ro#+ht to the hos(ital% it shows that he was in f#ll control of his )ental fac#lties1 his ne+ates his clai) that he was s#fferin+ fro) an illness that di)inished the e-ercise of his will=(ower1 !n the 6asis of the fore+oin+% we cannot a((reciate the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance alle+ed 63 acc#sed=a((ellant1 4n order to 6e entitled to the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of (assion and to o6f#scation% the followin+ ele)ents sho#ld conc#r5 (1) there sho#ld 6e an act 6oth #nlawf#l and s#fficient to (rod#ce s#ch condition of )indL E (2) said act which (rod#ced the o6f#scation was not far re)oved fro) the co))ission of the cri)e 63 a considera6le len+th of ti)e% d#rin+ which the (er(etrator )i+ht recover his )oral e,#ani)it31 he fore+oin+ ele)ents were not (roved to 6e (resent in instant case1 4n fact% d#rin+ acc#sed=a((ellantOs testi)on3% he even stated that he was not Cealo#s of his wife1 Ju%*.e$t: he C was correct in convictin+ acc#sed=a((ellant of the cri)e of (arricide #nder RPC A276% as a)ended 63 RA H68&% A81 he cri)e of (arricide% not 6ein+ a ca(ital cri)e (er se as it is not (#nisha6le 63 )andator3 death (enalt3 6#t 63 the fle-i6le (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a to death% two indivisi6le (enalties% the a((lication of the lesser or the +reater (enalt3 de(ends on the (resence of )iti+atin+ and a++ravatin+ circ#)stances1 4n the a6sence of an3 a++ravatin+ or )iti+atin+ circ#)stance for the acc#sed=a((ellant% the lesser (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a sho#ld 6e i)(osed1



S#ch illness sho#ld not de(rive the offender of conscio#sness of his acts1

*or the circ#)stance of !a "#$ a$% #)+u cat"#$ of the offender to 6e a((reciated% the law re,#ires the (resence of the ff re,#isites5  here sho#ld 6e an act 6oth #nlawf#l and s#fficient to (rod#ce s#ch condition of )ind% and  S#ch act wKc (rod#ced the o6f#scation was not far re)oved fro) the co))ission of the cri)e 63 a considera6le len+th of ti)e% d#rin+ wKc the (er(etrator )i+ht recover his )oral e,#ani)it31 he defense never (resented an3 )edical record of the acc#sed nor was a (s3chiatrist (resented to validate the defense of insanit31 ?one of the ele)ents=re,#isites were (roved to 6e (resent E in his testi)on3% "avier even stated that he was not Cealo#s of his wife1 9,#all3 i)(ortant% the defense% d#rin+ the trial% never alle+ed the a6ove=clai)ed )iti+atin+ circ#)stances of illness E (assion E o6f#scation% th#s wea.enin+ the case of acc#sed=a((ellant1 he alle+ed )iti+atin+ circ#)stances are )ere aftertho#+ht to whittle (to sha(e) down his cri)inal lia6ilit31 -. WON 'e '#u&% )e e$te$ce t# u++er a &#(er !e$a&t1 @es1 he cri)e of (arricide% not 6ein+ a ca(ital cri)e (er se is not (#nisha6le 63 )andator3 death (enalt3 6#t 63 the fle-i6le (enalt3 of reclusion perpetua to death% two indivisi6le (enalties1 he a((lication of the lesser of +reater (enalt3 de(ends on the (resence of )iti+atin+ and a++ravatin+ circ#)stances1 h#s% in the a6sence of an3 a++ravatin+ or )iti+atin+ circ#)stance for the acc#sed% the lesser (enalt3 of reclusion perpetua sho#ld 6e i)(osed1

/EO/LE v. JA:IER [311 SCRA 8H6 (1&&&)] Nature: A#to Review of decision of R C of A+oo% <a 0nion  'ec 1&875 Acc#sed=a((ellant 9d#ardo "avier was )arried to *lorentina <aceste1 he3 6e+ot 10 children1 !n "#ne F&6% after 71 3rs of )arria+e% "avier ad)itted .illin+ his wife1  esti)onies of SP!1 Rotelio Pacho% a des. investi+ator% and Consolacion "avier Panit E Al)a "avier% da#+hters of the s(s5 o Getween 2I3a)% Consolacion% who lived 10=18)1 awa3% heard her )o) sho#tin+% B3o#r father is +oin+ to .ill )eZD (translated fro) local dialect)1 She ran o#tside E )et her sister Al)a who was wee(in+ E infor)ed her of their (arentsF ,#arrel1 o+ether% the3 went to their 6rother Man#elFs ho#se% a6o#t H0=$0)1 awa3 fro) their (arentsF ho#se1 o 0(on reachin+ the latter% Man#el% who entered first% fo#nd the lifeless 6od3 of his )other in their 6edroo) and his father% wo#nded in the a6do)en1 o heir father% 9d#ardo% confessed to son Man#el that he .illed his wife and thereafter sta66ed hi)self1  A(ril 1&&H5 R C held "avier +#ilt3 of the cri)e of (arricide and sentenced hi) to s#ffer the (enalt3 of death% and to inde)nif3 the heirs of the victi) in the a)o#nt of PhP80R as )oral da)a+es and PhP21%H30 as act#al e-(enses1  4n his a((eal% "avier clai)s he .illed his wife 6eca#se he was s#fferin+ fro) inso)nia for a )onth and at the ti)e of the .illin+% his )ind went totall3 6lan. and he did not .now what he was doin+1 :e clai)s that he was insane then1 I ue a$% Rat"#: 1. WON accu e%0a!!e&&a$t Jav"er ca$ c&a". ."t"*at"$* c"rcu. ta$ce #+ "&&$e a$% #+ !a "#$ a$% #)+u cat"#$ ?o to 6oth1 !n illness% since "avier has alread3 ad)itted to the .illin+% it is inc#)6ent #(on hi) to (rove the clai)ed )iti+atin+ circ#)stance1 !S2 fo#nd no s#fficient evidence or )edical findin+ to s#((ort his clai)1 *or the )iti+atin+ circ#)stance of "&&$e of the offender to 6e a((reciated% the law re,#ires the (resence of the ff re,#isites5  4llness )#st di)inish the e-ercise of the will(ower of the offender% and

8#&%"$*: A((ealed decision affir)ed wK )odification1 "avier to s#ffer reclusion perpetua and PhP80R i)(osed as civil inde)nit3 instead of )oral da)a+es1 NOTES: here is (assional o6f#scation when the cri)e is co))itted d#e to an #ncontrolla6le 6#rst of (assion so (rovo.ed 63 (rior #nC#st or i)(ro(er acts% or d#e to a le+iti)ate sti)#l#s so (owerf#l as to overco)e reason1

"#l3 2&% 1&&$ Me)orand#) re(ort I Pro6le) of Marlon Para/o is the severe defect or deafness1 he (resence of an or+anic disorder cannot 6e deter)ined 6eca#se of the latterFs ina6ilit3 to co))#nicate1 :owever% so)e de+ree of )ental retardation was +athered with the #se of WPa(er E Pencil est1F :is )ental a+e is seven 3ears and nine )onths1 :is 4V is 601 Me)orand#) re(ort of 'r1 Rosa Mendo/a of P2: I Mr1 Marlon Para/o is indeed hearin+ i)(aired and s#ffers fro) )ental retardation1 esti)onies of the (eo(le who have .nown Marlon Para/o since childhood corro6orated the testi)onies of the )edical e-(erts1 he )other of Para/o% 6aran+a3 chair)an% school teacher stated that the a((ellant was deaf and )#te1 Gased on the collateral infor)ation +athered fro) (ersons who have .nown the (atient since childhood% to+ether with the res#lt of the dia+nostic test at 0P=P2: and evidenced 63 the (s3cholo+ical re(ort% it is now esta6lished that Marlon Para/o is s#fferin+ fro) (1) Profo#nd :earin+ <oss% left earL (2) Severe :earin+ <oss% ri+ht ear (3) Mental Retardation% Mild1 Records show that Para/o was tried witho#t the 6enefit of a si+n lan+#a+e e-(ert and he was onl3 assisted 63 a (erson who has 6een .nown to hi) since 1&$31 Peo(le v1 Crisolo+o I a6sence of an inter(reter in si+n lan+#a+e who co#ld have conve3ed to the acc#sed% a deaf )#te% the f#ll facts of the offense with which he was char+ed and who co#ld also have co))#nicated the acc#sedFs version of the circ#)stances which led to his i)(lication in the cri)e% de(rived the acc#sed of a f#ll and fair trial and a reasona6le o((ort#nit3 to defend hi)self1 ?ot even the acc#sedFs final (lea of not +#ilt3 can e-c#se these inherentl3 #nC#st circ#)stances1 he a6sence of a ,#alified inter(reter in si+n lan+#a+e and of an3 other )eans% whether in writin+ or otherwise% to infor) the acc#sed of the char+es a+ainst hi) denied the acc#sed his f#nda)ental ri+ht of d#e (rocess of law1 he acc#rac3 and fairness of the fact#al (rocess 63 which the +#ilt or innocence of the acc#sed was deter)ined was not safe+#arded1 he acc#sed co#ld not 6e said to have enCo3ed the ri+ht to 6e heard 63 hi)self and co#nsel% and to 6e infor)ed of the nat#re and ca#se of the acc#sation a+ainst hi) in the (roceedin+s where his life and li6ert3 were at sta.e1

/EO/LE v. GARCIA [2$1 SCRA 763 (1&&H)] /EO/LE v. /ARA>O [21R1 ?o1 1211H6% ]#lv $% 1&&&] Nature: Motion for Reconsideration of a decision of the SC Fact : Marlon Para/o was convicted for ra(e and fr#strated ho)icide1 !n Ma3 2&% 1&&H% Para/o filed a )otion for reconsideration which alle+ed that Para/o was not (rovided with a si+n lan+#a+e e-(ert1 4f the alle+ation sho#ld 6e (roven the C#d+e)ent of conviction sho#ld 6e set aside1 !n *e6r#ar3 10% 1&&$ the co#rt resolved to +rant the #r+ent o)ni6#s )otion  o hold in a6e3ance consideration of his )otion (endin+ his )edical e-a)ination  o allow a s#((le)ental )otion for reconsideration after his )edical e-a)ination  o s#6)it the a((ellant for e-a)ination 63 a (h3sician of the S#(re)e Co#rt1 I ue: J!? the C#d+)ent of conviction sho#ld 6e set aside 8e&%: @es1 A((ellant was e-a)ined 63 Geatri/ !1 Cr#/ (SC Medical Services Ps3cholo+ist)1 he res#lt of her e-a)ination was that Mr1 Para/oFs intelli+ence f#nction 6ased on the 2oodeno#+h is +a#+ed on the )ild to )oderate de+ree of )ental retardation with an esti)ated 4V of 601 :is )ental a+e on the other hand% is e,#ivalent to H 3rs E & )onths1 Fact : !r(hans% "ac.iel3n !n+ ($3rs old) and her 3o#n+er 6rother% were #nder the +#ardianshi( of their a#nt 9li/a6eth !n+1 9li/a6eth wor.ed a6road so the children sta3ed with 9li/a6ethFs live=in (artner% 'avid 2arcia1 A((arentl3% 'avid ra(ed "ac.iel3n since she was $ (1&&0) til she was 10 3ears old (1&&7)1 An+elito !n+ soon fo#nd o#t and the3 (ressed char+es1 :e was char+ed with si)(le cri)e of ra(e and the co#rt 6elow fo#nd hi) +#ilt3 onl3 of si)(le ra(e as char+ed1 ( he SC deter)ined that 2arcia can onl3 6e char+ed with 10 acts of ra(e% the first of which was the first ra(e co))itted in 1&&0% and & of which were the incidents ad)itted 63 2arcia in his letter to 9li/a6eth% all co))itted in &71 Read the letterZ M=wiwindan+ .a3oZ) I ue: Jhat is the (ro(er i)(osa6le (enalt3 on a((ellant in li+ht of his (roven 10 acts of ra(eS 8e&%: Recl#sion (er(et#a for each of 10 felonies of ra(e  :avin+ 6een char+ed with the si)(le cri)e of ra(e% each of which warrants the i)(osition of the (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a% 6oth the trial co#rt and the Peo(leOs ri6#ne a+ree on that (enalt3 to 6e i)(osed for each cri)e% altho#+h 6oth contend that s#ch (enalt3 sho#ld 6e i)(osed on 1$3 acts of ra(e1 Je have alread3 e-(lained that a((ellant can 6e convicted



















of onl3 ten cri)es of ra(e% 6#t we have not answered the #ns(o.en ,#estion% since 6oth the trial co#rt and the Solicitor 2eneral have (assed s#6 silentio thereover% on whether the ten convictions we s#stain sho#ld 6e for si)(le ra(e or for its ,#alified for) #nder the circ#)stances stated in Re(#6lic Act ?o1 H68& which a)ended Article 338 of the Revised Penal Code1 ?ote that the 1st cri)e of ra(e in W&0 of which 2arcia was fo#nd +#ilt3 is covered 63 the ori+inal (rovisions of the RPC% while the other & co))itted in &7 are +overned 63 the a)endator3 (rovisions of R1A1 H68&% with circ#)stances necessitatin+ hi+her (enalties% and which too. effect on 'ec1 31% &31 Sec1 11 of said act (rovides that where the victi) of the cri)e of ra(e is #nder 1$ and offender is a +#ardian of the victi)% death (enalt3 shall 6e i)(osed1 he additional attendant circ#)stances introd#ced 63 R1A H68& sho#ld 6e considered as !ec"a& Fua&"+1"$* c"rcu. ta$ce s(ecificall3 a((lica6le to the cri)e of ra(e and% accordin+l3% cannot 6e offset 63 )iti+atin+ circ#)stances1 he o6vio#s ratiocination is that% C#st li.e the effect of the attendant circ#)stances therefore added 63 R1A1 7111% altho#+h the cri)e is still deno)inated as ra(e uc' c"rcu. ta$ce 'ave c'a$*e% t'e $ature #+ ".!&e ra!e )1 !r#%uc"$* a Fua&"+"e% +#r. t'ere#+ !u$" 'a)&e )1 t'e '"*'er !e$a&t1 #+ %eat'. 4n Peo(le vs1 'e la Cr#/% it was held that the +#ardian referred to in the law is either a le+al or C#dicial +#ardian as #nderstood in the r#les on civil (roced#re1 Since% the incl#sion of the +#ardian in the en#)eration of the offenders in Art1 338 is to a#thori/e the i)(osition of the death (enalt3 on hi)% this definition of +#ardian sho#ld 6e #sed in the Art1 As o((osed to Art1 377Fs definition1 he Co#rt held that 2arcia had a relation of +#ardian to victi)% whether as a nat#ral or le+al% or even de facto and% )#ch less% C#dicial +#ardian1 :e was )erel3 e-(ected to carr3 o#t 9li/a6ethOs directions% and 9li/a6eth contin#ed to 6e the +#ardian de facto of the children1 4n fine% at the ver3 )ost% he was onl3 an #nwillin+ c#stodian and careta.er% not #nli.e a do)estic )aCordo)o or steward of the ho#se and the children% and for which services he o6tained free 6oard and lod+in+1 4ronicall3% that a)or(ho#s role that he (la3ed in the lives of the children% and which ena6led hi) to a6#se the)% offers hi) salvation fro) the death (enalt3 which he deserves1 he death (enalt3 conte)(lated for a real +#ardian #nder the a)end)ents introd#ced 63 R1A1 ?o1 H68& cannot 6e i)(osed since he does not fit into that cate+or31 *#rther)ore% Art1 338 ori+inall3 (rovided onl3 for si)(le ra(e (#nisha6le 63 recl#sion (er(et#a% 6#t R1A 7111 introd#ced a)end)ents thereto 63 (rovidin+ for ,#alified for)s of ra(e carr3in+ the death (enalt3% that is% when co))itted with the #se of deadl3 wea(on or 63 two or )ore (ersons% when 63 reason or on the occasion of the ra(e the victi) 6eco)es insane% or% #nder the sa)e circ#)stances% a ho)icide is co))itted1 he ho)icide in the last two instances in effect created a s(ecial co)(le- cri)e of ra(e with ho)icide1 he first two attendant circ#)stances are considered as e,#ivalent to ,#alif3in+ circ#)stances since the3 increase the (enalties 63 de+rees% and not )erel3 as a++ravatin+ circ#)stances which effect onl3 the (eriod of the (enalt3 6#t do not increase it to a hi+her de+ree1 he ori+inal (rovisions of Article 338 and the a)end)ents of R1A1 7111 are still )aintained1 R1A1 H68& thereafter introd#ced H )ore attendant circ#)stances which th#s ,#alifies cri)e 63 increasin+ the (enalt3 1 de+ree hi+her thro#+h the i)(osition of the death (enalt31 All these new attendant circ#)stances% C#st li.e those introd#ced 63 R1A1 7111% (arta.e of the nat#re of ,#alif3in+ circ#)stances% and not





)erel3 a++ravatin+ circ#)stances% on the sa)e rationale alread3 e-(lained1 V#alif3in+ circ#)stances )#st 6e (ro(erl3 (leaded in the indict)ent% otherwise% if (roven% the3 shall 6e considered onl3 as a++ravatin+ circ#)stance1 4nfor)ation filed a+ainst a((ellant char+ed onl3 the felon3 of si)(le ra(e and no attendant ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance was alle+ed1 h#s% he cannot 6e (#nished with the (enalt3 of death even ass#)in+ ar+#endo that he is s#ch a +#ardian1 ?either can that fact 6e considered to a++ravate his lia6ilit3 as the (enalt3 for si)(le ra(e is the sin+le indivisi6le (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a1 h#s for the ten cri)es of ra(e of which he was +#ilt3% onl3 the (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a can 6e i)(osed1

,.

/EO/LE v. RAMOS [2&6 SCRA 8$& (1&&$)] Nature: A#to)atic Review of a decision of the R C of Pan+asinan  !cto6er 16% 1&&8 I 9li/a6eth 1 Ra)os filed a cri)inal co)(laint for ra(e a+ainst *eliciano M1 Ra)os1 4t was alle+ed that the a((ellant was a6le to (er(etrate the felon3 a+ainst the )inor thro#+h the #se of force and inti)idation in its e-ec#tion  9li/a6eth Ra)os% a )inor of 17 3ears old% was ra(ed 63 her father while her 6rothers and sisters were slee(in+ near631 She was warned not to re(ort the )atter to an3one or else he wo#ld .ill her1 he ra(e was discovered onl3 when she s#ffered an a6ortion of the fet#s that she was carr3in+ in her wo)61  0(on filin+ of the char+es in the R C *eliciano chan+ed his residence to #ai% Ca+a3an and an alias warrant of arrest was iss#ed1 March 26% 1&&6 *eliciano was arrested in #ao% Ca+a3an while he was feedin+ the d#c.s1  After the (rosec#tion has (resented their evidence *eliciano wanted to chan+e his (lea to +#ilt3 and he was allowed 63 the co#rt to do so1 *eliciano Ra)os was sentenced to death 63 the R C of Pan+asinan1 I ue : 1. WON 'e ca$ c&a". t'e ."t"*at"$* c"rcu. ta$ce #+ v#&u$tar1 urre$%er  ?!1 here was no vol#ntar3 s#rrender 6eca#se he arrested 63 (olice A6an1 Accordin+ to A6an *eliciano Bwent with hi)D when he showed the warrant of arrest1 he e-ec#tion of warrant of arrest a+ainst *eliciano entailed e-(enses of a6o#t P2%800  S#rrender is vol#ntar3 when it is done 63 an acc#sed s(ontaneo#sl3 and )ade in s#ch a )anner that it shows the intent of the acc#sed to s#rrender #nconditionall3 to the a#thorities% either 6eca#se he ac.nowled+es his +#ilt or he wishes to save the) the tro#6le and e-(ense necessaril3 inc#rred in his search and ca(t#re1  *eliciano tried to evade arrest 63 chan+in+ his residence1 he a((ellant was arrested and he was act#all3 ta.en and held in c#stod3 #nder the a#thorit3 of the law1 -. WON '" !&ea #+ *u"&t1 ca$ )e taCe$ a a ."t"*at"$* c"rcu. ta$ce  ?!1 :is (lea of +#ilt3 was )ade after the evidence a+ainst hi) was (resented1 4t was )ade o#t of fear of conviction E not 6ased on his conscience1 A (lea of +#ilt3 )#st 6e )ade at the first o((ort#nit3% indicatin+ re(entance on the (art of the acc#sed1  A (lea of +#ilt3 )ade after the arrai+n)ent and after the trial had 6e+#n does not entitle the acc#sed to have s#ch (lea considered as a )iti+atin+ circ#)stance

WON t'e D $e( atte$%a$t c"rcu. ta$ce "$ t"tute% )1 RA DJH9 ca$ )e c#$ "%ere% a a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce  ?!1 RA H68& in A338 in the RPC (rovided for the H new attendant circ#)stances1 Peo(le vs1 2arcia I attendant circ#)stance (arta.e the nat#re of ,#alif3in+ circ#)stances and not )erel3 a++ravatin+ circ#)stance% since the3 increase the (enalties 63 the de+rees1 A++ravatin+ circ#)stance affect onl3 the (eriod of the (enalt3 and does not increase it to a hi+her de+ree1  Peo(le vs1 Ga3ot I ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance or an inherent a++ravatin+ circ#)stance sho#ld not 6e )ista.en for a +eneric a++ravatin+ circ#)stance in the cri)e of ro66er31 2eneric a++ravatin+ circ#)stance% not offset 63 )iti+atin+ circ#)stance% increases the (enalt3 which sho#ld 6e i)(osed #(on the acc#sed to the )a-i)#) (eriod% 6#t witho#t e-ceedin+ the li)it (rescri6ed 63 law1 A ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance I +ives the cri)e its (ro(er and e-cl#sive na)e 6#t also i)(oses on the a#thor thereof no other (enalt3 6#t that s(eciall3 (rescri6ed 63 law for said cri)es1  Ra(e with the conc#rrence of )inorit3 of the victi) and her relationshi( with the a++ressor +ives a different character of ra(e which raised the i)(osa6le (enalt3 fro) recl#sion (er(ert#a to the hi+her and s#(re)e (enalt3 of death1 Res#lt5 )inorit3 of the offended (art3 and relationshi( to the offender  s(ecial ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance1 WON t'e accu e% ca$ )e c#$v"cte% +#r Fua&"+"e% ra!e  ?!1 Cannot 6e convicted of ,#alified ra(e 6eca#se he wasnFt (ro(erl3 infor)ed that he is 6ein+ acc#sed of ,#alified ra(e  9ver3 ele)ent which the offense is co)(osed )#st 6e alle+ed in the co)(laint or infor)ation1  Person cannot 6e convicted of an offense hi+her than that which he is char+ed in the co)(laint or infor)ation on which he is tried1  4n !arcia it was held that it wo#ld 6e a denial of the ri+ht of the acc#sed to 6e infor)ed of the char+es a+ainst hi) and% conse,#entl3% a denial of d#e (rocess% if he is char+ed with si)(le ra(e and 6e convicted of its ,#alified for) (#nisha6le with death altho#+h the attendant circ#)stance ,#alif3in+ the offense and res#ltin+ in ca(ital (#nish)ent was not alle+ed in the indict)ent on which he was arrai+ned  he +eneral (rinci(les of cri)inal law (rovide that a++ravatin+ circ#)stances% even if not alle+ed in the infor)ation% )a3 6e (roven d#rin+ the trial over o6Cection of the defense and )a3 6e a((reciated in i)(osin+ the sentence1 S#ch evidence )erel3 for)s (art of the (roof of the act#al co))ission of the offense and its consideration 63 the co#rts do not violate the constit#tional ri+ht of the acc#sed to 6e infor)ed of the nat#re and ca#se of the acc#sation a+ainst hi) /EO/LE v. DIMA/ILIS [300 SCRA 2H& (1&&$)]

A.

Nature: A#to)atic review of a decision of R C Ma.ati 1&&$  Sharon (eldest of 8 children) was then 11 3rs old when she was first ra(ed 63 her ste(dad% 9le#terio 'i)a(ilis% who) she calls BPa(aD1 :e and SharonFs )other are live=in (artners1  Sharon was ra(ed 8 ti)es% 3 instances ha((ened wKin M.t C#risdiction% 1 ha((ened in Sta1 Ana Mla and the last in * 4% a+#i+1 4n ever3 instance% while SharonFs )other and a#nt were not aro#nd% 'i)a(ilis wo#ld order the other children to (la3 o#tside the ho#se1 After which% he wo#ld a((roach Sharon% co))and her to disro6eL he wo#ld then insert his fin+er into her





va+ina and (ro6e his )ale or+an into hers1 M#sterin+ eno#+h co#ra+e to finall3 tell her )other% the latter )erel3 shr#++ed off her stor3 and said it was )erel3 Bla)6in+D on the (art of 'i)a(ilis1 4t was onl3 when her <ola >iol3 overheard her stor3 that she was 6ro#+ht to ?G4 and e-a)ined 63 a )edico=le+al officer1 he latter noted in SharonFs (rivate or+an a healed s#(erficial h3)enal laceration at 3 oFcloc. (osition1 'i)a(ilis denied all char+es and invo.ed defense of ali6i sa3in+ that in all instances% he was o#tside drivin+ his Cee(ne3 and that the onl3 reason wh3 Sharon is acc#sin+ hi) of s#ch is 6eca#se of her <ola >iol3Fs aversion towards hi)1 R C M.t% for the 3 co#nts done in its C#risdiction% fo#nd 'i)a(ilis +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of the cri)e of ra(e and i)(osin+ #(on hi) '9A : (enalt3 in each case1



 



8ELD:  9ven tho#+h the info filed a+ainst hi) failed to alle+e the s(ecific dates of co))ission of the 3 co#nts of ra(e% info is still le+all3 via6le as lon+ as it distinctl3 states the stat#tor3 desi+nation of the offense and the acts or o)issions constit#tive thereof1 4n the cri)e of ra(e% the ti)e of its co))ission is not Ba )aterial in+redient of the offense1D 4t is s#fficient that Sharon was a6le to +ive info as near to the act#al date at wKc the offenses are co))itted as the info or co)(laint will (er)it1 he narration she +ave was )ade in a )anner 6etter than that wKc can +enerall3 6e e-(ected of a 3o#n+ and innocent +irl of 13 3rs of a+e1 ?o ill=)otive has 6een attri6#ted to the co)(lainant for )a.in+ the acc#sation and no decent +irl wo#ld +o thro#+h the tro#6le of e-(osin+ herself to the h#)iliation of trial and (#6lic scandal for so h#)iliatin+ an offense as ra(e e-ce(t for a stron+ )otive to see. C#stice1  he defense of ali6i will not hold for it is not s#fficient to show that he was at so)e other (lace at the ti)e of the co))ission 6#t it sho#ld 6e (roved that it has 6een li.ewise (h3sicall3 i)(ossi6le for hi) to 6e at the locus criminis at that ti)e1  he first incident of ra(e was co))itted when the victi) was onl3 11 3rs old% )a.in+ the offense stat#tor3 ra(e1 he death (enalt3 is i)(osed when the victi) is #nder 1$ 3rs of a+e and the offender is the co))on law s( of the (arent of the victi)1 !rdinaril3% the case wo#ld have th#s )eant the i)(osition of the )andator3 death (enalt31 V#ite fort#natel3 for the defendant 'i)a(ilis% he wo#ld 6e s(ared of s#ch1 he relnshi( 6etween a((ellant and his victi)= the victi) is the da#+hter of a((ellantFs co))on=law s( 63 the latterFs (revio#s relnshi( wK another )an% is a ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance that has not 6een (ro(erl3 alle+ed in the +iven info1 4t is a ,#alif3in+ a++ravatin+ circ#)stance% as (er Sec 11 of RA H68&% which cannot 6e (roved unless alleged wKc was a technical flaw co))itted 63 the (rosec#tion wKc the Co#rt cannot i+nore1 4t constrains the Co#rt to red#ce the (enalt3 of death i)(osed 63 R C to reclusion perpetua1  'ecision affir)ed with )odification1 /EO/LE v. LA>ARO [31H SCRA 738 (1&&&)] Nature: A((eal fro) R C ?a+a decision Fact B/r# ecut"#$E:  Ma3 8% 1&&15 A(olinar <a/aro% while drivin+ a 3ellow o3ota a)araw Cee(% was sto((ed 63 PKS+t1 Gonnet alon+ 2en1 <#na St1 GonnetFs attention was ca#+ht 63 63standers who were sho#tin+ that said vehicle had a 6loodied (assen+er1 Gonnet instr#cted <a/aro to follow )o6ile (atrol to Gicol Re+ional :os(ital1 Pol1 MaC1 #a/on% who +ot ti( thr# (hone calls re incident% was waitin+ for the) in the hos(ital1





#a/on% .nowin+ that driver was ar)ed% ordered driver to ste( o#t of Cee(1 :e saw driver had a hand+#n t#c.ed in his waist1 'river (#lled o#t hand+#n fro) its holster E dro((ed it at the 6ac. of driverFs seat1 #a/on then (#lled <a/aro o#t of vehicle E +ot hold of +#n wKc was a 13$ cali6er revolver containin+ 6 e)(t3 shells1 <a/aro didnFt res(ond when he was as.ed wh3 he had +#n E whether he had license to (ossess s#ch1 <a/aro was 6ro#+ht to (olice head,#arters E +#n was t#rned over to investi+ator1 A#+1 20% 1&&1 I S#(t1 Antonio Sierra% Chief of *irear)s E 9-(losives !ffice (*9!) at Ca)( Cra)e iss#ed a certification that <a/aro was not a licensedKre+istered firear) holder of an3 .indKcali6er1 <a/aro clai)s that on the da3 of incident% he had a drin.in+ s(ree wKne(hew Manolo <a/aro E Ricardo Ron,#illo in Ca)arines S#r1 he3 left (lace at aro#nd 3 ()1 Jhile travelin+% Manolo sto((ed Cee( to #rinate1 <a/aro then saw Ricardo draw +#n E (oint it at hi)1 <a/aro E Ricardo then +ra((led for (ossession of +#n1 After so)e ti)e% <a/aro reali/ed that Manolo was hit E he was as.in+ #ncle to 6rin+ hi) to hos(ital1 :e co#ldnFt do an3thin+ 6eca#se he was still +ra((lin+ wKRicardo1 Jhen Ricardo wea.ened E sto((ed )ovin+% he then 6ro#+ht Manolo to hos(ital1 :e left Ricardo who later on died1 :e clai)s that he doesnFt .now if +#n fo#nd in his (ossession was sa)e as +#n he was +ra((lin+ wK Ricardo for1 :e f#rther clai)ed that he E Ricardo fell fro) Cee( E he canFt recall who was holdin+ +#n when it was fired1 h#s clai)in+ that shootin+ of Ricardo was an accident1 Prosec#tion (resented 'r1 "#radoFs testi)on3 clai)in+ that 6ased on a#to(s3% inC#ries were not inflicted accidentall3 since )ore than one shot was inflicted on victi)1 Case at 6ar is for ille+al (ossession of firear)s E a))#nition #nder A1 of P' 1$661 A se(arate case for ho)icide was filed a+ainst hi) E tried se(aratel3 6efore sa)e C#d+e1 :o)icide case now wKCA1 *or ille+al (ossession of firear)s5 <a/aro entered a (lea of not +#ilt31 R C fo#nd hi) +#ilt3 E sentenced hi) to recl#sion (er(et#a1

-.

WON La?ar# '#u&% #$&1 )e c#$v"cte% #+ cr".e #+ ".!&e "&&e*a& !# e "#$ $#t Fua&"+"e% )1 '#."c"%e  RA ?o1 $2&7 a)ended (rovisions of P' 1$661 a1 P' 1$665 if ho)icideK)#rder co))itted #sin+ #nlicensed firear)% death (enalt3 shall 6e i)(osed1 61 RA $2&75 if ho)icideK)#rder co))itted #sin+ #nlicensed firear)% s#ch #se shall 6e considered as an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance1 Penalt3 (rescri6ed in Sec1 1 shall 6e a((lied onl3 if no other cri)e was co))itted1  Peo(le vs1 Molina E Peo(le vs1 *eloteo were decided in this )anner1 Co#rt held that ille+al (ossession of firear) will onl3 6e an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance E no lon+er (#nisha6le as a se(arate offense1  Senate deli6erations re a)end)ent confir)s s#ch1  A)end) ents too. effect on "#l3 6% 1&&H1 Cri)e co))itted Ma3 8% 1&&11 Altho#+h (enal laws +enerall3 have (ros(ective a((lication% retroactivit3 is allowed if s#ch wo#ld 6e advanta+eo#s to acc#sed1 h#s% a)end)ents sho#ld 6e a((lied to <a/aro1  4n case at 6ar% ho)icide E ille+al (ossession of firear)s were tried se(aratel31 G3 virt#e of retroactivit3% this is no lon+er (ossi6le1  Peo(le vs1 >alde/5 0nlicensed firear) canFt 6e considered as s(ecial a++ravatin+ circ#)stance since it will #nd#l3 raise (enalt3 fro) 7 RP to 7=fold death1 his a)end)ent is not 6eneficial to acc#sed=a((ellant th#s sho#ld not 6e +iven retroactive a((lication% lest it 6e an e-=(ost facto law1

8e&%: R C decision reversed E set aside1 <a/aro ac,#itted of ille+al (ossession of firear)s1 Case dis)issed1

I ue 4 Rat"#: 1. WON - e&e.e$t #+ "&&e*a& !# e "#$ #+ +"rear. (a !r#ve$ )1 !r# ecut"#$.  @9S1 9-istence of firear) I 6e3ond dis(#te1 Recovered fro) ta)araw1 Confir)ed 63 #a/onFs testi)on31  *act that acc#sed who ownedK(ossessed +#n doesnFt have corres(ondin+ licenseK(er)it to (ossess sa)e I @es1 a1 Certification fro) *irear)s E 9-(losives Section Chief is ad)issi6le as evidence since itFs a (#6lic doc#)ent (roc#red in the line of d#t31 *iscal hi)self witnessed si+nin+ of s#ch1 !fficial who iss#ed is the (ro(er c#stodian of records re firear)s in the RP1 61 R#le 130% Sec1 77% R#les of Co#rt5 9ntries in !fficial Records I official records )ade in (erfor)ance of d#t3 63 a (#6 officer of Phil or 63 a (erson in (erfor)ance of a d#t3 s(ecificall3 enCoined 63 law are (ri)a facie evidence of facts stated1 c1 R#le 132% Sec1 2$% R#les of Co#rt5 Proof of <ac. of Record I written state)ent si+ned 63 officer havin+ c#stod3 of official record or 63 his de(#t3 that after dili+ent search no recordKentr3 of s(ecified tenor is fo#nd to e-ist in records of his ofc acco)(anied 63 certification is ad)issi6le as evidence that records of office contains no s#ch recordKentr31

/EO/LE v. CULA [32& SCRA 10& (2000)] Fact : Man#el C#la E "oselita <o(e/ were fo#nd +#ilt3 63 the R C of ra(in+ the for)erFs da#+hter% Maricel C#la% +ivin+ fistic 6lows on the sto)ach E at the (oint of a 6laded wea(on1 SC convicted the 2 of 2 cri)es or ra(e% cons(irac3 havin+ there 6een fo#nd1 I ue: Jhat is the i)(osa6le (enalt3S

8e&%: Recl#sion (er(et#a foreach co#nt of ra(e (l#s inde)nification  he C% (#rs#ant to A11 of R1A H68&% i)(osed the (enalt3 of death #(on acc#sed=a((ellant Man#el C#la% ta.in+ into acco#nt the )inorit3 of Maricel as she said to have 6een onl3 16 3rs at the ti)e of the ra(e incident% as well as the relationshi( of father E da#+hter 6etween the)1 :owever% in Peo(le vs1 "avier% SC held that inde(endent (roof of the act#al a+e of a ra(e victi) 6eco)es vital and essential so as to re)ove an iota of do#6t that the victi) is indeed #nder 1$ 3rs of a+e as to fall #nder the ,#alif3in+ circ#)stances en#)erated in R1A1 H68&1 he (rosec#tion )#st (rove wK certainl3 that the victi) was 6elow 1$ when the ra(e was co))itted in order to C#stif3 the i)(osition of the death (enalt31 he record of the case is 6ereft of an3 inde(endent evidence% s#ch as the victi)Os d#l3 certified Certificate of <ive Girth% acc#ratel3 showin+ (rivate co)(lainantOs a+e1 h#s% the ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance of )inorit3







#nder R1A1 H68& cannot 6e a((reciated in this case% and accordin+l3 the death (enalt3 cannot 6e i)(osed1 0nder Art1 338 of the RPC% as a)ended 63 R1A1 ?o1 H68&% the (enalt3 shall 6e recl#sion (er(et#a to death whenever the cri)e of ra(e is co))itted with the #se of a deadl3 wea(on or 63 two or )ore (ersons1 4n the case at 6ar% two circ#)stances are (resent% na)el35 (1) #se of deadl3 wea(on and (2) two (ersons co))ittin+ the ra(e1 Goth circ#)stances were alle+ed in the co)(laint and (roved at the trial1 4n Peo(le vs1 2arcia% the Co#rt r#led that where these 2 circ#)stances are (resent% there is no le+al 6asis to consider 1 circ#)stance as a ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance and the other as a +eneric a++ravatin+ circ#)stance% so as to i)(ose the hi+her (enalt3 of death1 0nder the law% either circ#)stance is alwa3s a ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance and cannot 6e re+arded as a +eneric a++ravatin+ circ#)stance for either is not a)on+ the a++ravatin+ circ#)stances en#)erated in Art1 17 of the RPC1 he (enalt3 of recl#sion (enalt3 to death is co)(osed of 2 indivisi6le (enalties1 A((l3in+ A63% the lesser (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a shall 6e i)(osed #(on acc#sed=a((ellants there 6ein+ no AC or MC that can 6e a((reciated in their case1

were raised in s#rrender he was still (istol=whi((ed1 Jhen he was l3in+ on the +ro#nd he was still sta66ed1 4n the testi)on3 it was also stated that there were two other (eo(le who were assistin+ the 6rothers1 here was no ris.% therefore% to the a++ressors% no ho(e for the victi) ,. WON t'ere (a ev"%e$t !re.e%"tat"#$7 #+ .ea$ )e"$* e.!&#1e% #r c"rcu. ta$ce )r#u*'t a)#ut t# a%% "*$#."$1 t# t'e $atura& e++ect #+ t'e act7 a$% #+ t'e cr".e )e"$* c#.."tte% (G t'e #++e$%er taC"$* a%va$ta*e #+ '" #++"c"a& !# "t"#$ a 'av"$* atte$%e% t'e c#.." "#$ #+ t'e cr".e.  ?o1 0nited States v1 Alvares I "#stice Ma(a r#led that5 an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance )#st 6e Nas f#ll3 (roven as the cri)e itselfD1 :e added5 NJitho#t clear and evident (roof of their (resence% the (enalt3 fi-ed 63 the law for the (#nish)ent of the cri)e cannot 6e increased1 Moreover% insofar as evident (re)editation is concerned% the record contains no evidence showin+ that the defendant had% (rior to the )o)ent of its e-ec#tion% resolved to co))it the cri)e% nor is there (roof that this resol#tion was the res#lt of )editation% calc#lation and (ersistence1  Peo(le v1 Mendova = it sho#ld not 6e N(re)editationN )erel3L it is NevidentN (re)editation  Peo(le v1 Anin% r#led that the (er(etration of a cri)inal act Nevidentl3 )ade in the heat of an+erN didnFt call for a findin+ that there was evident (re)editation1 JhatFs re,#ired is that the offense was Nthe res#lt of cool E serene reflection1N  Jhat was done 63 the 6rothers of Ca(ala% canFt 6e cate+ori/ed as fallin+ wKin the nor) of )eans 6ein+ e)(lo3ed or circ#)stances 6ein+ 6ro#+ht a6o#t to add i+no)in3 to the nat#ral effects of the act1 4t is well to stress that the3 were prompted "y their desire to avenge their "rother, he3 went after Ma+aso% the victi)1 he3 assa#lted hi)% rel3in+ on the wea(ons the3 carried wK the)1 "es#s sta66ed hi) E a((ellant Mario (istol=whi((ed hi)1 he3 did what the3 felt the3 had to do to redress a +rievance1 4t cannot 6e said% therefore% that the3 deli6eratel3 e)(lo3ed )eans to add i+no)in3 to the nat#ral effects of the act1 4t is ,#ite a((arent that all the3 were interested in was to ass#re that there 6e retri6#tion for what was done to their 6rother1 #he mere fact that appellant $ario Capalac is a mem"er of the police force certainly did not of itself %ustify that the aggravating circumstance of advantage "eing ta&en "y the offender of his pu"lic position "e considered as present. :e acted li.e a 6rother% instinctivel3 reactin+ to what was #ndo#6tedl3 a vicio#s assa#lt on his .in that co#ld ca#se the death of a loved 11 4t wo#ld 6e an affront to reason to state that at a ti)e li.e that E reactin+ as he did% he (#r(osel3 relied on his 6ein+ a (olice)an to co))it the act1 :e (istol=whi((ed the deceased 6eca#se he had his (istol wK hi)1 4t ca)e in hand3 E he acted accordin+l31 hat he was a (olice)an is of no relevance in assessin+ his cri)inal res(onsi6ilit31 WON t'e )r#t'er ca$ ava"& #+ t'e ."t"*at"$* c"rcu. ta$ce #+ "..e%"ate v"$%"cat"#$ #+ a *rave #++e$ e  @es1 RPC5 hat the act was co))itted in the i))ediate vindication of a +rave offense to the one co))ittin+ the felon3 (delito)% his s(o#se% ascendants% descendants% le+iti)ate% nat#ral% or ado(ted 6rothers or sisters% or relatives 63 affinit3 within the sa)e de+ree1  Jhat was done was an i))ediate vindication of the sta66in+ (er(etrated 63 Ma+aso on a((ellantOs 6rother Moises1  he 6rothers Ca(alac reacted in a )anner wKc for the) was necessar3 #nder the circ#)stances1 hat was a f#lfill)ent of

what fa)il3 honor E affection re,#ire1 he a++ressor who did the) wron+ sho#ldnFt +o #n(#nished1 his isnFt to C#stif3 what was done1

/EO/LE v GA/ASIN [231 SCRA H2$ (1&&7)] Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of R C 4la+an% 4sa6ela1 1&&7  Accordin+ to (rosec#tion witness Al6erto Carrido% he and Rodri+o Gallad left the ho#se of 9nten+ e((an+ at a6o#t 2 PM of !ct 6 FH& after a B(a)isaD for e((an+Fs deceased father1  "err3 Cal(ito followed the)1 Jhen the3 reached the (oint of the road facin+ the ho#se of ?ic. Sal#dares% Cal(ito was shot 63 a((ellant C1C <oreto 2a(asin with an ar)alite rifle1  Jhen Cal(ito fell on the +ro#nd% a((ellant fired )ore shots at hi)1 hereafter% acc#sed A)or Sal#dares (lanted a 122 cali6er revolver on the left hand of Cal(ito1 *a#stina Cal(ito ran to hel( her fallen h#s6and1 Cal(ito died d#e to 7 6#llet wo#nds% wKc as his 6od3 was a#to(sied 63 'r <a3#+an% were on his ri+ht ar)% ri+ht front (ortion of the head% ri+ht and left ri61  A((ellant invo.ed self=defense sa3in+ that he was iss#ed a )ission order to investi+ate a re(ort re the (resence of #nidentified ar)ed )en in Garrio San "ose% 4sa6ela1 :e was infor)ed that "err3 Cal(ito had an #nlicensed firear)1  :e (ositioned hi)self in the 3ard of ?icanor Sal#dares at the ni+ht of the B(a)isaD onl3 to see Cal(ito1  :owever% when Cal(ito was a6o#t 3 )eters awa3 fro) hi)% 2a(asin as.ed what was 6#l+in+ in his waist1 Cal(ito too. a ste( 6ac.ward% drew his firear) fro) the waist and fired twice at a((ellant1 :e )issed 6eca#se a((ellant dro((ed to the +ro#nd si)#ltaneo#sl3 firin+ his ar)alite1 8ELD: C correctl3 r#led that the cri)e of )#rder #nder A27$ RPC was co))itted1 reacher3 attended the co))ission of the cri)e1 he 2 conditions to constit#te treacher3 were (resent% to wit5 (1) e)(lo3)ent of the )eans of e-ec#tion that +ives the (erson who is attac.ed no o((ort#nit3 to defend hi)self or to retaliateL E (2) the )eans of e-ec#tion were deli6eratel3 or conscio#sl3 ado(ted1 A((ellant deli6eratel3 e-ec#ted the act in s#ch a wa3 that Cal(ito was #naware E hel(less1 his can 6e +athered fro) his act of waitin+ for the victi) 6ehind the hollow=6loc. fence of Sal#dares E shootin+ the victi) fro) his ri+ht side1 9vident (re)editation% as a +eneric a++ravatin+ circ#)stance% was (roven 63 the act was (receded 63 his cool tho#+ht E reflection1 3 other +eneric a++ravatin+ circ#)stances5 (1) i+no)in3% r#led o#t 6eca#se a#to(s3 indicated no other inC#ries wKc co#ld show that the victi) was .ic.ed 63 assailants% (2) a6#se of s#(erior stren+th% wKc was a6sor6ed 63 treacher3% and (3) ta.in+ advanta+e of (#6lic (osition1 As a )e)6er of the Phili((ine Consta6#lar3% a((ellant co))itted the cri)e wK an ar)alite wKc was iss#ed to hi) when he received the )ission order1 >ol#ntar3 s#rrender )a3 6e considered 6#t this is offset 63 the a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of ta.in+ adv of (#6lic (osition1 h#s% onl3 the +eneric a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of evident premeditation )a3 6e a((reciated a+ainst the a((ellant1 he correct (enalt3 wo#ld have 6een death acd+ to A27$ E 67 RPC were it not for the fact that s#ch (enalt3 is constit#tionall3 a6horrent1 he (ro(er (enalt3 is reclusion perpetua1 Affir)ed1

/EO/LE v. CA/ALAC [11H SCRA $H7 (1&$2)] Fact :  Se(te)6er 20% 1&H0 at aro#nd 2500 oOcloc. in the afternoon% at a licensed coc.(it in the Cit3 of 4li+an1 he a++ressor("i))3 Ma+aso)% atte)(tin+ to esca(e% was confronted 63 two 6rothers of Moises% "es#s Ca(alac% ori+inall3 incl#ded in the infor)ation 6#t now deceased% and a((ellant Mario Ca(alac1 he atte)(t of Ma+aso to 6oard a Cee( was #ns#ccessf#l% he havin+ ali+hted after two shots were fired in s#ccession1 Rnowin+ that he was co)(letel3 at the )erc3 of the two 6rothers% he raised his hands as a si+n of s#rrender% 6#t the3 were not to 6e a((eased1 :e was (istol=whi((ed 63 a((ellant Mario Ca(alac% 6ein+ dealt several 6lows on the head and the face1 After he had fallen to the +ro#nd% "es#s Ca(alac sta66ed the deceased on the chest three or to#r ti)es1 :e was 6ro#+ht to the hos(ital where he died% the ca#se% accordin+ to the coronerOs re(ort% 6ein+ Nhe)orrha+ic shoc. d#e to a wo#nd of the heart1N  Mario Ca(alac was convicted of )#rder1 he lower co#rt fo#nd that the cri)e was co))itted wK evident (re)editation E treacher31 he lower co#rt also held that a((ellant too. advanta+e of his (osition as a (olice officer E e)(lo3ed )eans or 6ro#+ht a6o#t circ#)stances wKc added i+no)in3 to the nat#ral effects of his act1 4t sentenced hi) to s#ffer the death (enalt31 I ue : 1. WON C#$ !"rac1 (a !r#ve%.  @es1 he 6rothers a((arentl3 had one (#r(ose in )ind% to aven+e the sta66in+ of Moises Ca(alac1 4n their actions the3 were i)(elled 63 a co))on (#r(ose E the acted in concert1  0S v1 Ma+ca)ot I "#stice Ma(a stressed as the essential ele)ent for cons(irac3 to e-ist the Nconc#rrence of willsN and N#nit3 of action and (#r(ose -.  WON t'ere (a treac'er1 "$v#&ve% @es1 RPC (rovides5 here is treacher3 when offender co))its an3 of the cri)es a+ainst the (erson% e)(lo3in+ )eans% )ethods% or for)s in the e-ec#tion thereof wKc tend directl3 E s(eciall3 to ins#re its e-ec#tion% wKo ris. to hi)self arisin+ fro) the defense wKc the offended (art3 )i+ht )a.e Ma+asoOs sit#ation was ho(eless1 An3 defense he co#ld have (#t #( wo#ld 6e f#tile and #navailin+1 9ven when his hands

A.

/E/ITO v. CA [21R1 ?o1 11&&72% ("#l3 $% 1&&&)] Fact Bre !#$%e$t E:  "#l3 18% 1&$&% $530 a)5 C3nthia Sa(a% wife of victi) ?oe Sa(a% was in her )o)Fs ho#se in G#ra6#d% <aoan+% ?orthern Sa)ar where she E her : were sta3in+1













So)eone on the street called on her : 6#t ?oe was still aslee( since he went to 6ed late as he is (art of loc Ganta3 Ga3an who )a.es ro#nds at ni+ht1 C3nthia saw 3 (etitionersKacc#sed Y 9strella Pe(ito1 *eli(e E 9strella are s(s E Sinonor E Sonn3 are their .ids1 She saw that the3 were ar)ed wKvario#s wea(ons s#ch as de(an+% 4ndian (ana% sa+an+at1 She was fri+htened so she ran to nei+h6orFs ho#se where she so#+ht ref#+e1 She )et her )o)=in=law% 0rdanita Sa(a1 She told her a6o#t the incident1 0rdanita went 6ac. to her ho#se E told acc#sed to leave ?oe for he didnFt do an3thin+ wron+ to the)1 he acc#sed went inside ho#se while 9strella stood 63 the door1 After wKc a co))otion was heard1 hen the 3 went o#t of the ho#se wKtheir wea(ons 6loodied1 Sinonor anno#nced that ?oe was dead1 ?oe was fo#nd dead in a (ool of 6lood on .itchen floor1 :e s#stained 1& sta6% incise E hac. wo#nds1

Fact B!et"t"#$er E:  "#l3 18% 1&$&% 6et 6 E H a1)15 ?oe was dr#n. E ar)ed wK6olo E 4ndian (ana1 :e )ade tro#6le in the nei+h6orhood wKc (ro)(ted 9strella to re(ort )atter to 6r+3 ca(t1 9s(ino who then 6ro#+ht ?oe ho)e1  After half an ho#r5 ?oe challen+ed fa)il3 of acc#sed to a fi+ht1 :e chased *eli(e who ran towards their ho#se E so ?oe didnFt (#rs#e hi) an3)ore1 :e went ho)e1  Sinonor tho#+ht dad was h#rt so he +ra66ed a 6olo% r#shed o#t of ho#se E ran after ?oe1 ?oe hit Sinonor wK(ana E str#c. hi) wK6olo on rt ar)1 Sinonor was a6le to +ra6 rt ar) of victi) wKc held 6olo E sta66ed hi) several ti)es1 ?oe tried to flee 6#t Sinnonor (#rs#ed hi) til the3 reached ?oeFs ho#se1 ?oe sta++ered inside the ho#se% fell on .itchen floor E died1 Sinonor was )et 63 his fa)il3 as he ca)e o#t wK6loodied 6olo% clothes E hands1  R C +ave credence to res(ondentFs evidence1 All 3 acc#sed were fo#nd +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of ho)icide1 A((reciated testi)onies of witnesses% (olice officer as well as )#nici(al co#rt resol#tion re incident% a#to(s3 re(ort1 *o#nd defenses of *eli(e E Sonn3 that the3 didnFt (artici(ate as incredi6le% (re(ostero#s E not convincin+1 SinonorFs (lea of self=defense not a((reciated since he 6eca)e offender E not defender and )eans e)(lo3ed was not reasona6le to (reventKre(el a++ression since 1& wo#nds were s#stained1 Plea of vol#ntar3 s#rrender not a((reciated since s#ch was not (roven in co#rt1 9strella ac,#itted1  CA5 affir)ed R C1 ?#)6er of wo#nds wo#ld show that not onl3 one (erson co))itted cri)e1 Jitnesses testified that the3 saw all 7 Pe(itos +o to the ho#se of ?oe1 2ave )#ch wei+ht to testi)on3 of A)anda Gantilo1 Golstered 63 fact that (rior to incident ?oe has challen+ed Pe(itos to a fi+ht1 Altho#+h SinonorFs desire to e-c#l(ate dad is #nderstanda6le% it canFt 6e considered where co))on desi+n E concerted action is evident1 MC of s#fficient (rovocation on (art of ?oe is considered1 I ue 4 Rat"#: 1. WON *u"&t #+ Fe&"!e 4 S#$$1 (a !r#ve$ )e1#$% rea #$a)&e %#u)t 4 "+ 1e 7 WON c#$ !"rac1 (a e ta)&" 'e%.  ?!1 A)ada Gantillo% witness for (etitioners% clai) that she her ho#se was onl3 )ore than an ar)slen+th awa3 fro) ?oeFs ho#se and their ho#ses were derived 63 a 6a)6oo fence1 She testified that she was doin+ the la#ndr3 at the ti)e the incident occ#rred1 She clai)s that she saw all 7 Pe(itos (ass 63 one )in#te after the other1 She saw that the3 all had wea(ons1 hen she heard a co))otion as if a .itchen was 6ein+ 6#tchered so she sto((ed wor. E ran towards )ain hi+hwa31 She saw Sinonor wKstains of 6lood in front of hi)1

:e ca)e o#t fr ho#se of C3nthia1 Gantilo testi corro6orated 63 2enaro e(ace% C3nthia E 0rdanita1  >enancio <a+#itan% witness for res(ondents% clai) that onl3 Sinonor E ?oe +ra((led wKo other (eo(le Coinin+ the)1 :e f#rther stated that Sinonor alone s#ccessivel3 sta66ed ?oe E (#rs#ed hi) #( to ti)e when ?oe sta++ered towards his ho#se1 :e also clai)s that he onl3 saw Sinonor co)e o#t of ?oeFs ho#se wKo *eli(e% Sonn3 or 9strella1 Corro6orated 63 Rodolfo e(ace E *eli(e% Sinonor% Sonn3 E 9strella Pe(ito1  Co#rt convinced wKres(ondentsF evidence5 11 Pa6lo P#l+a who (hoto+ra(hed victi)Fs 6od3 E was (resented as witness testified that 6olo was in ?oeFs rt hand 6el3in+ clai) that ?oe was aslee( when he was attac.ed E s#((ortin+ Pe(itoFs clai) that ?oe died while fi+htin+ wKSinonor1 21 ?oe was fo#nd in .itchen E not in livin+ roo)1 ?e+ates clai) that he was aslee( E 6olsters alle+ation that Sinonor finished hi) off as he retreated to his ho#se1 31 'r1 >er who e-a)ined victi) co#ldnFt )a.e a cate+orical state)ent re certaint3 of 1& wo#nds 6ein+ inflicted 63 different wea(ons1 She also clai)s itFs (ossi6le1 71 here are onl3 s#s(icions% s#r)ises% E +#esses on +#ilt of *eli(e E Sonn31 he3 canFt 6e fo#nd +#ilt3 si)(l3 6eca#se of these1 2#ilt )#st flow nat#rall3 fro) facts (roved E )#st 6e consistent wKall of the)1 -.  M"t"*at"$*Ga**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce . MC inco)(lete defense of relative canFt 6e a((reciated in favor of Sinonor1 9ven if 6ased on )ista.en 6elief% s#ch can 6e a((reciated onl3 if act done wo#ldFve 6een lawf#l had facts 6een as acc#sed 6elieved the) to 6e1 ?o )ore rt to attac. when #nlawf#l a++ression has ceased1 4n this case% even if ?oe .illed *eli(e% Sinonor canFt still clai) this MC 6eca#se ?oe alread3 sto((ed a6o#t $)1 fr door of Pe(itoFs residence E t#rned 6ac. to +o ho)e1 A++ression alread3 ceased to e-ist1 MC of s#fficient (rovocationKthreat on (art of offended (art3 i))ediatel3 (recedin+ act is a((reciated1 Provocation5 #nC#stKi)(ro(er cond#ct or act of offended (art3 ca(a6le of e-citin+% incitin+ or irritatin+ an3one1 S#fficient5 ade,#ate to e-cite (erson to co))it a wron+ wKc )#st 6e (ro(ortionate in +ravit31 4))ediatel3 (recede act5 no interval of ti)e 6et (rovocation 63 offended (art3 E co))ission of cri)e 63 (rovo.ed1 Provocation on ?oeFs (art5 challen+in+ Pe(itos ar)ed wK6olo E (ana and chasin+ *eli(e1 Jitnesses testified that Sinonor attac.ed ?oe shortl3 after (rovocation1 AC of dwellin+ not a((reciated since ?oe +ave (rovocation1 MC of (assion or o6f#scation disre+arded since s#fficient (rovocationKthreat MC was alread3 a((reciated1 Sho#ld 6e treated as one if 6ased on sa)e facts1

Ali(io i+le3% and stole several ite)s and on the occasion thereof% with intent to .ill% dra++ed i+le3 inside a roo)% and thereafter assa#lted% attac.ed and sta66ed the latter on the different (arts of the 6od3 which ca#sed her death shortl3 thereafter1 I ue : 1. WON /ara" # (a *u"&t1 #+ t'e !ec"a& c#.!&e5 cr".e #+ r#))er1 ("t' '#."c"%e. @es1 he essential ele)ents of the s(ecial co)(le- cri)e of Ro66er3 with :o)icide (Art1 27&% RPC) are5 (1) the ta.in+ of (ersonal (ro(ert3 with the #se of violence or inti)idation a+ainst a (ersonL (2) the (ro(ert3 th#s ta.en 6elon+s to anotherL (3) the ta.in+ is characteri/ed 63 intent to +ain or animus lucrandiL and% (7) on the occasion of the ro66er3 or 63 reason thereof% the cri)e of ho)icide which is therein #sed in a +eneric sense% was co))itted1 he evidence for the (rosec#tion showed that a((ellant and his co)(anion% with a +#n and a .nife% too. (ossession of (ersonal (ro(erties 6elon+in+ to the victi)% with intent to +ain% and on the occasion thereof% the victi) was .illed1 -. WON a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce (ere r"*'t&1 a!!rec"ate% ?o1 'wellin+ and a6#se of s#(erior stren+th )a3 6e a((reciated 6#t not disre+ard of res(ect d#e the offended (art3 on acco#nt of her se-1 D(e&&"$*. 'wellin+ a++ravates a felon3 where the cri)e was co))itted in the dwellin+ of the offended (art3% if the latter has not +iven (rovocation or if the victi) was .illed inside his ho#se1 :ere% ro66er3 was co))itted in the ho#se of the victi) witho#t (rovocation on her (art1 4n ro66er3 with violence and inti)idation a+ainst (ersons% dwellin+ is a++ravatin+ 6eca#se in this class of ro66er3% the cri)e )a3 6e co))itted witho#t the necessit3 of tres(assin+ the sanctit3 of the offended (art3Os ho#se1 'wellin+ is considered a++ravatin+ (ri)aril3 6eca#se of the sanctit3 of (rivac3 the law accords to h#)an a6ode1 :e who +oes to anotherOs ho#se to h#rt hi) or do hi) wron+ is )ore +#ilt3 than he who offends hi) elsewhere1 A)u e #+ u!er"#r tre$*t'. Jhile a6#se of s#(erior stren+th )a3 6e considered when there is an ine,#alit3 of co)(arative force 6etween the victi) and the a++ressor% there )#st% nonetheless% 6e a sit#ation of stren+th notorio#sl3 selected and )ade #se of 63 the latter in the co))ission of the cri)e1 Jhat sho#ld 6e considered is whether the a++ressors too. advanta+e of their co)6ined stren+th in order to cons#))ate the offense1 A6#se of stren+th is (resent not onl3 when the offenders enCo3 n#)erical s#(eriorit3% or there is a notorio#s ine,#alit3 of forces 6etween the victi) and the a++ressor 6#t also when the offender #ses a (owerf#l wea(on which is o#t of (ro(ortion to the defense availa6le to the offended (art31 :ere% the victi) was totall3 hel(less in the face of two (2) (er(etrators who were ar)ed with a +#n and a .nife1 D" re*ar% #+ re !ect %ue t# e5. :owever% the a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of disre+ard of the res(ect d#e to the victi) 63 reason of her se- cannot 6e a((reciated1 his a++ravatin+ circ#)stance can 6e considered onl3 in cri)es a+ainst (ersons and honor1 he s(ecial co)(le- cri)e of Ro66er3 with :o)icide is a cri)e a+ainst (ro(ert3 not a+ainst (ersons1 Moreover% nothin+ a((ears in the record that a((ellant deli6eratel3 intended to offend or ins#lt the a+e or se- of the offended (art31 Moreover% s#ch an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance wo#ld 6e a6sor6ed 63 the a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of a6#se of s#(erior stren+th1



 

8e&%: CA decision as to *eli(e E Sonn3 reversed1 he3 are ac,#itted1 Affir)ed JR Sinonor1 here 6ein+ 1 MC E no AC% (enalt3 sho#ld 6e i)(osed in its )in (eriod th#s% he is sentenced to (rision )a3or )in to recl#sion te)(oral )a- E ordered to (a3 inde)nit3 E )oral da)a+es to heirs of ?oe1

/EO/LE v. /ARAISO [31& SCRA 722 (1&&&)] Fact : Roland Paraiso was fo#nd +#ilt3 of the s(ecial co)(le- cri)e of Ro66er3 with :o)icide and sentencin+ hi) to s#ffer the (enalt3 of death1 Confederatin+ with "ohn 'oe he entered the ho#se of <olita

Ju%*.e$t: Penalt3 of reclusion perpetua to death is co)(osed of 2 indivisi6le (enalties1 A((l3in+ Art1 63% RPC% (enalt3 that sho#ld 6e i)(osed is death which is the )a-i)#) (rovided for 63 law in the a6sence of an3 )iti+atin+ circ#)stance to offset the a++ravatin+

circ#)stances of dwellin+ and a6#se of s#(erior stren+th1 hese a++ravatin+ circ#)stances need not 6e alle+ed in the infor)ation since the3 are )ere +eneric a++ravatin+ circ#)stances which have the effect of increasin+ the (enalt3 to the )a-i)#) (eriod which is death1 G#t in accordance with Sec1 28 of R1A1 H68&% a)endin+ Art1 $3 of the RPC% #(on finalit3 of this decision% certified tr#e co(ies thereof% as well as the records of this case% are forthwith forwarded to the !ffice of the President for (ossi6le e-ercise of the (ardonin+ (ower1





 /EO/LE v. RODIL [10& SCRA 30$ (1&$1)] Nature: A#to)atic Review of C#d+)ent of the Circ#it Cri)inal Co#rt Fact : *loro Rodil was fo#nd +#ilt3 of the cri)e of )#rder 63 the Circ#it Cri)inal Co#rt for the death of <t1Masana1 :er "#$ #+ t'e !r# ecut#r  A(ril 27% 1&H1 aro#nd 1500 () I Masana to+ether with *idel% <i+sa and MoCica was havin+ l#nch inside a resta#rant in front of the 4ndan+ Mar.et1 Jhile the3 were eatin+% their attention was called 63 Rodil who was o#tside 6lowin+ his whistle1 Masana% in civilian clothin+% acco)(anied 63 *idel went o#tside and as.ed Rodil% after identif3in+ hi)self as a PC officer% whether the +#n that was t#c.ed #nder his shirt had a license  4nstead if answerin+ Rodil atte)(ted to draw his +#n 6#t *idel +ra66ed the +ave and +ave it to Masana1  he three went inside the resta#rant and Masana wrote a recei(t for the +#n and he as.ed Rodil to si+n it 6#t the a((ellant ref#sed to do so1 Masana ref#sed to ret#rn the +#n to Rodil and as Masana was a6o#t to stand #( Rodil (#lled o#t his da++er and sta66ed Masana several ti)es on the chest and sto)ach ca#sin+ his death after several ho#rs1  he co)(anions of Masana too. the acc#sed into c#stod31 :er "#$ #+ t'e %e+e$ e  Rodil is clai)in+ self=defense  Rodil to+ether with his wife were eatin+ inside the resta#rant and while the3 were waitin+ for their food Masana a((roached and in,#ired whether he was a )e)6er of the Anti= s)#++lin+ 0nit1 Rodil answered in the affir)ative and Masana invited hi) to Coin hi) in his ta6le1  Rodil acce(ted the invitation1 '#rin+ their conversation Masana as.ed for identification of Rodil and the latter showed his 4'1 Masana told Rodil that his 4' was fa.e and Rodil insisted that it was +en#ine1 Masana was de)andin+ that Rodil s#rrender his 4' to hi) 6#t Rodil ref#sed1 Jhen Rodil ref#sed Masana (#lled o#t his +#n and hit the acc#sed on the head with its handle for 2 ti)es and as a res#lt 6lood +#shed o#t fro) his head and face1  Rodil (#lled o#t his da++er and sta66ed Masana and then ran o#t of the resta#rant1  Rodil went to the direction of the M#nici(al 6#ildin+ where he intended to s#rrender1 !n his was he )et the Chief of Police and he was acco)(anied to the )#nici(al 6#ildin+ and was +iven first aid treat)ent1 I ue 1.   WON e&+0%e+e$ e ca$ )e ava"&e% )1 R#%"& ?!1 Self=defense )#st 6e (roven 63 clear% s#fficient% satisfactor3 and convincin+ evidence Acc#sed )#st rel3 on the stren+th of his own evidence and not on the wea.ness of the (rosec#tion1 -.

:avin+ ad)itted the wo#ndin+ or .illin+ of the victi)% the acc#sed )#st 6e held lia6le for the cri)e #nless he esta6lishes to the satisfaction of the co#rt the fact of le+iti)ate self=defense1 Co#rt cannot (erceive how the ref#sal of the acc#sed to +ive his 4' co#ld have (rovo.ed or enra+ed the deceased to the e-tent of initiatin+ the a++ression 63 drawin+ his (istol and hittin+ the acc#sed with its 6#tt1 4t is the acc#sed who had ever3 reason to 6e resentf#l of the deceased and to 6e enra+ed after the deceased ref#sed to heed his (lea that his +#n 6e ret#rned1





Chief of Police (Panali+an) was (resent d#rin+ the incident1 Panali+an was the one who wrested the da++er fro) Rodil and the acc#sed .new hi) to 6e the chief of (olice1 Chief of (olice is considered a (#6lic a#thorit3 or a (erson in a#thorit3 for he is vested with C#risdiction or a#thorit3 to )aintain (eace and order and is s(ecificall3 d#t3 6o#nd to (rosec#te and to a((rehend violators of the law

D" 

WON t'e cr".e c#.."tte% (a .ur%er #r '#."c"%e .ere&1 #r .ur%er #r '#."c"%e c#.!&e5e% ("t' a au&t u!#$ a$ a*e$t #+ aut'#r"t1.  Cri)e co))itted was ho)icide (?o co)(le- cri)e 6#t there is a +eneral a++ravatin+ circ#)stance)  M#rder I it was esta6lished 63 the (rosec#tion that d#rin+ the sta66in+ incident% a((ellant s#ddenl3 and witho#t +ivin+ the victi) a chance to defend hi)self% sta66ed the latter several ti)es with a da++er% inflictin+ )ortal wo#nds1  ?o treacher3 I assailant E victi) was face to face1 Attac. wasnFt treachero#s 6eca#se the victi) was a6le to ward off the sa)e wK his hand1 *orce of wardin+ off the attac. was so stron+ that the acc#sed 6#)( his head on a ta6le near63% ca#sin+ inC#ries to hi)1 *ailed to show that the acc#sed )ade an3 (re(aration to .ill his victi) so as to ins#re the co))ission of the cri)e% )a.in+ it at the sa)e ti)e (ossi6le or hard for the victi) to defend hi)self or retaliate1  reacher3 e-ists when the offender co))its an3 of the cri)es a+ainst the (erson e)(lo3in+ )eans% )ethods% or for)s in the e-ec#tion thereof which tend to directl3 and s(eciall3 to ins#re its e-ec#tion% wKo ris. to hi)self arisin+ fro) the defense which the offended (art3 )i+ht )a.e1  4nfor)ation does not alle+e the fact that the acc#sed then .new that% 6efore or at the ti)e of the assa#lt% the victi) was an a+ent of a (erson in a#thorit31  S#ch .nowled+e )#st 6e e-(ressl3 and s(ecificall3 averred in the infor)ationL otherwise% in the a6sence of s#ch alle+ation% the re,#ired .nowled+e wo#ld onl3 6e a((reciated as a *e$er"c a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce1  4t is essential that the acc#sed )#st have .nowled+e that the (erson attac.ed was a (erson in a#thorit3 or his a+ent in the e-ercise of his d#ties% 6eca#se the acc#sed )#st have the intention to offend% inC#re% or assa#lt the offended (art3 as a (erson in a#thorit3 or a+ent of a (erson in a#thorit31 WON t'e AC %" re*ar% #+ ra$C '#u&% )e a!!rec"ate%  @9S1 Jhenever there is a difference in social condition 6etween the offender and the offended (art3% this a++ravatin+ circ#)stance so)eti)es is (resent1  Mesana identified hi)self as a PC officer and the acc#sed is )erel3 a )e)6er of the Anti=S)#++lin+ 0nit and therefore inferior 6oth in ran. and social stat#s1  Ran. I refers to a hi+h social (osition or standin+  Cases wherein the a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of disre+ard of ran. was a((reciated a1 Peo(le vs1 Genito I cler. )#rdered assistant chief of the (ersonnel transaction division 61 Peo(le vs1 orres I )#rder of Col1 Sal+ado and inC#ries to 2en1 Castaneda c1 Peo(le vs1 >aleriano I )#rder of district C#d+e

 

e$t: Me&e$c"#08errera Conte)(t of% or which ins#lt to (#6lic a#thorities to 6e considered as a++ravatin+% it is essential that5 o Cri)e is co))itted in the (resence of a (#6lic a#thorit3% not a )ere a+ent of the a#thorities o P#6lic a#thorit3 is en+a+ed in the e-ercise of his f#nctions and is not the (erson a+ainst who) the cri)e is co))itted1 Masana is not a (#6lic a#thorit3 nor a (erson in a#thorit3 he is a )ere a+ent of a (erson in a#thorit3 'isre+ard of the res(ect d#e to ran. o here )#st 6e a difference in social condition of the offender and the offended (art3 o !ffender and offended are of the sa)e ran. the a++ravatin+ circ#)stance does not a((l3 o 'ifference in ran. 6et a lie#tenant and officer of anti=s)#++lin+ #nit is not s#ch of a de+ree as to C#stif3 consideration of disres(ect of ran. d#e to the offended (art31

/EO/LE v. DANIEL [$6 SCRA 811 (1&H$)] Nature: A((eal fro) C#d+)ent of C*4 Ga+#io Cit3% Gel)onte1 FACTS: 13=3r old Mar+arita Palen+ filed co)(laint a+ainst A)ado 'aniel alias BA)ado AtoD for the cri)e of ra(e1 !n Se(t 20% 1&68% Mar+arita% a native of Mt Province% arrived in Ga+#io Cit3 fro) #6la3 in a 'an+wa 6#s1 She was then en ro#te to her 6oardin+ ho#se in 2#isad as she was a hi+h school st#dent at the Ga+#io 9astern :i+h School1 Jhile she was waitin+ inside the 6#s% the acc#sed 'aniel ca)e and started )olestin+ her 63 in,#irin+ her na)e and +ettin+ hold of her 6a+1 She did not allow the latter and instead called the attention of the 6#s driver and the cond#ctor 6#t was )erel3 shr#++ed 63 the)1 4t see)ed that the3 were also afraid of the acc#sed1 'es(ite the rain% she left the 6#s and went to ride in a Cee( (ar.ed so)e 100)eters awa31 he acc#sed followed her and rode and sat 6eside her1 Jhen Mar+arita ali+hted in 2#isad% she was a+ain followed 63 the acc#sed1 Reachin+ her 6oardin+ ho#se% she o(ened the door and was a6o#t to close it when the acc#sed dashed in and closed the door 6ehind hi)1 :e (#lled a da++er $ inches lon+ and threatened her sa3in+% B4f 3o# will tal.% 4 will .ill 3o#1D Geca#se of her fear% Mar+arita fell silent1 She was then forced to lie down wK the acc#sed (lacin+ a hand.erchief in her )o#th and holdin+ a da++er to her nec.1 :er atte)(ts to flee was to no avail as she was onl3 7 ft $ inches tall E &8 l6s while 'aniel was 8 ft H inches tall and wei+hed 126 l6s1 he acc#sed was s#ccessf#l in havin+ carnal .nowled+e of Mar+arita1 hereafter she lost conscio#sness1 Jhen she recovered% 'aniel had alread3 +one1 *or his defense% 'aniel asserts that he and Mar+arita have .nown each other since 1&63 and this was in fact the 2 nd ti)e he had carnal .nowled+e of her1 Also% he alle+es that he (ro)ised to )arr3 Mar+arita and was act#all3 s#r(rised the she filed the co)(laint a+ainst hi)1 Medico=<e+al re(ort indicated that Mar+arita was a vir+in 6efore the incident co)(lained of1

,.

8ELD: he cri)e co))itted 63 'aniel is ra(e wK the #se of a deadl3 wea(on wK the a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of havin+ 6een co))itted in the dwellin+ of the offended (art31 Altho#+h Mar+arita was )erel3 rentin+ a 6eds(ace in a 6oardin+ ho#se% her roo) constit#ted for all intents and (#r(oses a Bdwellin+D as the ter) is #sed in Art 17 (3) RPC1 4t is not necessar3% #nder the law% that the victi) owns the (lace where he lives or dwells1 Ge he a lessee% a 6oarder% or a 6ed= s(acer% the (lace is his ho)e the sanctit3 of wKc the law see.s to (rotect and #(hold1 he correct (enalt3 is death (#rs#ant to Aft 338 RPC1 :owever% for lac. of the necessar3 n#)6er of votes% the (enalt3 ne-t lower in de+ree is to 6e a((lied1 'aniel is sentenced to s#ffer the (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a and ordered to inde)nif3 Mar+arita Palen+ 63 wa3 or )oral da)a+es of PhP12R1 /EO/LE v. ;A9E> [301 SCRA 27$ (1&&&)] Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of the R C of 0rdaneta% Pan+asinan Fact :  Jilfredo GaXe/ was fo#nd 63 the R C to 6e +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of (arricide for the .illin+ of his father% Gernardo GaXe/% and sentenced hi) to s#ffer the (enalt3 of death1  Acc#sed was livin+ with in his (arentsO ho#se1 !n A#+#st 17% 1&&7% his sisters% 9lvira GaXe/=G#sta)ante and 9)elinda GaXe/=Antiado ca)e to the ho#se 6eca#se their father co)(lained that the acc#sed )ade tro#6le whenever dr#n.1  he3 were disc#ssin+ the (lan for (#ttin+ #( the acc#sed in another ho#se or slee(in+ ,#arters1 Afterwards% the acc#sed% who loo.ed dr#n. 6eca#se he was red in the face% ran into the .itchen% +ot 2 .nives% went into his fatherOs roo) and sta66ed hi)1 9lvira tried to ta.e awa3 the .nives 6#t he l#n+ed at her and sta66ed he1 9)elinda also tried to sto( hi)1 :e chased her while 9lvira loc.ed herself in their fatherOs roo)1 After the acc#sed had left% she r#shed their father to the hos(ital 6#t he was alread3 dead1  he acc#sed entered a (lea of insanit31  9lvira testified that the acc#sed had 6een sta3in+ in their fatherOs ho#se for 7 3ears after the acc#sed se(arated fro) his wifeL that he was confined at the Gic#tan Reha6ilitation Center for addiction to +asoline and was dischar+edL that he was also treated at the Ga+#io 2eneral :os(ital for addiction to +asoline% andL that he had not shown an3 indication that he was cra/31 'r1 2erona 444 of the ?CM: (?ational center for Mental :ealth) testified that acc#sed was ad)itted to the ?CM: 20 da3s after the cri)eL that the acc#sed was s#fferin+ fro) schi/o(hrenia% descri6ed as a )ental disorder characteri/ed 63 tho#+ht dist#r6ances% hall#cination% s#s(icio#sness% and deterioration in areas of wor.% social relations and self=careL that schi/o(hrenia can 6e ca#sed 63 #se of s#6stances (inhalin+ +asoline and alcoholis))L that he co#ld not sa3 whether the acc#sed was insane at the ti)e he co))itted the cri)e1  Marina 2a6el=Gane/% )other of the acc#sed% testified that he had 6een confined for )ore than a 3ear at the Gic#tan reha6 CenterL that he was also treated at the Ga+#io 2eneral hos(italL that after .illin+ his father% he was confined at the Mandal#3on+ )ental hos(ital for treat)entL that his wife left hi) and he 6la)ed his in=laws for his )arital tro#6lesL that he resorted to +asoline to for+et his (ro6le)s% andL that he was not a dr#n.ard1  he trial co#rt fo#nd hi) +#ilt3 of (arricide with the a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of dwellin+ and ha6it#al into-ication and sentenced hi) to s#ffer the (enalt3 of death I ue :

1.

WON 'e (a "$ a$e at t'e t".e #+ t'e c#.." "#$ #+ t'e cr".e a$% '#u&% )e e5e.!t +r#. cr"."$a& &"a)"&"t1 u$%er Art. 1- #+ t'e R/C.  ?!1 Acc#sed )#st (rove that he was co)(letel3 de(rived of reason when he .illed his father in order to 6e considered e-e)(t fro) cri)inal lia6ilit3  4n Peo(le vs1 *or)i+ones5 Nit is necessar3 that there 6e a co)(lete de(rivation of intelli+ence in co))ittin+ the actL that the acc#sed 6e de(rived of reasonL that there 6e no res(onsi6ilit3 for his own actsL that he acts witho#t the least discern)entL that there 6e a co)(lete a6sence of (ower to discern111insanit3 at the ti)e of the co))ission of the act sho#ld a6sol#tel3 de(rive a (erson of intelli+ence or freedo) of will% 6eca#se )ere a6nor)alit3 of his )ental fac#lties does not e-cl#de i)(#ta6ilit31N Peo(le vs1 Rafanan% "r5 N*or)i+oens esta6lished 2 distin+#isha6le tests5 (a) the test of co+nition111and (6) the test of volition11G#t o#r caselaw shows co))on reliance on the test of co+nition% rather than on a test relatin+ to Ofreedo) of the will1ON  G#rden to (rove his insanit3 at the ti)e of the co))ission of the act rests on the defense1 G#t he was not a6le to (rove 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t his insanit3 at the ti)e i))ediatel3 (recedin+ the .illin+ or at the ver3 )o)ent of the .illin+1 9vidence )erel3 consisted of the testi)on3 of his )other re+ardin+ his treat)ents1 he testi)on3 of 'r1 2erona 444 is inconcl#sive as to whether the acc#sed was insane at the ti)e i))ediatel3 (recedin+ the .illin+ or at the ver3 )o)ent of the .illin+1 :e co#ld not have testified to this effect% considerin+ that he treated the acc#sed after the acc#sed was confine at the ?CM:1 WON t'ere e5" t t'e a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce #+ "$t#5"cat"#$ a$% %(e&&"$* "$ t'e c#.." "#$ #+ t'e cr".e  ?!1 'wellin+ cannot 6e considered a++ravatin+ 6eca#se acc#sed and his father were livin+ in the sa)e ho#se where the cri)e was co))itted1 he rationale for considerin+ dwellin+ as an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance is the violation 63 the offender of the sanctit3 of the ho)e of the victi) 63 tres(assin+ therein to co))it the cri)e1 he reason is entirel3 a6sent in this case1 Re+ardin+ the a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of into-ication% it has not 6een shown that it is ha6it#al or intentional as re,#ired 63 Art 18 of the RPC1 9ven ass#)in+ that the acc#sed was dr#n. at the ti)e he co))itted the cri)e% it was not shown that he is a ha6it#al and e-cessive drin.er or that he intentionall3 +ot dr#n.1 ?either can into-ication 6e )iti+atin+ 6eca#se there is no showin+ that he acc#sed was so dr#n. that his will (ower was i)(aired or that he co#ld not co)(rehend the wron+f#lness of his acts1 WON t'e tr"a& c#urt *rave&1 erre% "$ ".!# "$* t'e %eat' !e$a&t1 u!#$ t'e accu e% "$ tea% #+ rec&u "#$ !er!etua #$ t'e a u.!t"#$ t'at 'e (a a$e at t'e t".e #+ C"&&"$*. ?!1 0nder RA H68&% the (enalt3 for (arricide is recl#sion (er(et#a to death1 Since in this case there was neither a++ravatin+ nor )iti+atin+ circ#)stances% the lesser (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a sho#ld 6e i)(osed1

-.

Fact :  "#lian !rtillano and Martin Mandolado% a((ellants% as well as Conrado 9rinada and Anacleto Si)on% were on a 6#s 6o#nd for Midsa3a(% ?orth Cota6ato1 All 7 were traineesKdraftees of A*P  he3 ali+hted at the 6#s ter)inal in Midsa3a(1 Gein+ all in #nifor)% ar)ed E 6elon+in+ to the sa)e )ilitar3 o#tfit% the3 +ot ac,#ainted E decided to drin. 9SV r#)% at the said 6#s ter)inal1  After drin.in+ for a6o#t an ho#r% Mandolado +ot dr#n. and went inside the (#6lic )ar.et1 S#6se,#entl3% he ret#rned% +ra66ed his 1 30 cali6er )achine +#n and started firin+1 :is co)(anions tried to diss#ade hi) 6#t he nonetheless contin#ed firin+ his +#n1  Sensin+ tro#6le% Conrado and Anacleto ran awa3% hailed and 6oarded a (assin+ *ord *iera with so)e (assen+ers on 6oard1 A((ellants followed and 6oarded also the vehicle and forced the driver of the *ord *iera to 6rin+ the) to the Midsa3a( crossin+1 All the while% Mandolado was harassin+ the driver and firin+ his +#n1  he3 for off at the Midsa3a( crossin+ and waited for a ride1 Jhen :er)ini+ildo enorio% drivin+ a (rivatel3 owned Cee( where ?olasco Mendo/a was on 6oard% (assed 63 the 7 6oarded the Cee(1 he whole ti)e% Mandolado was still ca#sin+ tro#6le and firin+ his +#n1  0(on learnin+ that the Cee( was 6o#nd for Cota6ato Cit3 and not Pi.it% ?orth Cota6ato% a((ellant Mandolado +ot an+r3% Ncoc.edN his +#n and ordered the driver to sto(1 Jhile the Cee( was co)in+ to a f#ll sto(% Conrado and Anacleto i))ediatel3 C#)(ed off the Cee( and ran towards their detach)ent ca)(1  A((ellants also +ot off the Cee( 6#t then Mandolado fired his 130 cali6er )achine +#n at and hit the occ#(ants of the Cee(1 A((ellant !rtillano li.ewise% fired his ar)alite% not at the occ#(ants of said Cee( 6#t downwards hittin+ the +ro#nd1  hen the3 ran awa3 fro) the scene and 6oarded another vehicle and went in so )an3 (laces #ntil the3 were a((rehended1  Mandolado was fo#nd +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of )#rder ,#alified 63 treacher3% evident (re)editation and a6#se of s#(erior stren+th while !rtillano was (enali/ed 63 i)(rison)ent for 6ein+ an accessor3 I ue : 1. WON t'e a)u e #+ u!er"#r tre$*t' .a1 )e a!!rec"ate%.  ?!1 Altho#+h the SC a((reciated the (resence of treacher3% it did not a((reciate a++ravatin+ circ#)stances of evident (re)editation and the #se of s#(erior stren+th1 Jhile it )a3 6e tr#e that a soldier in the A*P is dee)ed as one who holds (#6lic (osition% there is no (ers#asive showin+ that herein a((ellants 6ein+ draftees of the Ar)3% in f#ll )ilitar3 #nifor) and carr3in+ their hi+h=(owered firear)s% facilitated the co))ission of the cri)es the3 were char+ed1  4t )a3 6e conceded that as draftees% the acc#sed co#ld easil3 hitch hi.e with (rivate vehicles% as in the case of the deceased enorioOs owner=t3(e Cee(% 6#t there is no evidence that when the3 sto((ed the Cee( the acc#sed alread3 intended to shoot the occ#(ants of the vehicle1  Peo(le v1 PantoCa5 here is nothin+ to show that the a((ellant too. advanta+e of his 6ein+ a ser+eant in the Phili((ine Ar)3 in order to co))it the cri)es1 he )ere fact that he was in fati+#e #nifor) and had an ar)3 rifle at the ti)e is not s#fficient to esta6lish that he )is#sed his (#6lic (osition in the co))ission of the cri)es 111  here co#ld 6e no a6#se of confidence as evidence on record showed lac. of confidence 63 the victi)s to the a((ellants% that this confidence was a6#sed% and that the a6#se of the confidence facilitated co))ission of cri)es1

,.

Ju%*.e$t: the decision of the R C is A**4RM9' with the M!'4*4CA 4!? that the acc#sed=a((ellant is sentenced to s#ffer the (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a

/EO/LE v. MANDOLADO [123 SCRA 12$ (1&$3)]









4n order that a6#se of confidence 6e dee)ed as a++ravatin+% it is necessar3 that Nthere e-ists a relation of tr#st and confidence 6etween the acc#sed and one a+ainst who) the cri)e was co))itted and the acc#sed )ade #se of s#ch a relationshi( to co))it the cri)e1N 4t is also essential that the confidence 6etween the (arties )#st 6e i))ediate and (ersonal s#ch as wo#ld +ive that acc#sed so)e advanta+e or )a.e it easier for hi) to co))it the cri)eL that s#ch confidence was a )eans of facilitatin+ the co))ission of the cri)e% the c#l(rit ta.in+ advanta+e of the offended (art3Os 6elief that the for)er wo#ld not a6#se said confidence 4n the instant case% there is a6sol#tel3 no showin+ of an3 (ersonal or i))ediate relationshi( #(on which confidence )i+ht rest 6etween the victi)s and the assailants who had C#st )et each other then1 Conse,#entl3% no confidence and a6#se thereof co#ld have facilitated the cri)es1 Si)ilarl3% there co#ld have 6een no o6vio#s #n+ratef#lness in the co))ission of the cri)e for the si)(le reason that the re,#isite tr#st of the victi)s #(on the acc#sed (rior to the cri)inal act and the 6reach thereof as conte)(lated #nder Art1 17(7) RPC are )anifestl3 lac.in+ or non=e-istent1 4n all li.elihood% the acc#sed Ar)3 )en in their #nifor)s and holdin+ their hi+h=(owered firear)s cowed the victi)s into 6oardin+ their Cee( for a ride at )achine +#n (oint which certainl3 is no so#rce of +ratef#lness or a((reciation1 WON Ort"&&a$# " a$ acce #r1 ?!1 "#lian !rtillano sho#ld 6e convicted% not as an accessor3% 6#t as an acco)(lice1 An acco)(lice coo(erates in the e-ec#tion of the offense 63 (revio#s or si)#ltaneo#s acts% (rovided he has no direct (artici(ation in its e-ec#tion or does not force or ind#ce others to co))it it% or his coo(eration is not indis(ensa6le to its acco)(lish)ent (Art1 1$% RPC)1 Peo(le vs1 Silvestre5 o hold hi) lia6le% #(on the other hand% as an acco)(lice% it )#st 6e shown that he had .nowled+e of the cri)inal intention of the (rinci(al% which )a3 6e de)onstrated 63 (revio#s or si)#ltaneo#s acts which contri6#tes to the co))ission of the offense as aid thereto whether (h3sical or )oral Peo(le vs1 a)a3o5 O4t is an essential condition to the e-istence of co)(licit3% not onl3 that there sho#ld 6e a relation 6etween the acts done 63 the (rinci(al and those attri6#ted to the (erson char+ed as acco)(lice% 6#t it is f#rther necessar3 that the latter% with .nowled+e of the cri)inal intent% sho#ld coo(erate with the intention of s#((l3in+ )aterial or )oral aid in the e-ec#tion of the cri)e in an efficacio#s wa31 4n the case at 6ar% !rtillano% 63 his acts% showed .nowled+e of the cri)inal desi+n of Mandolado1 4n other words% !rtillanoOs si)#ltaneo#s acts s#((lied% if not )aterial% )oral aid in the e-ec#tion of the cri)e in an efficacio#s wa31 !rtillanoOs (resence served to enco#ra+e Mandolado% the (rinci(al% or to increase the odds a+ainst the victi)s



 

 

-. 



Canal1 he3 6ro#+ht Ma++ie to Swan.3 :otel1 "ose% A,#ino% Pineda and Canal too. t#rns ra(in+ Ma++ie1 he3 decided to leave her on a s(ot in front of the *ree Press G#ildin+ not far fro) 9(ifanio de los Santos Aven#e near Channel 8 to )a.e it a((ear% accordin+ to the)% that the co)(lainant had C#st co)e fro) the st#dio1 he3 threatened that she wo#ld 6e do#sed with acid if she wo#ld infor) an3one of the incident1 Jhen she was inside the ca6 and alone with the driver% Mi+#el *1 Ca)(os% she 6ro.e down and cried1 She .e(t as.in+ the driver if a car was followin+ the)L and each ti)e the driver answered her in the ne+ative Jhen she reached ho)e she infor)ed her )other of the incident A((ellant Canal and Pineda e-ec#ted swore to se(arate state)ents on the da3 of their arrest 11 CaXal confir)ed the infor)ation (revio#sl3 +iven 63 "ose that the fo#r of the) waited for Miss 'e la Riva to co)e down fro) the AGS St#dio% and that the3 had (lanned to a6d#ct and ra(e her1 A((ellant CaXal ad)itted that all fo#r of the) (artici(ated in the co))ission of the cri)e% 6#t he wo#ld )a.e it a((ear that insofar as he was concerned the co)(lainant 3ielded her 6od3 to hi) on condition that he wo#ld release her 21 Pineda e-ec#ted a state)ent statin+ that he and his other three co)(anions we(t to the AGS St#dio% and that% on learnin+ that Miss 'e la Riva was there% the3 )ade (lans to wait for her and to follow her1 :e ad)itted that his +ro#( followed her car and snatched her and too. her to the Swan.3 :otel1 :e wo#ld )a.e it a((ear% however% that the co)(lainant vol#ntaril3 acceded to havin+ se-#al interco#rse with hi)1 "ose% A,#ino% Canal (leaded not +#ilt3 while Pineda (leaded +#ilt31

the )ost lo+ical (erson in who) a da#+hter wo#ld confide the tr#th1 ,. WON t'e e5tra<u%"c"a& tate.e$t " a%." ")&e.  @9S1 he acc#sed contends that sec#red fro) the) 63 force and inti)idation% and that the incri)inatin+ details therein were s#((lied 63 the (olice investi+ators1  he state)ents were +iven in the (resence of several (eo(le E s#6scri6ed E sworn to 6efore the Cit3 *iscal of VC% to who) neither of the aforesaid a((ellants inti)ated the #se of inordinate )ethods 63 the (olice1 he3 are re(lete wK details which co#ld hardl3 6e .nown to the (oliceL E altho#+h it is s#++ested that the a#thorities co#ld have sec#red s#ch details fro) their vario#s infor)ers% no evidence at all was (resented to esta6lish the tr#th of s#ch alle+ation1  9ven disre+ardin+ the in=c#stod3 state)ents of "ose and Canal% Je find that the )ass of evidence for the (rosec#tion on record will s#ffice to sec#re the conviction of the two1 WON t'ere (a a ." tr"a& +#r /"$e%a. ?!1 Pineda contends that there was a )istrial res#ltin+ in +ross )iscarria+e of C#stice1 :e contends that 6eca#se the char+e a+ainst hi) and his co=a((ellants is a ca(ital offense E the a)ended co)(laint cited a++ravatin+ circ#)stances% which% if (roved% wo#ld raise the (enalt3 to death% it was the d#t3 of the co#rt to insist on his (resence d#rin+ all sta+es of the trial1 he co#rt held that (lea of +#ilt3 is )iti+atin+% at the sa)e ti)e it constit#tes an ad)ission of all the )aterial facts alle+ed in the infor)ation% incl#din+ the a++ravatin+ circ#)stances% and it )atters not that the offense is ca(ital% for the ad)ission ((lea of +#ilt3) covers 6oth the cri)e and its attendant circ#)stances ,#alif3in+ andKor a++ravatin+ the cri)e it was not inc#)6ent #(on the trial co#rt to receive his evidence% )#ch less to re,#ire his (resence in co#rt1 4t wo#ld 6e different had a((ellant Pineda re,#ested the co#rt to allow hi) to (rove )iti+atin+ circ#)stances% for then it wo#ld 6e the 6etter (art of discretion on the (art of the trial co#rt to +rant his re,#est1

A. 









I ue 1. WON t'e accu e% (ere .#t"vate% )1 &e(% %e "*$ . YES  @9S1 "ose% A,#ino and CaXal den3 havin+ had an3thin+ to do with the a6d#ction of Miss 'e la Riva1 he3 (oint to Pineda (who entered a (lea of +#ilt3) as the sole a#thor thereof% 6#t the3 +enero#sl3 contend that even as to hi) the act was (#r+ed at an3 taint of cri)inalit3 63 the co)(lainantOs s#6se,#ent consent to (erfor) a stri(tease show for a fee% a circ#)stance which% it is clai)ed% ne+ated the e-istence of the ele)ent of lewd desi+n1  his testi)on3 of Ms1 'e la Riva% whose evidentiar3 wei+ht has not in the least 6een overthrown 63 the defense% )ore than s#ffices to esta6lish the cri)es char+ed in the a)ended co)(laint1 he clai)s of the acc#sed that the3 were not )otivated 63 lewd desi+ns )#st 6e reCected as a6sol#tel3 witho#t fact#al 6asis1 -.   WON t'e accu e% ra!e M . %e &a R"va. @9S1 "ose% A,#ino and Canal contend that the a6sence of se)en in the co)(lainantOs va+ina dis(roves the fact of ra(e1 'r1 Grion stated that se)en is not #s#all3 fo#nd in the va+ina after three da3s fro) the last interco#rse% es(eciall3 if the s#6Cect has do#ched herself within that (eriod he a6sence of s(er)ato/oa does not dis(rove the cons#))ation of ra(e% the i)(ortant consideration 6ein+% not the e)ission of se)en% 6#t (enetration1 Jhen the victi) +ot ho)e she i))ediatel3 told her )other that the fo#r ra(ed her1 he state)ent was )ade 63 the co)(lainant to her )other who% in cases of this nat#re was

H.

WON t'e e$#r.#u !u)&"c"t1 #+ t'e ca e a++ecte% t'e %ec" "#$ #+ t'e tr"a& c#urt.  ?!1 he a((ellants too. notice of the enor)o#s (#6licit3 that attended the case fro) the start of investi+ation to the trial1  "ose hi)self ad)its in his 6rief that the rial "#d+e Nhad not 6een infl#enced 63 adverse and #nfair co))ents of the (ress% #n)indf#l of the ri+hts of the acc#sed to a (res#)(tion of innocence and to fair trial1N WON a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce (ere !re e$t. @9S1 ?i+htti)e% a((ellants havin+ (#r(osel3 so#+ht s#ch circ#)stance to facilitate the co))ission of these cri)es A6#se of s#(erior stren+th% the cri)e havin+ 6een co))itted 63 the fo#r a((ellants in cons(irac3 with one another (Cf1 Peo(le vs1 'e 2#/)an% et al1% 81 Phil1% 108% 113) 4+no)in3% since the a((ellants in orderin+ the co)(lainant to e-hi6it to the) her co)(lete na.edness for a6o#t ten )in#tes% 6efore ra(in+ her% 6ro#+ht a6o#t a circ#)stance which tended to )a.e the effects of the cri)e )ore h#)iliatin+ #se of a )otor vehicle1 WON t'e ".!# "t"#$ #+ +#ur %eat' !e$a&t1 " va&"%.

J.  

8e&%: Mandolado is +#ilt3 of )#rder ,#alified 63 treacher3 while !rtillano is convicted as an acco)(lice to the cri)e of )#rder



/EO/LE v. JOSE [3H SCRA 780 (1&H1)] Nature: A((eal fro) and a#to)atic rev#e of a decision of Ri/al C*4  "#ne 26% 1&6H I Ma+dalena de la Riva was a6d#cted o#tside her own 63 "ai)e "ose% 9d+ardo A,#ino% Gasilio Pineda and Ro+elio



 D.





@9S1 he S#(re)e Co#rt held that in view of the e-istence of cons(irac3 a)on+ the acc#sed and of its findin+ re+ards the nat#re and n#)6er of cri)es co))itted% as well as the (resence of a++ravatin+ circ#)stances% fo#r death (enalties can 6e i)(osed1

of PhP80R1 Gein+ a sin+le indivisi6le (enalt3% recl#sion (er(et#a is i)(osed re+ardless of an3 )iti+atin+ or a++r circ#)stances1

/EO/LE v. MOLINA [337 SCRA 700 (2000)] Nature: A#to)atic Review of R C A6ra decision • Roland Molina was fo#nd +#ilt3 of )#rder for .illin+ "ose(h Gon=ao E fr#strated )#rder for sta66in+ one An+elito Gon=ao1 :e was sentenced to death1 • <ater discovered that Molina was char+ed E convicted of atte)(ted ho)icide (revio#sl3 (!ct1 &% 1&&6)1 • R C decision5 consideredKa((reciated AC of recidivis) E +ave credence to (rosec#tionFs evidence1 B/r# ecut"#$E March 7 E 8% 1&&6 6et1 12 E 1 in the )ornin+5 • 6ros "ose(h E An+elito Gon=ao% wKco#sin 'ann3 >idal attended town fiesta of <a+an+ilan+ E were on their wa3 ho)e1 he3 were +oin+ to the +ate of the A6ra State 4nstit#te of Sciences E echnolo+3 (AS4S ) to +et ride ho)e1 • he3 heard so)e6od3 sho#t B.#6aZD referrin+ to "ose(h who was indeed a h#nch6ac.1 he3 as.ed the (ersons (resent wKMolina% who a)on+ the) sho#ted B.#6aZD 6#t none answered1 • Molina introd#ced hi)self E the Gon=aos E >idal said that the3 will 6e on their wa3 ho)e1 • Jhen the 3 were a6o#t to t#rn aro#nd to +o on their wa3% Molina sta66ed "ose(h at the 6ac.1 An+elito went to the aid of his 6ro 6#t was li.ewise sta66ed 63 Molina at the 6ac.1 Molina E co)(an3 fled1 • Police arrived E the 2 were 6ro#+ht to the hos(ital 6#t "ose(h was declared dead on arrival while An+elitio was onl3 saved thr# e-(ert )edical attendance of 'r1 Seares1 • Molina denies (artici(ation E 6la)ed incident on so)e6od3 else1 • Jitnesses (resented5 'r1 Seares% SP07 Ra6aCa% 'ann3 >idal E An+elito Gon=ao E 'r1 'ic.enson1 BDe+e$ eE March 7% 1&&65 • Molina E <oren/o eCero% 6oth fro) Pa+(a+at(at% a3#)% A6ra% went to <an+an+ilan+% A6ra to attend the fiesta1 • & ()5 watched /ar/#ela at the AS4S a)(hitheater • 10=12 ()5 the3 went to station of (#6lic vehicles to +et a ride for ho)e • Jhile the3 were descendin+ the )ain +ate of AS4S % the3 )et 3 dr#n. (ersons% E when he told eCero% BG#)a6a%D the 3 )isheard it as B.#6a1D he3 denied callin+ "ose(h B.#6aD and the3 introd#ced the)selves E as.ed who the 3 were1 he 3 didnFt answer E instead s#rro#nded Molina E eCero1 "ose(h tried to draw a 6olo% so Molina (ic.ed #( a stone E threw it at "ose(h who was not hit1 Molina then ran awa3 6#t he was overta.en 63 a taller )an who tried to sta6 hi)1 "ose(h arrived too E he li.ewise tried to sta6 Molina1 :e was a6le to r#n awa31 :e learned later on when he E eCero were alread3 on the fair +ro#nds that so)e6od3 was h#rt1 he3 went ho)e s#6se,#entl31 • esti)onies of Molina E "ovito ?adarisa3 (resented1 ?adarisa3 clai)ed that it was eCero who sta66ed "ose(h1 I ue 4 Rat"#: 1. WON TC err#$e#u &1 *ave cre%e$ce t# !r# ecut"#$3 +act .  ?!1 ?o reason to dist#r6 R C eval#ation1 An+elito E >idalFs testi)onies were consistent E cate+orical1 >idal was even #nwaverin+ in (ositivel3 identif3in+ Molina as the one who sta66ed "ose(h1 -.

 Positive identification of An+elito% one of the victi)s% de)olishes MolinaFs denial E i)(#tation of cri)e to another (erson1 9s(eciall3 since i)(#tation was onl3 heard d#rin+ his testi)on3 E was not raised d#rin+ investi+ation1 his is nothin+ 6#t a ne+ative E self=servin+ evidence #ndeservin+ of wei+ht in law1 WON treac'er1 '#u&% )e a!!rec"ate%.  @9S1 2 conditions5 )eans of e-ec#tion +ives attac.ed no o((ort#nit3 to defend hi)self or retaliate and )eans of e-ec#tion was deli6eratel3 E conscio#sl3 ado(ted1  >idal E An+elito has (roven that 2 conditions were )et1 he3 were a6o#t to leave when Molina attac.ed "ose(h1 Goth An+elito E "ose(h were hit at the 6ac.1 he3 were ca#+ht off +#ard1  *or this AC to 6e a((reciated% attac. )#st 6e s#dden E #ne-(ected renderin+ victi) #na6le E #n(re(ared to defend hi)self d#e to s#ddenness E severit3 of attac.1 4t )eans ado(tion of wa3s that )ini)i/e or ne#trali/e an3 resistance wKc )a3 6e (#t #( 63 the #ns#s(ectin+ victi)1 WON t'e AC #+ rec"%"v" . '#u&% )e a!!rec"ate%.  @9S1 Sho#ld still 6e a((reciated even if it was not alle+ed in the infor)ation if acc#sed doesnFt o6Cect to (resentation of evidence on fact of recidivis)1 Molina did not o6Cect to s#ch1 :e did not a((eal (revio#s conviction either1  Recidivist5 one who at ti)e of his trial for one cri)e shall have 6een (revio#sl3 convicted 63 final C#d+)ent of another cri)e e)6raced in the sa)e title of the RPC (Art1 17(&))1 WON RTC erre% "$ t'e !re cr")"$* !e$a&t"e .  ?!1 M#rder5 'eath% there 6ein+ one AC1 RPC Art1 63 states that when law (rescri6es (enalt3 co)(osed of 2 indivisi6le (enalties E thereFs 1 AC% a((l3 +reater (enalt31  *r#strated )#rder5 i)(osa6le (enalt3 is recl#sion te)(oral as (er RPC art1 27$ Y AC of recidivis)% so a((l3 recl#sion te)(oral )a-i)#)1  Civ inde)nit3 raised to P80.% Act#al da)a+es I deleted nothin+ in record to C#stif3 s#ch% recei(ts are needed1 Moral da)a+es I no fact#al 6asis1 9-e)(lar3 da)a+es I P30. d#e to (resence of 1 AC1

/EO/LE v. DESALISA [22& SCRA 38 (1&&7)] Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of R C Sorso+on1 1&&71 FACTS: 9))an#el 'esalisa% a 22=3r old far)er% lived wK his 1$=3r old le+al wife% ?or)a% who was then 8 )os (re+nant and their 2=3r old da#+hter in a s)all ni(a hse on a hill at Pinad#ctan% Sorso+on1 he whole nei+h6orhood consists of 3 ho#ses1 he other 2 ho#ses are a6o#t 180 )eters awa35 the ho#se of his (arents=in=law and the ho#se of Carlito 'ichoso1 he view of the ho#ses is o6str#cted 63 the )an3 fr#it trees and shr#6s (revalent in the area1 !n !ct &% 1&$3% >icente 'ioneda% the father=in=law of the acc#sed% testified that the latter went to their ho#se and left his 2 3r=old1 he ne-t da3% at a6o#t 6 or HAM% >icente went to the ho#se of the acc#sed onl3 to find (lates scattered on the floor% the .ettle wK coo.ed rice #nto#ched% and the other ro(e holdin+ the ha))oc. )issin+1 :e went o#t of the ho#se and noticed the co#(leFs (i+ to 6e h#n+r31 :e tho#+ht of feedin+ it wK cocon#t )eat fro) the tree wKc was near631 :e saw the 6ac. of the 6od3 of his da#+hter1 :e called her and to#ched her 6ac.1 :owever% her 6od3 swa3ed1 4t was onl3 then that he reali/ed that she was han+in+ fro) a 6ranch of the Cac.fr#it tree1 :er nec. was s#s(ended a6o#t 7 inches a6ove the +ro#nd1 :er nec. was tied wK the )issin+ ro(e of the ha))oc.1 here were no e3ewitnesses to the incident1 Acc#sed=a((ellant often )anhandled his da#+hter 6eca#se he s#s(ected her of havin+ a (ara)o#r and that the 6a63 in her wo)6 was not his1 :e 6elieved that one Ariate was co#rtin+ his wife1 'esalisa invo.es the defense of denial1 :e s(ec#lates that it was his wife who was Cealo#s1 She s#s(ected hi) of havin+ an affair wK the da#+hter of Mano3 Charito1 8ELD: he acc#sed has the o((ort#nit3 to co))it the cri)e1 he ho#se where the3 lived is #( a hill and isolated1 he whole nei+h6orhood consists onl3 of 3 ho#ses1 ?o one can +o #( the hill to visit wKo 6ein+ .nown to the nei+h6or1 Moreover% the )otive of Cealo#s3 is evident for what can 6e )ore h#)iliatin+ to a )an aside fro) a wife 6ein+ #nfaithf#l to 6e ref#sed entr3 to oneFs ver3 ho)eS Altho#+h the acc#sed did not flee after the cri)e% there is no case law holdin+ that non=fli+ht is concl#sive of (roof of innocence1 he a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of evident (re)editation can not 6e a((reciated a+ainst acc#sed=a((ellant a6sent an3 (roof as to how and when the (lan to .ill was hatched or what ti)e ela(sed 6efore it was carried o#t1 ?either )a3 the a++r circ#)stance of ni+htti)e 6e a((reciated a+ainst hi) 6eca#se there is no (roof that it was (#r(osel3 so#+ht or ta.en advanta+e of or that it facilitated the co))ission of the cri)e1 :owever% the a++r circ#)stance of #ninha6ited (lace is (resent1 he #ninha6itedness of a (lace is deter)ined not 63 the distance of the nearest ho#se to the scene of the cri)e 6#t J!? there was reasona6le (ossi6ilit3 of the victi) receivin+ so)e hel( in the (lace of co))ission1 Considerin+ that the .illin+ was done d#rin+ ni+htti)e and )an3 fr#it trees and shr#6s o6str#cted the view of the nei+h6ors and (assers63% there was no reasona6le (ossi6ilit3 for the victi) to receive an3 assistance1 Acc#sed=a((ellant is fo#nd +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of the co)(le- cri)e of (arricide wK #nintentional a6ortion and sentenced to s#ffer the (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a and to (a3 civil inde)nit3

,.

A.

8ELD: R C affir)ed wK)odification1

/EO/LE v. GAORANA [2$& SCRA 682 (1&&$)]  Marivel *#entes% co)(lainant% went to Rowena Sanche/Fs ho#se #(on the latterFs instr#ction1 Jhen Marivel +ot there% Rowena went to the 6athroo)1 hen% Al6erto% RowenaFs co))on law h#s6and and a((ellant herein% a((roached Marivel% covered her )o#th and (ointed a h#ntin+ .nife to her nec.1 :e told her that heFd .ill her if sheFd tell her )other1 Marivel fo#+ht 6#t Al6erto +ot her inside a roo) and had interco#rse with her1 All the while% (rivate co)(lainantOs )o#th was covered with a hand.erchief1 After a6o#t 8 )in#tes% Rowena ca)e 6ac. and saw Al6erto still on to( of Marivel1 Al6erto instr#cted Rowena to ste( o#t of the roo)1 After a while% he +ot #(% (#t on his 6riefs and called his wife inside the roo)1 he second incident of ra(e ha((ened while Marivel was slee(in+ 6#t then awa.ened 63 the Al6ertoFs .isses1 :e had a .nife which scared Marivel and he a+ain had se- with her1 She did not sho#t 6eca#se she was afraid of Al6erto who was a (risoner and had alread3 .illed so)e6od31









Marivel re(orted the incidences event#all3 and after a d#e trial% R C convicted Al6erto with 2 co#nts of ra(e and sentencin+ hi) to 2 ter)s of recl#sion (er(et#a1 ue: J!? V#asi=Recidivis) was esta6lished ?!1 A((eal denied1 he two 4nfor)ations alle+ed that 6oth instances of ra(e were attended 63 the a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of ,#asi=recidivis)1 he trial co#rt )ade no e-(ress r#lin+ that a((ellant was a ,#asi=recidivist% and ri+htl3 so1 '#rin+ the trial% the (rosec#tion )anifested that a((ellant had 6een convicted 63 the R C of Ra6an+.alan% ?e+ros !ccidental in Cri)1 Case ?o1 013 and was servin+ sentence for the cri)e of ho)icide1 :owever% the (rosec#tion failed or ne+lected to (resent in evidence the record of a((ellantOs (revio#s conviction1 V#asi=recidivis)% li.e recidivis) and reiteracion% necessitates the (resentation of a certified co(3 of the sentence convictin+ an acc#sed1 he fact that a((ellant was an in)ate of 'AP9C!< does not (rove that final C#d+)ent had 6een rendered a+ainst hi)1

I  









/EO/LE v. ;ALDOGO [21R1 ?o1 12&106=0H (2003)] Nature: A#to)atic Review of a 'ecision of the R C of Palawan  2on/alo Galdo+o alias NGa+#ioN E 9d+ar Ger)as alias NG#nsoN were servin+ sentence in the Penal Colon3 of Palawan1 he3 were also servin+ the Ca)acho fa)il3 who resides wKin the Penal Colon3  !n *e6 22% 1&&6 Ga+#io E G#nso .illed "or+e (17 31o1) E a6d#cted "#lie (12 31o1)1 he3 6ro#+ht "#lie #( to the )o#ntains1  '#rin+ their tre. Ga+#io E G#nso were a6le to retrieve their clothin+ E 6elon+in+s fro) a tr#n. which was located #nder a a)arind tree1  *e61 2$% 1&&6 I Ga+#io left "#lie in the )o#ntains to fend for herself1 "#lie went to the lowlands E there she as.ed for hel( fro) ?icode)#s  Ga+#ioKGaldo+o denied .illin+ "or+e and .idna((in+ "#lie1 Ga+#io contends that while he was (re(arin+ for slee( he was a((roached 63 G#nso who was ar)ed with a 6loodied 6olo1 G#nso warned hi) not to sho#t% otherwise he will also 6e .illed1  Acc#sed=a((ellant )aintained that he did not intend to h#rt "#lie or de(rive her of her li6ert31 :e averred that d#rin+ the entire (eriod that he and "#lie were in the )o#ntain 6efore Ger)as left hi)% he tried to (rotect her fro) Ger)as1 Acc#sed=a((ellant asserted that he wanted to 6rin+ "#lie 6ac. to her (arents after Ger)as had left the) and to s#rrender 6#t acc#sed=a((ellant was afraid that "#lio Sr1 )i+ht .ill hi)1  he trial co#rt convicted G#nso of o M#rder = a((reciatin+ a+ainst hi) the s(ecific a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of ta.in+ advanta+e and #se of s#(erior stren+th% wKo an3 )iti+atin+ circ#)stance to offset the sa)e% E (#rs#ant to the (rovisions of the 2nd (ar1% ?o1 1% of A63 of the RPC% he is here63 sentenced to death o Ridna((in+ = no )odif3in+ circ#)stance a((reciated and (#rs#ant to the (rovisions of the 2nd (ar1% ?o1 2% of A63 of the RPC% E not 6ein+ entitled to the 6enefits of the 4ndeter)inate Sentence <aw% he is here63 sentenced to recl#sion (er(et#a% wK the accessor3 (enalties of civil interdiction for life% E of (er(et#al a6sol#te dis,#alificationL I ue : 1. WON t'e accu e% " *u"&t1 #+ .ur%er a$% C"%$a!!"$*. YES  Galdo+o clai)s that he was actin+ #nder d#ress 6eca#se he was threatened 63 Ger)as with death #nless he





did what Ger)as ordered hi) to do1 :e clai)s that he was even (rotective of "#lie1 :e insists that "#lie was not a credi6le witness and her testi)on3 is not entitled to (ro6ative wei+ht 6eca#se she was )erel3 coached into i)(licatin+ hi) for the death of "or+e and her .idna((in+ and detention 63 Ger)as1 "#lieFs testi)on3 is credi6le I findin+s of facts of the C% its cali6ration of the testi)onial evidence of the (arties% its assess)ent of the (ro6ative wei+ht of the collective evidence of the (arties E its concl#sions anchored on its findin+s are accorded 63 the a((ellate co#rt +reat res(ect% if not concl#sive effect1 he raison dOetre of this (rinci(le is that this Co#rt has to contend itself wK the )#te (a+es of the ori+inal records in resolvin+ the iss#es (osed 63 the (artiesL he C has the #ni,#e advanta+e of )onitorin+ E o6servin+ at close ran+e the attit#de% cond#ct E de(ort)ent of witnesses as the3 narrate their res(ective testi)onies 6efore said co#rt 9-ce(tions5 a1 when (atent inconsistencies in the state)ents of witnesses are i+nored 63 the trial co#rtL 61 when the concl#sions arrived at are clearl3 #ns#((orted 63 the evidenceL c1 when the C i+nored% )is#nderstood% )isinter(reted andKor )isconstr#ed facts E circ#)stances of s#6stance which% if considered% will alter the o#tco)e of the case 4tFs inc#)6ent on the (rosec#tion to (rove the cor(#s delicti% )ore s(ecificall3% that the cri)es char+ed had 6een co))itted E that acc#sed=a((ellant (recisel3 co))itted the sa)e1 Prosec#tion )#st rel3 on the stren+th of its own evidence E not on the wea.ness of acc#sedFs evidence he (rosec#tion add#ced ind#6ita6le (roof that acc#sed=a((ellant cons(ired wK Ger)as not onl3 in .illin+ "or+e 6#t also in .idna((in+ E detainin+ "#lie1 here is cons(irac3 if 2 or )ore (ersons a+ree to co))it a felon3 E decide to co))it it1 Cons(irac3 )a3 6e (roved 63 direct evidence or circ#)stantial evidence1 Cons(irac3 )a3 6e inferred fro) the acts of the acc#sed% 6efore% d#rin+ E after the co))ission of a felon3 (ointin+ to a Coint (#r(ose E desi+n E co))#nit3 of intent1 As lon+ as all the cons(irators (erfor)ed s(ecific acts wK s#ch closeness E coordination as to #n)ista.a6l3 indicate a co))on (#r(ose or desi+n in 6rin+in+ a6o#t the death of the victi)% all the cons(irators are cri)inall3 lia6le for the death of said victi)1









deter)ination to co))it the cri)e1 he law doesnFt (rescri6e a ti)e fra)e that )#st ela(se fro) the ti)e the felon has decided to co))it a felon3 #( to the ti)e that he co))its it1 Garefaced fact that acc#sed=a((ellant and Ger)as hid the 6a+ containin+ their clothin+ #nder a tree located a6o#t a .ilo)eter or so fro) the ho#se of "#lio Sr1 does not constit#te clear evidence that the3 decided to .ill "or+e and .idna( "#lie1 4t is (ossi6le that the3 hid their clothin+ therein (re(arator3 to esca(in+ fro) the colon31 I ins#fficient evidence for evident (re)editation1 Galdo+o E Ger)as were ar)ed wK 6olos% thereFs no evidence that the3 too. advanta+e of their n#)erical s#(eriorit3 E wea(ons to .ill "or+e1 :ence% a6#se of s#(erior stren+th canFt 6e dee)ed to have attended the .illin+ of "or+e1 'wellin+ a++ravatin+ 6eca#se there is no evidence that "or+e was .illed in their ho#se or ta.en fro) their ho#se and .illed o#tside the said ho#se Rillin+ was ,#alified wK treacher3 = Co#rt has (revio#sl3 held that the .illin+ of )inor children who 63 reason of their tender 3ears co#ld not 6e e-(ected to (#t #( a defense is attended 63 treacher31 Since treacher3 attended the .illin+% a6#se of s#(erior stren+th is a6sor6ed 63 said circ#)stance1

/EO/LE v. SUMAL/ONG [2$7 SCRA 767 (1&&$)] Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of R C Cota6ato Cit3 (1&&$) FACTS: !n "an 12% 1&&7% $PM% Arola 'ilan+alen E Moha))ad Mana+#ili escorted ho)e their friend% "#.aris G#an% to ?a3on Shariff Ra6#ns#an on a service owned 63 1 ?on+ *red1 After dro((in+ off their friend1 he 3 went on their wa3 ho)e1 'ilan+alen E Mana+#ili as.ed to 6e dro((ed off at 7" Pi//a :o#se alon+ ?otre 'a)e Aven#e to eat1 After wKc% while waitin+ for a tric3cle to ta.e the) ho)e% the3 saw 7 )en near an electric (ost 8 )eters awa3 fro) the 7" Pi//a :se entrance1 JKo warnin+% the 7 )en s#ddenl3 E si)#ltaneo#sl3 sta66ed the)1 Arola 'ilan+alen died of he))orha+e E antecedent )#lti(le wo#nds while Mana+#ili% who s#stained sta6 wo#nds on his ri+ht anterior=a-illar3 line% was still r#shed to the 9R1 :e was confined for 2nts1 !n "an 17 F&7% Police !fficer a3on+ 6ro#+ht 6efore hi) 8 (ersons incl#din+ a((ellant 2err3 S#)al(on+ for identification (#r(oses1 :e was (ositivel3 identified 63 Mana+#ili as 1 of the assailants1 'ilan+alenFs )other testified that the3 s(ent PhPH0R for the 6#rial of her son E for other M#sli) cere)onies for the dead1 wo of the 7 )en re)ain at lar+e1 !nl3 S#)al(on+ and *ernando were convicted wK the cri)es of )#rder and fr#strated )#rder1 *or their defense% 6oth +ave their defense of ali6i1 *ernando said he was wor.in+ then fro) H=10() at his e)(lo3erFs sho(% )a.in+ 6al#sters (railin+s)% ta.in+ onl3 10 )in 6rea.s for l#nch and s#((er1 :e denied (revio#sl3 .nowin+ the acc#sed1 :owever% his e)(lo3er testified that in )a.in+ 6al#sters% the3 had to wait for 7 hrs fro) the ti)e the3 (o#red )i-ed ce)ent into the )oldin+ till it hardened1 '#rin+ this wait% *ernando wo#ld #s#all3 +o ho)e to eat and slee( and one wo#ld C#st wa.e hi) #( when his services were a+ain needed1 S#)al(on+% on the other hand% clai)ed that he was a ho)e readin+ in the evenin+ of "an 121 his was attested to 63 his father1 he co#rt held that their defenses were of no )erit1 he residence of *ernando was C#st a few )in#tes ride fro) the scene of the cri)e1 And it was #n#s#al for S#)al(on+% a colle+e st#dent% to 6e at ho)e and aslee( at s#ch an earl3 ti)e in the evenin+1 Moreover% 6oth were (ositivel3 identified 63 victi) Mana+#ili as those who attac.ed the)1 he co#rt fo#nd the (resence of treacher3 in the s#dden and si)#ltaneo#s attac. a+ainst the victi)s who were #nar)ed and

-.

WON t'e Fua&"+1"$* a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce #+ ev"%e$t !re.e%"tat"#$ a$% *e$er"c a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce #+ taC"$* a%va$ta*e #+ u!er"#r tre$*t' ca$ )e a!!rec"ate%.  o warrant a findin+ of evident (re)editation% the (rosec#tion )#st esta6lish the confl#ence of the ff1 re,#isites a1 i)e when offender deter)ined to co))it the cri)eL 61 An act )anifestl3 indicatin+ that the offender cl#n+ to his deter)inationL and c1 S#fficient interval of ti)e 6etween the deter)ination and the e-ec#tion of the cri)e to allow hi) to reflect #(on the conse,#ences of his act1  9vident (re)editation )#st 6e (roved with certaint3 as the cri)e itself  4t cannot 6e 6ased solel3 on )ere la(se of ti)e fro) the ti)e the )alefactor has decided to co))it a felon3 #( to the ti)e that he act#all3 co))its it1  he (rosec#tion is 6#rdened to (rove overt acts that after decidin+ to co))it the felon3% the felon cl#n+ to his

#ns#s(ectin+1 4t also 6elieved that there was cons(irac3 a)on+ the acc#sed1 G#t wKo e-(lanation% it fo#nd that evident (re)editation a++ravated the cri)e1 h#s% it i)(osed #(on 6oth the (enalt3 of death for the fatal sta66in+ of 'ilan+alen and reclusion temporal )a-i)#) for the wo#ndin+ of Mana+#ili% wK da)a+es1 Goth a((eal that in the clear a6sence of an3 +eneric a++ravatin+ circ#)stance attendin+ the )#rder% a((ellants )a3 6e sentenced onl3 to reclusion perpetua% not death1 8ELD: 9vident (re)editation and even vol#ntar3 s#rrender were wron+l3 a((reciated 63 the trial co#rt1 A((ellant *ernando clai) that he vol#ntar3 s#rrendered to the 6r+3 ca(t1 :owever% it was shown that the (olice had tried to arrest hi) (rior 6#t he i)(licitl3 allowed his father to conceal his (resence1 Jhen the 6r+3 ca(t ca)e% he s#6)itted hi)self onl3 wK the ass#rance of his safet31 :is s#rrender then was not of his own .nowin+ and #nconditional accord as re,#ired 63 law1 4t has 6een held that if the onl3 reason for the acc#sedFs s#((osed s#rrender is to ens#re his safet3% his arrest 6ein+ inevita6le% the s#rrender is not s(ontaneo#s and not vol#ntar31 he co#rt re premeditacion conocida did not )a.e an3 ratiocination or anal3sis as to how or wh3 it was a((reciated1 *or evident (re)editation to a++ravate a cri)e% there )#st 6e (roof% as clear as the evidence of the cri)e itself% of the ff ele)ents5 (1) the ti)e when the offender deter)ined to co))it the cri)eL (2) an act )anifestl3 indicatin+ that he cl#n+ to his deter)inationL E (3) s#fficient la(s of ti)e 6etween deter)ination E e-ec#tion% to allow hi)self to reflect #(on the conse,#ences of his act1 he Sol2en correctl3 o6served that these re,#isites were not d#l3 esta6lished 63 the (rosec#tion1 A6sent an3 clear and convincin+ evidence of evident (re)editation or other a++rK)it circ#)stances% the (enalt3 i)(osa6le for the )#rder of 'ilan+alen is reclusion perpetua (A63(2) RPC)1 he (enalt3 for the atte)(t on Mana+#iliFs life is prision mayor in its )edi#) (eriod1 :owever% a((l3in+ the 4ndeter)inate Sentence <aw% the (enalt3 i)(osa6le a+ainst a((ellants is 7 3rs E 2 )os of (rision correccional )edi#)% as )ini)#)% to 103rs of (rision )a3or )edi#)% as )a-i)#)1 Goth sentences shall 6e served s#ccessivel31 Assailed decision )odified1 /EO/LE v. ;I;AT [2&0 SCRA 2H (1&&$)] Nature: A((eal fro) R C Manila decision  !ct 17% 1&&2% 1530 (1)15 2ari Gi6at sta66ed to death <lo3d del Rosario alon+ 21 #a/on cor Ma1 Cristina Sts1% Sa)(aloc% Manila1 'el Rosario was then waitin+ for a ride to school1  Jitness5 ?ona Avila Cinco% a la#ndr3 wo)an% was then at *#neraria 2loria waitin+ for her 6ettor1 11 She saw so)e6od3 tal. to Gi6at who told Gi6at% BPare and#on na1 Si+#rad#hin )o lan+ na it#)6a )o na1D Gi6at then de)onstrated how he was +oin+ to (erfor) the act1 21 After so)e ti)e% she then saw Gi6at a((roach del Rosario E too. a (ointed o6Cect fro) a note6oo.% then he sta66ed victi) in the left chest twice1 Gi6at left 6#t after hearin+ del Rosario sho#t for hel(% he ret#rned E sta66ed hi) a+ain1 Gi6at ran awa3 E Avila left too1  Jitness *lorencio Castro testified that he saw Gi6at wK7 others inside the 2loria Me)orial :o)es1 :e saw one of the) o(en a note6oo. where a stainless .nife was inserted1  Jitness Ro+elio Ro6les testified that Gi6at fre,#ented his (lace in Sa)(aloc 6eca#se of onton Montero1 Montero is the (resident of Sa)ahan+ 4locano *raternit3% a frat Gi6at was (art of1 Montero told Ro6les a6o#t a r#)6le in their school wherein so)e6od3 died E that Gi6atFs +ro#( (lanned to ta.e reven+e a+ainst del Rosario1 :e .new del Rosario 63 face E he f#rther



 

testified that he .new Gi6atFs +ro#( .e(t t#so. E +#ns in his ho#se1 Gi6at clai)ed that it was his )o)Fs 6irthda3 on that da3 E that he was at ho)e d#rin+ that ti)e reviewin+ for his final e-a)s1 :e also testified that he went to school for his finals where he sta3ed #ntil 7530 (1)1 :e denied all alle+ations E he clai)s that he was )erel3 i)(licated E he didnFt .now an3thin+ a6o#t the incident1 Jitnesses Marte Soriano E <ino As#ncion 444% class)ates of Gi6at% corro6orated his clai)s1 R C fo#nd Gi6at +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of cri)e of )#rder1



Peo(le vs1 '#)d#)5 one ho#r was considered a s#fficient la(se of ti)e1

8ELD: Affir)ed1

/EO/LE v. LUG0AW [22& SCRA 30$ (1&&7)]  Pal=lo3 was far)in+ (art of the co))#nal forest land located in Sitio Rali(.i(1 'es(ite the 6o#ndar3 dis(#te 6etween hi) and his nei+h6or% C!nchita i(on% Pal=lo3 strai+htened o#t the 6o#ndar3 line 63 (#ttin+ #( a fence alle+edl3 #(on the instr#ction of the (#6lic forester1 As Pal=lo3 went a6o#t his tas.% his da#+hters Sonia (13) and Carina followed hi) aro#nd1 Jhen Pal=lo3 was +oin+ to the ho#se% Sonia heard a +#n re(ort and th#s went #(hill1 "#st as a 2nd +#n re(ort reso#nded% she saw Ro+elio Gana3 and "#lio <#+=aw fro) a distance1 She also saw that as her father wa a6o#t to draw his 6olo% <#+=aw shot hi)1 Pal=lo3 died1 Accordin+ to Sonia% <#+=aw was 6ehind a tree st#)( when he shot her father1 Ganna3% who was with <#+=aw% was hidin+ and he did not do an3thin+1 he R C convicted Ganna3 and <#+=aw of )#rder ,#alified 63 treacher3 and evident (re)editation1 ue: J!? cri)e was attended 63 evident (re)editation ?!1 4t is (rinci(all3 fro) SoniaFs testi)on3 that the co#rt concl#ded that the cri)e co))itted was not )#rder 6#t ho)icide1 he co#rt held that evident (re)editation (as well as treacher3) had not 6een (roven 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1 hree re,#isites o i)e when the offender deter)ined to co))it he cri)e% o An act )anifestl3 indicatin+ that the c#l(rit has cl#n+ to his deter)ination and o 9-ec#tion to allow the acc#sed o((ort#nit3 to reflect #(on the conse,#ences of his act All three were wantin+ in the case1 Penalt35 :o)icide (RPC A27&) is (#nisha6le 63 recl#sion te)(oral1 A6sent an3 AC or MC% the (enalt3 i)(osa6le is the )edi#) de+ree of recl#sion te)(oral1 A((l3in+ 4ndeter)inate Sentence <aw% the (enalt3 that sho#ld 6e i)(osed on <#+=aw is 10 3rs E 1 da3 of (rision )a3or )a- as )in (enalt3 to 1H 3rs E 7 )os1 of recl#sion te)(oral )edi#) as )a- (enalt31 :e shall also inde)nif3 the heirs1

ISSUES 4 RATIO: 1. WON t'e !r# ecut"#$ ("t$e e are $#t cre%")&e.  ?!1 SC res(ects trial co#rt findin+s #nless thereFs clear (roof that it was reached ar6itraril3 or it overloo.ed so)e s#6stantial factsKval#e that )i+ht affect res#lt1  CincoFs fail#re to sho#t for hel( E dela3 in re(ortin+ incident is acce(ta6le considerin+ that she )#st have 6een scared herself1 4t doesnFt affect her credi6ilit3 if it is s#fficientl3 reasoned o#t1 ?ot i)(ossi6le either for her to re)e)6er details of the incident1 Gi6atFs ca)( theori/ed that Cinco co#ldFve not 6een ta.in+ 6ets for the PGA on the da3 of the incident wKc was a Jed 6eca#se PGA +a)es were then held on #es% h#rs E Sat1 G#t she co#ldFve done so to )a-i)i/e (rofit1 Gesides% s#ch is i))aterial in the case1 -. WON %e+e$ e #+ a&")" '#u&% )e a!!rec"ate%.  ?!1 *or ali6i to 6e a((reciated% there )#st 6e clear E satisfactor3 (roof that it was (h3sicall3 i)(ossi6le for acc#sed to 6e at the cri)e scene at the ti)e of co))ission1  Ali6is of Gi6at that he was at ho)e E then in school at Arellano 0niversit31 hese (laces are act#all3 near the cri)e scene1 :e co#ld ver3 well 6e (resent in the cri)e scene d#rin+ co))ission1 Gesides% this clai) is #ns#6stantiated1 :e sho#ld have (resented a class card or +radin+ sheet to (rove that he did ta.e the e-a)1  Positive identification of acc#sed 63 witnesses is +iven )ore wei+ht than the ne+ative E self=servin+ denials E ali6is (resented 63 Gi6at1 WON AC #+ ev"%e$t !re.e%"tat"#$ '#u&% )e a!!rec"ate%.  @9S1 Re,#isites5 ti)e when offender deter)inedKconceived to co))it cri)e% act )anifestl3 indicatin+ that c#l(rit has cl#n+ to his deter)ination% E s#fficient la(se of ti)e 6et deter)ination E e-ec#tion to allow hi) to reflect #(on conse,#ences of his act1  9ssence5 e-ec#tion of cri)Fl act is (receded 63 cool tho#+ht E reflection #(on resol#tion to carr3 o#t cri)Fl intent d#rin+ s(ace of ti)e s#fficient to arrive at cal) C#d+)ent1  Jitnesses Ro6les E Cinco have testified to (rove that 3 re,#isites were )et1 Gi6at tried to contest Ro6lesF testi)on31 Ro6les testified that he allowed Gi6atFs +ro#( to hide +#ns E t#so. in his ho#se1 Gi6at clai)s that it was not lo+ical for so)eone in his rt fra)e of )ind to allow an36od3 to do that1 G#t Ro6les e-(lained that he was scared of Gi6atFs +ro#( E he wanted to (rotect his fa)il3 thatFs wh3 he allowed the) to do so1 Gesides% evident (re)editation was clearl3 (roven 63 CincoFs testi)on31 She heard Gi6atFs +ro#( (lan the .illin+ at aro#nd 11530 a1)1 then the3 co))itted cri)e at aro#nd 1530 a1)1 h#s% there was a s#fficient la(se of ti)e for Gi6at to reflect E s#ch is (roof that Gi6at cl#n+ to his resol#tion to .ill del Rosario1

 



 I 



 

,.

/EO/LE v. CAMILET [172 SCRA 702 (1&$6)] Nature: A((eal fro) the C#d+)ent of the R C of 4loilo  Ca)ilet was convicted of )#rder and was sentenced 63 the R C of 4loilo to life i)(rison)ent1  >ersion of the Prosec#tion5 "#l3 2% 1&$2 I After a Ga(tist (ra3er )eetin+ at the residence of Perfecto Ca)acho Sr1 (Garan+a3 Ca(tain) 'ione Ca)acho (d#)6 ne(hew of Perfecto) arrived and he co))#nicated to the +ro#( that he was stran+led and hit on his 6#ttoc.s 63 so)eone at a certain (lace1  Perfecto Sr (6ro#+ht alon+ his flashli+ht)1 to+ether with 'ione% Perfecto "r1% Rosita Ca)a3o E Co6in Ca+a3ao wend to the (lace indicated 63 'ione1 After a6o#t 180 )eters Ca)ilet s#ddenl3 ste((ed fro) a +rove of 6anana (lants E wKo warnin+ sta66ed Perfecto Sr1 with a one=foot lon+% shar( 6laded .nife1





>ersion of the 'efense5 Accordin+ to 9)ilio Cachila while he was on his wa3 ho)e he saw Perfecto Sr1 and his co)(anions standin+ near the di.e alon+ the road1 Ca)ilet arrived and Perfecto Sr1 told hi) BReno% so 3o# are here1 4 will .ill 3o#1 o#r so#l has no val#e to )eD Ca)ilet stated tat he was on his wa3 to the ho#se of his )other= in=law to as. for hel( in (lantin+ rice1 :e alle+ed that Perfecto Sr1 hit his )o#th with a ha))er and .noc.ed off five of his teeth1 :e fell down on the )#dd3 ricefield1 :is wife hel(ed hi) and while the3 were wal.in+ awa3 he (#lled o#t his .nife% sw#n+ it and hit so)eone whose identit3 he did not .now1 he followin+ )ornin+ he fo#nd o#t that he .illed Perfecto Sr1

driverFs seat1 Gina+ seated hi)self at the (assen+erFs and 2#i3a6 occ#(ied the 6ac. seat1 he3 first went to the +as station to fill #(1 Gina+ saw 2enaro and Al6erto on the street 10 )eters awa3 to his ri+ht1 2enaro sho#ted in 46ana+ dialect translated% B*ire now1D 3 s#ccessive +#nshots were fired in a few seconds1 he 1 st show .illed Santia+o hittin+ hi) in the head1 he 2nd shot was fired at 2#i3a6 who also shot in the head% .illin+ hi) instantl31 he 3 rd shot hit Patrol)an Gina+ in the Caw1 :e fell on the ce)ent (ave)ent and lost conscio#sness1 G#t 6efore that% he saw <i) firin+ the first 2 shots wK his 13$ cali6er nic.le=(lated S)ith E Jesson revolver1 Gein+ a (atrol)an hi)self and havin+ served in the ar)3% he was fa)iliar wK firear)s1 <i) was then wearin+ a 3ellow (olo=Cac.et1 Gina+ had .nown hi) for a lon+ ti)e since the3 6oth ca)e fro) San Pa6lo and #sed to drin. li,#or to+ether1 Gina+ s#stained a +#nshot wo#nd a6ove the left Caw% near the )o#th% inC#rin+ his ton+#e1 4f not for 6lood transf#sion% he wo#ld have died1 4n the hos(ital% on the ni+ht followin+ the shootin+% the chief of (olice interviewed hi) and as.ed hi) who had fired at hi) and his co)(anions1 As Gina+ co#ld not tal.% he wrote on a (iece of (a(er the na)e of his assailant5 Antonio <i) with his 6od3+#ard1 Prior to the shootin+% Santia+oFs 6rother% >ice=Ma3or Carlos #)ali#an was char+ed wK the )#rder of Antionio <i)Fs )other and sister1 Moreover% in another case% the 6rothers of <i) were char+ed wK )#rder and Gina+ was a (rosec#tion witness there1 Santia+o was .nown to 6e financier of his 6rother% the vice=)a3or% while 2#i3a6 was a 6#3er of to6acco for Santia+o and was res(onsi6le for o6tainin+ 6ail 6onds for the vice=)a3or1 8ELD: he +#ilt of <i) was (roven 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1 he shootin+ was ind#6ita6l3 treachero#s for <i) e)(lo3ed a for) of assa#lt wKc directl3 and s(eciall3 ins#red its e-ec#tion wKo ris. to hi)self arisin+ fro) the defense wKc the victi)s )i+ht have )ade (Art 17 RPC)1 he s#r(rise assa#lt (recl#ded the) fro) )a.in+ an3 defense at all1 Pre)editation was not (roven1 he (rosec#tion failed to esta6lish (a) the ti)e when <i) deter)ined to co))it the cri)es% (6) the act showin+ that he had cl#n+ to his deter)ination% and (c) a s#fficient interval 6etween the deter)ination and the e-ec#tion that wo#ld have afforded hi) f#ll o((ort#nit3 for )editation and reflection and allowed his conscience to overco)e the resol#tion of his will1 here 6ein+ no +eneric a++rK)it circ#)stances% the (enalt3 of reclusion perpetua for each of the 2 )#rders was (ro(erl3 i)(osed (Art 67 E 27$ RPC)1 An indeter)inate sentence of 6 3rs of (rision correcional% as )ini)#)% to 12 3rs E 1 da3 of recl#sion te)(oral )ini)#)% as )a-i)#)% is i)(osed for the fr#strated )#rder1 "#d+)ent affir)ed1 

 



Pon++anL second +ro#(5 Sa6ino Ala6an% Al6erto Se)il E <#ciano "a)arolin1 *elicisi)o went down E as he e)er+ed fro) the tho#se% Paran+an E Pon++an fired their +#ns at hi)1 :e was hit at several (arts of his 6od3 E died instantl31 Gienvenido re(orted the incident E H were char+ed wK)#rder1 Paran+an died after infor)ation was filed so case a+ainst hi) was dis)issed1 "a)arolin% Se)il E Ala6an were dischar+ed to 6e state witnesses1 Pa+linawan E Gendano were still at lar+e1 !nl3 Pon++an stood trial1 :e (leaded not +#ilt31 R C fo#nd Pon++an +#ilt3 of )#rder1

I ue : 1. WON Ca."&et " *u"&t1 #+ .ur%er.  ?!1 :e clai)s self defense and ad)its .illin+ Perfecto Sr1  ?o self defense since the Prosec#tion was a6le to esta6lish that the inC#ries of Ca)ilet was ca#sed 63 a sc#ffle1  Co#rt o6served that loss of his teeth was ca#sed 63 deca3  *or a cri)e to 6e of )#rder there )#st 6e treacher3 or evident (re)editation1 o reacher3 I )ere s#ddenness of attac. isnFt s#fficient to constit#te treacher3 where it doesnFt a((ear that the a++ressor ado(ted s#ch )ode of attac. to facilitate the (er(etration of the .illin+ wKo ris. to hi)1 Attac. was frontal o 9vident (re)editation I not esta6lished 63 the (rosec#tion1 *acts tend to show that Ca)ilet )i+ht have har6o#red ill=feelin+s towards the Ca)achos after the3 too. a (ortion of the land he was far)in+1 here was no evidence of the ti)e when he deter)ined to co))it the cri)e% an act )anifestl3 indicatin+ that that he has cl#n+ to his deter)ination% and s#fficient la(se of ti)e 6etween deter)ination and e-ec#tion to allow hi) to reflect #(on the conse,#ences of his act and to allow his conscience to overco)e the resol#tion of his will1 -. WON $"*'tt".e ca$ )e c#$ "%ere% a a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce. ?!1 ?o (roof that it was es(eciall3 so#+ht 63 Ca)ilet to (er(et#ate the cri)e WON %" re*ar% #+ ra$C ca$ )e c#$ "%ere% a a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce. ?!1 here is no clear evidence that Ca)ilet co))itted the cri)e in disre+ard of the res(ect d#e Perfecto Sr1 as 6aran+a3 ca(tain1 /EO/LE v. LIM [H1 SCRA 27& (1&H6)]

ISSUE: J!? co#rt erred in convictin+ Pon++an1 8ELD: ?!1 'eath (enalt3 affir)ed1 4nde)nit3% raised to P80.1 11 Pon++anFs ali6i was that he was in Ma)6oan+a del ?orte d#rin+ that ti)e where he did far)in+ wor.1 :e also clai)ed that he was a 6r+3 co#ncilor in Ma)6oan+a fro) 1&$2 #( to the ti)e he was arrested1 Corro6orated 63 defense witness 2eroni)o Ar#nda% 6r+3 ca(t% who clai)ed that Pon++an was indeed in Ma)6oan+a then s#(ervisin+ so)e 6r+3 civic (roCect1 :e f#rther clai)ed that he .e(t a lo+6oo. of (eo(le who (artici(ated in the activities1  CanFt (revail over (ositive identifications of witnesses Gienvenido% Sa+#in E Se)il1 Accordin+ to Gienvinido he was a6le to identif3 all of the acc#sed 6eca#se it was a )oonlit ni+ht at that ti)e1 Se)il on the other hand testified that it was Pon++an who called o#t to *elicisi)o E that onl3 Pon++an E Paran+an were ar)ed1 :e f#rther testified that he alon+ wKAla6an E "a)arolin ran awa3 after *elicisi)o was shot leavin+ 6ehind those in the first +ro#(1 Sa+#in testified that he saw Pon++an 2 ho#rs 6efore the cri)e was co))itted1  Ar#nda said that Pon++an s#(ervised a 6r+3 civic (roC whereas Pon++an clai)ed that he was doin+ far)wor. at that ti)e1  <o+6oo. I d#rin+ co))ission of cri)e% Ar#nda was not 3et the 6r+3 ca(t th#s he co#ld not have had control over 6r+3 activities1 <o+6oo. was not (resented either1 31 2eneralit3 E a)6i+#it3 of GienvenidoFs affidavit is i))aterial1 esti)onies are +iven )ore credence than affidavits1 71 Mere fa)ilial ties of Gienvenido E *elicisi)o do not )a.e his testi)on3 less credi6le1 81 reacher3 a((reciated1 a1 Re,#isites5 ado(t )eans% )ethods or for)s in e-ec#tion of felon3 wKc ins#re its co))ission wKo ris. to hi)self arisin+ fro) an3 defense wKc offended (art3 )i+ht )a.e 61 >icti) was not ar)ed1 Perha(s he was not even f#ll3 awa.e1 :e was ca#+ht off=+#ard1 61 9vident (re)editation altho#+h (resent% it was no lon+er considered d#e to (resence of treacher31 4t )erel3 6eco)es a +eneric AC1 a1 e-ists when e-ec#tion of cri)inal act is (receded 63 cool tho#+ht E reflection #(on resol#tion to carr3 o#t cri)Fl intent d#rin+ s(ace of ti)e s#fficient to arrive at cal) C#d+)ent1 61 Se)il testified that it was Pon++an who led E directed the) towards victi)Fs ho#se1 Proof that he (artici(ated in the cri)inal )issionKdesi+n1 H1 AC of #se of s#(erior stren+th E ni+htti)e a6sor6ed in treacher31

,.

Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of the Circ#it Cri)inal Co#rt of #+#e+arao% Ca+a3an1 FACTS: 4n the )ornin+ of S#nda3% A(ril 20% 1&6&% Santia+o #)ali#an% a 3H=3r old 6#siness)an% drove his Cee( to #+#e+arao1 :e was acco)(anied 63 his da#+hter >il)a% who) he dro((ed off at St Pa#l Colle+e% and *a#sto 2#i3a6% "#an Malillin and Patrol)an Cesar Gina+ who was his escort in civilian clothes1 he3 first (la3ed )ahCon+ at the ho#se of one Malla6o1 2#i3a6 re)ained in the Cee( to +#ard it1 At noon% the3 (roceeded to the coc.(it1 2#i3a6 a+ain watched the Cee(1 At a6o#t 7PM% Santia+o and Gina+ left the coc.(it1 !n their wa3 o#t% the3 (assed 63 Antonio <i) and his 6od3+#ard near the e-it1 2enaro and Al6erto% <i)Fs co)(anions% were standin+ at the +ate tal.in+ to each other1 0(on reachin+ the Cee(% Santia+o too. the

/EO/LE v. /ARANGAN [231 SCRA 6$2 (1&&7)] Nature: A((eal fro) R C 'i(olo+ decision  A(ril 26% 1&$8% & ()5 *elicisi)o 'inia3% resident of !waon% 'a(itan Cit3% was alread3 slee(in+ alon+ wKthe rest of his ho#sehold1 he3 heard so)e6od3 callin+ fro) o#tside #r+in+ hi) to co)e down1  Ginvenido% *elicisi)oFs son% (eered E he saw H )en divided in 2 +ro#(s1 7 were in front of the stairs of the ho#se E 3 were a6o#t 8 )eters awa31 :e reco+ni/ed the H as% first +ro#(5 Ro+er Paran+an% Mosi)o Pa+linawan% "ai)e Gendano E *eli(e

/EO/LE v ILAOA [233 SCRA 231 (1&&7)]

Fact :  A deca(itated 6od3 of a )an was fo#nd in a +rass3 (ortion at inio St1% An+eles Cit31 :e was later identified as ?estor de <o3ola thr# his voterFs identification1  A(art fro) the deca(itation% the decease 6ore 73 sta6 wo#nds in the chest as well as sli+ht 6#rns all over the 6od31  he head was fo#nd 2 feet awa3 fro) the cor(se (niceZ3echZ)  8 (ersons were char+ed for the cri)e altho#+h R#6en and Ro+elio 4laoa were the onl3 ones who stood trial and the two were fo#nd +#ilt3 of )#rder attended 63 evident (re)editation% a6#se of s#(erios stren+th and cr#elt31  Circ#)stancial evidence esta6lished that ?estor was drin.in+ with the two% and later R#6en and ?estor were en+a+ed in an ar+#)ent1 ?estor was then .ic.ed and )a#led 63 R#6en and his 6rother Rodel and "#li#s 9li+inio and 9dwin a(an+1 hereafter he was dra++ed to R#6enFs a(art)ent1 R#6en and "#li#s later 6orrowed the tric3cle of a certain Ale- >illa)il1 R#6en was seen drivin+ the tric3cle with a sac. in the sidecar that loo.ed li.e it contained a h#)an 6od31 Ale- noted 6loodstains on the tric3cleFs floor1 Glood was fo#nd in R#6enFs shirt and shoes and hair near his ri+ht forehead was fo#nd (artl3 6#rned1 S#san !ca)(o% R#6enFs live=in (artner was li.ewise seen swee(in+ what a((eared to 6e 6lood at the entrance of their a(art)ent1 I ue : 1. WON cr".e (a atte$%e% ("t' ev"%e$t !re.e%"tat"#$  ?!1 here is nothin+ in the records to show that a((ellants% (rior to the ni+ht in ,#estion% resolved to .ill ?estor de <o3ola% nor is there (roof to show that s#ch .illin+ was the res#lt of )editation% calc#lation or resol#tion on his (art1  !n the contrar3% the evidence tends to show that the series of circ#)stances which c#l)inated in the .illin+ constit#tes an #n6ro.en chain of events with no interval of ti)e se(aratin+ the) for calc#lation and )editation1 -. WON cr".e (a atte$%e% ("t' crue&t1  ?!1 he fact that ?estorFs deca(itated 6od3 6earin+ 73 sta6 wo#nds% 27 of which were fatal% was fo#nd d#)(ed in the street is not s#fficient for a findin+ of cr#elt3 where there is no showin+ that R#6en% for his (leas#re and satisfaction% ca#se ?estor to s#ffer slowl3 and (ainf#ll3 and inflicted on hi) #nnecessar3 (h3sical and )oral (ain1  ?#)6er of wo#nd alone is not the criterion for the a((reciation of cr#elt3 as an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance  ?either can it 6e inferred fro) the )ere fact that the victi)Fs 6od3 was dis)e)6ered1 /EO/LE v. MAR=UE> [11H SCRA 168 (1&$2)] Nature: A((eal fro) the C#d+e)ent of the Co*4 of V#e/on  <ower co#rt fo#nd *rancisco *orneste E Sa)#el "aco6o +#ilt3 of the cri)e of ro66er3 wK ra(e1 Renato Mar,#e/ died d#rin+ trial1  ?ov1 16% 1&66 I acc#sed (retended to 6e PC soldiers that were loo.in+ for contra6and1 *rancisca Mar,#e/ said that there was no contra6and in their ho#se1 he )en ordered her to o(en #( otherwise the3Fll shoot1 She o(ened the window E Renato Mar,#e/ forced hi)self hi)1 he door to the ho#se was then o(ened E his co)(anions were a6le to enter the ho#se1





he acc#sed de)anded the )one3 and other val#a6le ite)s of the occ#(ants of the ho#se1 <eticia (da#+hter 13 3ear old) E R#fina (ho#sehold hel() was also ra(ed1 '#rin+ the initial investi+ation R#fina and <eticia did not na)e na)es of their a++ressors 6#t instead the3 descri6ed the)1 *rancisca (ointed o#t secretl3 to the PC that the acc#sed were the (er(etrators of the cri)e

I ue : 1. WON t'e accu e% (ere "%e$t"+"e% )e1#$% rea #$a)&e %#u)t t'at t'e1 (ere t'e !er!etrat#r #+ t'e r#))er1.  @9S1 Silence of the co)(lainin+ witnesses on the identit3 of the acc#sed i))ediatel3 after the incident was e-(lained 63 the ordeal that the3 C#st s#ffered at the hands of the acc#sed1  he acc#sed were (ositivel3 identified 63 the victi)s and it was not shown that witness have an i)(ro(er )otive or were 6iased a+ainst the)%  9-(erience has shown that witnesses are rel#ctant to div#l+e the identit3 of their assailants e-ce(t to (ro(ere a#thorities or #ntil the3 feel safe eno#+h fro) an3 (ro6a6le har)1 -. WON t'e AC #+ $"*'tt".e7 u$&a(+u& e$tr17 %(e&&"$* #+ t'e #++e$%e% !art"e 7 %" *u" e B!rete$%"$* t# )e /C #++"cer E 4 utter %" re*ar% %ue t# v"ct".3 a*e 4 e5 ca$ )e a!!rec"ate%.  @9S1 Pro(erl3 alle+ed in the infor)ation and was (roven 63 the (rosec#tion1

8ELD: Cons(irac3 was ade,#atel3 (roven 63 the evidence1 Goth acted in concert% hel(in+ and coo(eratin+ wK one another 63 si)#ltaneo#s acts% evidentl3 in (#rs#it of a co))on o6Cective1 he a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of cra+t #r +rau% was (ro(erl3 a((reciated a+ainst 9)(acis1 Goth )en (retended to 6e 6ona fide c#sto)ers of the victi)Fs store and on this (rete-t +ained entr3 into the latterFs store and later% into another (art of his dwellin+1 4n (revio#s cases% the Co#rt held the (resence of fra#d or craft when one (retended to 6e consta6#lar3 soldiers to +ain entr3 into a residence to ro6 and .ill the residents% (retended to 6e needf#l of )edical treat)ent onl3 .illin+ the owner of the ho#se% and (retended to 6e wa3farers who had lost their wa3 to enter into a ho#se1 ?i+htti)e was also (ro(erl3 a((reciated as an AC as noct#rnit3 was deli6eratel3 and (#r(osel3 so#+ht to facilitate the co))ission of the cri)e1 *or s#(erior stren+th to 6e dee)ed (resent% it doesnFt s#ffice to (rove s#(eriorit3 in n#)6er on the (art of the )alefactors 6#t that the3 (#r(osel3 e)(lo3ed e-cessive force% force o#t of (ro(ortion to the )eans of defense availa6le to the (erson attac.ed wKc was (resent in this case1 9)(acis E his co)(anion too. advanta+e of their co)6ined stren+th E their 6laded wea(ons to overco)e their #nar)ed victi) E ass#re the s#ccess of their felonio#s desi+n to ta.e the )one31 'wellin+ was also correctl3 a((reciated1 4nde)nit3 for death (a3a6le is increased to PhP80R E restit#tion of PhP12R shall 6e )ade 63 the acc#sed1 'ecision affir)ed wK )odification1

/EO/LE v. CA;ATO [160 SCRA &$ (1&$$)] Nature: A((eal fro) C*4 Ma)6oan+a del ?orte C#d+)ent  "an1 28% 1&H1% H530 (1)15 3 )as.ed (ersons entered >ictor 2#initFs ho#se1 2#init E his wife were a6o#t to eat dinner then1 wo of the tres(assers h#++ed hi) E covered his )o#th while one of the) +ra((led wKhis wife E in the (rocess his )as. was re)oved1 S#ch (erson was identified as Sa6an+an Ca6ato% a nei+h6or of the 2#anits1 he3 de)anded for )one3 E so the3 +ave the) their savin+s in the (i++3 6an. a)o#ntin+ to P300 1 G#t the tres(assers wanted P3.1 Jhen the3 said that the3 did not have that )#ch )one3% 2#init was 6o-ed E str#c. wKa (istol1 he 3 (ersons left E 2#init later fo#nd his wife dead1   'efense5 Ca6ato clai)s he was at ho)e that ni+ht E that he onl3 learned a6o#t the incident thr# 2#initFs son% 4sco1  R C5 fo#nd Ca6ato +#ilt3 of ro66er3 wKho)icide1 WON Ca)at#3 *u"&t (a !r#ve$ )e1#$% rea #$a)&e %#u)t  @9S1 Ca6ato clai)s that 2#anitFs testi is not credi6le for he (2#anit) )entioned that he reco+ni/ed Ca6ato as earl3 as when ro66ers were still at the door wKc he clai)s is not (ossi6le 6eca#se the ro66ers wore )as.s1 G#t close e-a)ination of 2#anitFs testi)onial wo#ld reveal that identification was )ade after Ca6atoFs )as. was re)oved wKc too. (lace while Ca6ato was +ra((lin+ wK2#anitFs wife1  Gesides% consistencies are #nderstanda6le1 4tFs a )anifestation of +ood faith E (roof that the witness is not a rehearsed one1  Ca6ato did not show an3 )otiveKintent as to wh3 2#anit wo#ld i)(licate hi) in the cri)e1  rial co#rtFs findin+s re credi6ilit3 of witnesses will 6e res(ected 6eca#se itFs in a 6etter (osition to C#d+e s#ch1  Ali6i is a wea. defense es(eciall3 since Ca6ato was (ositivel3 identified 63 2#anit1 More so 6eca#se his ali6i was not corro6orated 63 an3one1

/EO/LE v. EM/ACIS [222 SCRA 8& (1&&3)] Nature: A((eal fro) decision of R C Ce6#1 (1&&3) FACTS: At a6o#t &PM of Se(t 16% 1&$6% as vicit)s *idel Saro)ines and his J Ca)ila were a6o#t to close their s)all store in Ce6#% 2 )en% Ro)#aldo <an+o)e/ and Crisolo+o 9)(acis% ca)e and as.ed to 6#3 so)e sardines and rice1 After the3 finished eatin+% <an+o)e/ told *idel to sell hi) so)e ci+arettes1 :e then anno#nced a hold=#( and ordered *idel to +ive #( his )one31 he latter started to hand hi) PhP12R 6#t s#ddenl3 decided to fi+ht to .ee( it1 A str#++le followed in the co#rse of wKc <an+o)e/ sta66ed *idel a6o#t 3-1 9)(acis Coined in and wK his own .nife also sta66ed *idel1 At this ti)e% +#nshots were heard o#tside the ho#se1 4t was onl3 when Peter% *idelFs 13=3r old son% saw his father fi+htin+ for his life and r#shed to his fatherFs defense wK a (in#ti (a lon+ 6olo) stri.in+ 9)(acis and inflictin+ 2 wo#nds on hi) did the 2 )en flee1 *idel died fro) the fatal inC#ries% wKc (enetrated his l#n+s and heart1 9)(acis went to the clinic of 'r 9#sta,#io for the treat)ent of his wo#nds inflicted 63 Peter1 :e told the doctor that he was assa#lted wKo warnin+ 63 a 3o#n+ )an near the Pa(an Mar.et1 he ne-t da3% (olice officers went loo.in+ for a )an who )i+ht have 6een treated for wo#nds fro) a 6laded wea(on1 he3 ca)e to 'r 9#sta,#ioFs clinic who told the) a6o#t 9)(acis1 :e was fo#nd at the (#6lic )ar.et ta.in+ 6rea.fast E there the3 arrested hi)1 :e ad)itted +oin+ to the store of *idel 6#t denied havin+ Coined <an+o)e/ in his attac.1 :e asserts that he tried to sto( hi) 6#t the latter s#cceeded in sta66in+ *idel1 :e f#rther alle+es that he was 6ro#+ht 63 his nei+h6ors to the the clinic1 he other 2 )en% who were acc#sed of firin+ the +#n fro) o#tside% denied an3 (artici(ation in the cri)e1 he3 were 6oth a6solved 63 the co#rt1 <an+o)e/ disa((eared E co#ld not 6e fo#nd1

WON AC #+ a)u e #+ u!er"#r tre$*t' '#u&% )e a!!rec"ate%.  ?!1 Petitioners clai) that s#ch sho#ld 6e a((reciated considerin+ that Ca6ato is a ro6#st )an who attac.ed an a+ein+ defenseless wo)an wKa stone1  :owever% records of the case donFt contain info JR the (h3sical conditions of acc#sed E victi)s1  Characteristics of this AC5 a1 de(ends on a+e% si/e E stren+th of the (arties1 61 here sho#ld 6e a notorio#s ine,#alit3 of forces 6et victi) E a++ressor wherein a++ressor ta.es advanta+e of s#ch fact in the co))ission of the cri)e1 c1 Means to (#r(osel3 #se e-cessive force o#t of (ro(ortion to the )eans of the defense availa6le to the (erson attac.ed1 Ot'er AC a!!rec"ate%:  'wellin+5 cri)e was co))itted inside the ho#se of the offended (art31 A++ravatin+ in ro66er3 wK violence or inti)idation 6eca#se this .ind of ro66er3 can 6e co))itted wKo necessaril3 tres(assin+ into the offended (art3Fs ho#se1  'is+#ise5 the3 wore )as.s to cover their faces E conceal their identities es( Ca6ato who was .nown to the (arties1 he fact that his )as. fell down is i))aterial1 8e&%: Affir)ed1 Recl#sion Per(et#a wK P30. civil inde)nit31

his constit#tional ri+hts% and in the (resence of and with the assistance of said co#nsel% a((ellant R#elan effectivel3 waived his ri+ht to re)ain silent1 -. WON tr"a& c#urt (a c#rrect "$ a!!rec"at"$* t'e !re e$ce #+ t'e t'ree a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce  Save onl3 for the a++ravatin+ circ#)stances of a6#se of s#(erior stren+th% the (rosec#tion failed to (rove treacher3 and evident (re)editation alle+ed in the infor)ation1  JK re+ard to a6#se of s#(erior stren+th% (rosec#tion )#st (rove that the assailant #sed (#r(osel3 e-cessive force o#t of (ro(ortion to the )eans of defense availa6le to the (erson attac.ed1  4n the instant case% a((ellant clearl3 too. advanta+e of his s#(erior stren+th as the victi) was an elderl3 wo)an% H6 3rs old% frail and of s)all 6#ild while the a((ellant was then onl3 20 3ears old% of +ood stat#re and 6#ild and was ar)ed with an a-e with which to .ill the victi)1  :owever% the a++ravatin+ circ#)stance of a6#se of s#(erior stren+th cannot ,#alif3 the .illin+ of the victi) and raise it to the cate+or3 of )#rder 6eca#se the sa)e was not alle+ed in the infor)ation1 A ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance )#st 6e (leaded in the infor)ation for if it is not (leaded 6#t (roved% it shall onl3 6e considered as a +eneric a++ravatin+ circ#)stance in the i)(osition of the correct (enalt31 WON ".!# "t"#$ #+ K&"+e ".!r" #$.e$tK )1 TC (a !r#!er. ?!1 Peo(le v1 Ga+#io cf1 Peo(le v1 Penillos5 he Code does not (rescri6e the (enalt3 of Nlife i)(rison)entN for an3 of the felonies therein defined% that (enalt3 6ein+ invaria6l3 i)(osed for serio#s offenses (enali/ed not 63 the Revised Penal Code 6#t 63 s(ecial laws1 Recl#sion (er(et#al entails i)(rison)ent for at least 30 3ears after which the convict 6eco)es eli+i6le for (ardon% it also carries with it accessor3 (enalties% na)el35 (er(et#al s(ecial dis,#alification% etc1 4t is not the sa)e as Nlife i)(rison)entN which% for one thin+% does not carr3 with it an3 accessor3 (enalt3% and for another% does not a((ear to have an3 definite e-tent or d#ration1



the fallen (olice)an E ta#ntin+l3 .ic.ed hi) sa3in+% BAre @o# Still AliveSD >ersion of Padilla I the victi) was shot at the head 63 #nidentified )en1 :e contends that he was at a distance str#++lin+ with a wo)an at the ti)e that !nt#nca was hit1 WON t'e /a%"&&a '#t O$tu$ca. @9S1 4)(ro6a6ilit3 of the version of the defense lies (rinci(all3 on the )edical findin+s on the (oint of entr3 of the 6#llet% si/e of the +#nshot wo#nd and its characteristics as well as the location of the sl#+ ta.en fro) the head of the victi)  all (oints towards the acc#sed 'iffic#lt to 6elieve that the alle+ed +#n)an fired the shot that hit the victi) at the to( of his head fro) his ri+ht side% while the latter was at a distance str#++lin+ with a wo)an at the ti)e he was hit1 he testi)on3 was )ade in a strai+htforward )anner1 WON t'ere " treac'er1. ?!1 Acc#sed did not deli6eratel3 e)(lo3 )eans% )ethods or for)s in the )ode of his attac. which tended directl3 and s(eciall3 to ins#re his safet3 fro) the an3 offensive or retaliator3 act the victi) )i+ht )a.e1 A((ellant didnFt conscio#sl3 ado(t a (artic#lar )ethod or )anner of .illin+ the victi) that wo#ld eli)inate an3 ris. to hi)self% for it wasnFt #ntil !nt#ca E the wo)an he was holdin+ hosta+e accidentall3 fell to the +ro#nd that a((ellant was accorded the instant o((ort#nit3 to .ill his victi) wK facilit31 Peo(le vs1 Canete I circ#)stance that the deceased had fallen to the +ro#nd +ave the acc#sed the o((ort#nit3 of which he (ro)(tl3 availed of to co)e #( with the deceased and dis(atch hi) at once1 G#t the act of so doin+ cannot 6e inter(reted as envincin+ a desi+n to e)(lo3 a )ethod indicative of alevosia1 Assa#lt on the victi) was not )ade in a s#dden and #ne-(ected )anner1 >icti) was forewarned of a +raver evil when acc#sed and his co)(anions )a#led hi)1

I ue : 1. 



 -. 

,. /EO/LE v. RUELAN [231 SCRA 680 (1&&7)] Fact :  *ordito R#elan is the store hel(er of Ricardo E Rosa "ardiel1 :e sta3ed in the "ardielFs residence 6#t he had se(arate ,#arters for slee(in+  !ne da3% Ricardo awo.e to Rosa leavin+ his roo)1 :e saw Rosa )eet with R#elan at the +ate of the ho#se as the3 were a6o#t to o(en the store1 Rosa ordered R#elan to +et an a-e to 6e #sed in re(airin+ so)e fi-t#res and a sac.1  hen RosaFs ho#se do+ +ot loose E went o#t towards the street1 Rosa scolded R#elan while the latter (leaded that she sto( 6eratin+ hi)1 Rosa didnFt heed to his re,#est E R#elan +ot fed #( E #sin+ his a-e% he str#c. Rosa 6ehind her ri+ht ear ca#sin+ her to fall face down1 hen% a((ellant dra++ed her to a +rass3 (ortion at the side of the street E i))ediatel3 left the (lace1  R#elan was th#s char+ed 63 the R C of the cri)e of )#rder and i)(osin+ on hi) the (enalt3 of Blife i)(rison)ent1D I ue : 1. WON 'e ca$ )e +#u$% *u"&t1 )e1#$% rea #$a)&e %#u)t #+ t'e cr".e c'ar*e% )a e% #$ t'e e ta)&" 'e% +act 7 ("t'#ut t'e a&&e*e% (r"tte$ e5tra<u%"c"a& c#$+e "#$  R#elan contends that his e-traC#dicial confession is inad)issi6le as he was never a((rised of his constit#tional ri+hts to re)ain silent% to co#nsel% E to 6e infor)ed of s#ch ri+hts1  G#t a confession is (res#)ed to 6e vol#ntar3 #ntil the contrar3 is (roved E the 6#rden of (roof is #(on the (erson )a.in+ the confession1  4n this case% the (res#)(tion hasnFt 6een overco)e1 ?ot onl3 is the a((ellantOs confession re(lete with details onl3 he co#ldFve s#((lied% 6#t the circ#)stances s#rro#ndin+ its e-ec#tion 6elie his clai)  G3 vol#ntaril3 e-ec#tin+ his e-traC#dicial confession after havin+ 6een infor)ed 63 Att31 <#/ Corte/ of







/EO/LE v. /ADILLA [233 SCRA 76 (1&&7)] Nature: A((eal fro) the decision of the Co*4 of Cat6alo+an Sa)ar  S+t1 *eli- Padilla was a )e)6er of the Phili((ine Air *orce1 :e was char+e wK a cri)e of )#rder ,#alified 63 treacher3% evident (re)editation E ta.in+ advanta+e of his (#6lic (osition for fatal shootin+ on Ma3 8% 1&$1 of his co)rade= in=ar)s Pfc1 !nt#nca1 2 AC were alle+ed to have attended the co))ission of the offense5 aid or ar)ed )en E a6#se of s#(erior stren+th1  C convicted Padilla of )#rder ,#alified 63 treacher3 wK the +eneric AC of ta.in+ advanta+e of his (#6lic (osition 6#t at the sa)e ti)e MC of s#fficient (rovocation in favo#r of the acc#sed1  Prosec#tion Jitness Pat1 !)e+a I o+ether with MaC1 'e la Cr#/ the3 were C#st across the street (18 )eters) and fro) where the3 stood the3 co#ld see clearl3 the side view of the acc#sed E the victi) facin+ each other1 !nt#ca 6e++ed for his life E said that he was not +oin+ to fi+ht with hi)1 he acc#sed showed no )erc3 and s,#ee/ed the tri++er (#)(in+ a sin+le 6#llet into the head of his victi) who was C#st so)e 3=7 )eters fro) hi)1 he acc#sed 6ac.trac.ed E then ret#rned to

,.

WON AC #+ a)u e #+ u!er"#r tre$*t' ca$ )e a!!rec"ate%  @9S1 Pro(erl3 alle+ed1  A6#se of s#(erior stren+th is (resent not onl3 when the offenders enCo3 n#)erical s#(eriorit3% or there is a notorio#s ine,#alit3 of forces 6etween the victi) and the a++ressor% 6#t also when the offender #ses a (owerf#l wea(on wKc is o#t of (ro(ortion to the defense availa6le to the offended (art31  Acc#sed was ar)ed wK a (owerf#l (istol wKc he (#r(osel3 #sed% +ainin+ hi) an advanta+e to his victi) who onl3 had a (iece of (l3wood to cover hi)self after he was disar)ed1 WON t'e accu e% a)u e% '" !u)&"c !# "t"#$. ?!1 P#6lic official )#st #se his infl#ence% (resti+e% E ascendanc3 wKc his office +ives hi) in reali/in+ his (#r(ose Co#ld not 6e said that the acc#sed (#r(osel3 #sed or too. advanta+e of his (osition or ran. in .illin+ the victi) 6eca#se he co#ld have co))itted the cri)e C#st the sa)e 63 #sin+ another wea(on not necessaril3 his service firear)

A. 



/EO/LE v. CASTILLO [2$& SCRA 213 (1&&$)] Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of R C of V#e/on Cit3  Aro#nd 1AM on Ma3 8% 1&&3% 9#lo+io >elasco% flr )ana+er of Cola P#6ho#se alon+ 9'SA% was sittin+ o#tside the (#6 while tal.in+ wK his co=wor.er1 Soon% their c#sto)er on3 'o)etita ca)e o#t of the (#6 and infor)ed hi) that heFll 6e on his wa3 ho)e1 :owever% when he was a6o#t an ar)Fs len+th fro) 9#lo+io% a((ellant Ro6ert Castillo ca)e o#t fro) nowhere and s#ddenl3 and wKo warnin+ sta66ed on3 wK a fan .nife on his left chest1 As on3 (leaded for hel(% a((ellant sta66ed hi) once )ore% hittin+ hi) on the left hand1 9#lo+io (laced a chair 6etween the two to sto( Castillo fro) f#rther attac.in+ on31  on3 ran awa3 6#t a((ellant (#rs#ed hi)1 9#lo+io ca)e to .now later that on3 had died1 :is 6od3 was fo#nd o#tside the fence of 4+lesia ni Cristo% 9'SA1 Medico=le+al officer testified that the (ro-i)ate ca#se of on3Fs death was the sta6 wo#nd on his chest1  A((ellant Ro6ert Castillo clai)s that decedent on3 was attac.ed 63 2 )alefactors as testified 63 one 9dil6erto Marcelino% a tric3cle driver% who saw )en +an+in+ #( on on3 63 the co)(o#nd of 4+lesia ni Cristo1  C did not a((reciate CastilloFs defense of ali6i and held that the .illin+ was ,#alified 63 a6#se of s#(erior stren+th% the acc#sed havin+ s#r(rised and attac.ed wK a deadl3 wea(on1 And altho#+h treacher3 was (resent% it also held that this was a6sor6ed 63 a6#se of s#(erior stren+th1  A((ellant contends that the C showed its (reC#dice a+ainst hi) 63 as.in+ ,#estions that were well wKin the (rosec#tion to e-(lore and as.1 8ELD: A((ellant Castillo is +#ilt3 of )#rder for the death of Antonio 'o)etita1 he alle+ation of 6ias E (reC#dice isnFt well=ta.en1 4t is a C#d+eFs (rero+ative E d#t3 to as. clarificator3 ,#estion to ferret o#t the tr#th1 he (ro(riet3 of a C#d+eFs ,#eries is deter)ined not necessaril3 63 their ,#antit3 6#t 63 their ,#alit3 E in an3 event% 63 the test of whether the defendant was (reC#diced 63 s#ch ,#estionin+1 he (rosec#tion was #na6le to (rove the a++r circ#)stance of evident (re)editation1 :owever% SC held that the .illin+ was not ,#alified 63 a6#se of s#(erior stren+th% contrar3 to CFs r#lin+1 he (rosec#tion did not de)onstrate that there was a )ar.ed difference in the stat#re and 6#ild of the victi) and the a((ellant wKc wo#ld have (recl#ded an a((ro(riate defense fro) the victi)1 :owever% the .illin+ was ,#alified 63 treacher31 reacher3 is co))itted when 2 conditions conc#r5 (1) )eans% )ethods and for)s of e-ec#tion e)(lo3ed left the (erson attac.ed no o((ort#nit3 to defend hi)self or to retaliate% and (2) that s#ch )eans% )ethods% and for)s of e-ec#tion were deli6eratel3 and conscio#sl3 ado(ted 63 the acc#sed wKo dan+er to his (erson1 hese re,#isites were evidentl3 (resent when the acc#sed a((eared fro) nowhere and swiftl3 and #ne-(ectedl3 sta66ed the victi) C#st as he was 6iddin+ +ood63e to his friend1 he action rendered it diffic#lt for the victi) to defend hi)self1 he (resence of Bdefense wo#ndsD does not ne+ate treacher3 6eca#se the first sta6% fatal as it was% was inflicted on the chest and hence% rendered on3 defenseless1 A((eal denied% assailed decision affir)ed1 Award of inde)nit3 to the heirs of Castillo in the a)o#nt of PhP80R1







:is wife *lora Sarno was left inside the h#t1 Jhile on to( of the tree% Corte/ was str#c. 63 a valle3 of shots1 :e later on fell to the +ro#nd at the 6ase of the cocon#t tree1 *lora went o#tside E was s#((osed to hel( his h#s6and 6#t the five (ersons each ar)ed wKa lon+ firear) fired at her too1 She went 6ac. to the h#t for cover 6#t she was a6le to reco+ni/e the 8 as Conrado 2on/ales% 4rineo Can#el% Perino Can#el% 9le#terio C#3o) E <a#reano San+alan+1 he latter was .nown to *lora E her 6ro Ricardo since childhood1 he five left after a6o#t 8)ins E when she ret#rned to her h#s6and% he was alread3 dead1  Ricardo Sarno% *loraFs 6ro who lived near63% heard the +#nshots too1 :e went o#t E saw San+alan+ shootin+ Corte/ wKa 2arand car6ine1 :e was s#((osed to hel( Corte/ 6#t he was fired #(on 63 the )en too1 Sarno E *lora e-ec#ted sworn state)ents E 6ased on these% a co)(laint a+ainst the 8 offenders was filed1 !nl3 San+alan+ was arrested1 C*4 convicted hi) of )#rder E was sentenced to RP1 'efense5 San+alan+ clai)s that d#rin+ that ti)e% he was in Sa)(aloc% Manila to 6orrow )one3 fro) a certain 2atd#la for the t#ition fees of his children1 :e li.ewise i)(#+ns the credi6ilit3 of Mrs1 Corte/ E Ricardo1



  





GenCa)in +ot #( and wal.ed to the door to tal. to Catalino% who was also an e)(lo3ee in the sa)e office1 :e saw that Catalino was red=faced% an+r3 and holdin+ a 6alison+ and was with a )an who) GenCa)in did not .now1 GenCa)in said to hi)% NR#n+ ano )an i3on% a3 hinihin+i .o na sa i3o1N Catalino re(lied% N?a.i.ini+ na)an a.o sa i3o1N GenCa)in then went 6ac. in the roo) 6elievin+ that he had cal)ed down and (acified Catalino1 G#t no sooner had he settled hi)self to res#)e wor. than he saw Catalino o(en the door% co)e in and r#sh towards *lorentino1 At that ti)e *lorentino had his 6ac. to Catalino and Catalino sta66ed *lorentino in the 6ac.1 *lorentino t#rned to face hi) and a str#++le ens#ed 6etween the)1 GenCa)in Coined the fra3 and tried to sto( the assa#lt and hel( his father wrest the 6alison+ awa3 fro) Catalino1 Catalino% however% (assed the .nife to his co)(anion who ,#ic.l3 fled1 *lorentino sta++ered and fell and GenCa)in went to his father% who was alread3 all 6loodied% and t#rned hi) on his 6ac.1 :is )other ca)e so he left her to see to his father and went in (#rs#it of Catalino who had also fled in the )eanti)e1 he3 event#all3 a((rehended Catalino1

I ue 4 Rat"#: 1. WON Sa$*a&a$*3 a&")" " a%." ")&e  ?!1 'iscre(ancies in the testi)onies of Sarno E Mrs1 Corte/ are not +larin+ and instead these stren+then their credi6ilit3 E show that the3 did not rehearse their testi)onies1  Corte/ E Sarno clearl3 E consistentl3 testified that San+alan+ was a)on+ those who shot Ricardo1 heir #nwaverin+ identification ne+ates San+alan+Fs ali6i1  Altho#+h )otive for .illin+ was not (roven% it was not shown either that Corte/ E Sarno were i)(elled 63 )alicio#s desires to falsel3 incri)inate San+alan+1 -. WON t'e Fua&"+1"$* AC #+ treac'er1 Ba&ev# "aE '#u&% )e a!!rec"ate%.  @9S1 Jhen the cri)e ha((ened% victi) was on to( of a cocon#t tree1 :e was #nar)ed E defenseless1 he assa#lt was #ne-(ected1 :e didnFt +ive an3 i))ediate (rovocation1 'eli6erate E s#r(rise attac. ins#red victi)Fs .illin+ wKo an3 ris. to the offenders arisin+ fro) an3 defense wKc the victi) co#ld have )ade1 h#s% offense is )#rder1  reacher3 a6sor6s the AC of 6and1  9vident (re)editation% tho#+h alle+ed% was not (roven1

8e&%: C*4 affir)ed1

/EO/LE v. GUITIERRE>7 JR. [18$ SCRA 617 (1&$$)] Fact :  Catalino was char+ed with the )#rder of *lorentino Mant#ano and fo#nd +#ilt3 thereof 63 the Gatan+as% C*41 Co#rt +ave credence to the testi)on3 of GenCa)in Mant#ano% *lorentinoFs son% who was wor.in+ with hi) in the sa)e office1  Accordin+ to GenCa)in% he was at wor. with his father when the cri)e occ#rred1 :is father C#st ca)e fro) the co)fort roo) and was a6o#t to enter the door leadin+ into the roo) GenCa)in was in when GenCa)in heard Catalino so)ewhere at the front door of the office% challen+in+ *lorentino to a d#el1 he challen+e was re(eated two or three ti)es1

I ue: J!? R C erred in classif3in+ the .illin+ as )#rder the avowed ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance of treacher3 was a6sent1  ?!1 Catalino clai)s that havin+ 6een challen+ed to a fi+ht had (#t *lorentino on +#ard which effectivel3 (recl#ded the ado(tion or e)(lo3)ent of )eans of attac. calc#lated to ens#re the .illin+ witho#t ris. to hi)self1  :owever% the ar+#)ent disre+ards the fact that an event had s#(ervened 6etween the challen+e and the assa#lt i1e1% the atte)(t of the victi)Os son to (acif3 the acc#sed and his co)(anion which had see)in+l3 s#cceeded in the li+ht of the latterOs res(onse% N?a.i.ini+ na)an a.o sa i3o1N  here was th#s no lon+er an3 reason for either the victi)% *lorentino% or his son% GenCa)in% to e-(ect an3 attac. fro) the acc#sed1 *lorentino was in fact alread3 wal.in+ toward the side door of the office% on the (oint of +oin+ ho)e% and GenCa)in was seatin+ hi)self 6ac. at his des. to res#)e wor. when s#ddenl3 and swiftl3% the acc#sed had fl#n+ o(en the front door% r#shed at *lorentino and sta66ed hi) in the 6ac.1  he attac. was clearl3 attended 63 alevosiaL it was s#dden and #ne-(ected% (er(etrated fro) 6ehind% the victi) 6ein+ #nar)ed% with no chance to defend hi)self1  Peo(le v1 >illan#eva5 his .illin+ was an assassination (#re and si)(le1 4t was a deli6erate% s#dden and #ne-(ected assa#lt fro) 6ehind% witho#t warnin+ and witho#t +ivin+ the victi) a chance to defend hi)self or re(el the assa#lt% and witho#t ris. to the assailant1 hat is the characteristic or distin+#ishin+ hall)ar. of alevosia1 4t was not a .illin+ )ade on the s(#r of the )o)ent1 4t was not (ro)(ted 63 )ere i)(#lse1 4t was well=(lanned and reflected #(on as shown 63 the (rior threatenin+ acts of the acc#sed and the )anner it was e-ec#ted1 he e-istence of treacher3 cannot 6e do#6ted1 8e&%: 'ecision of C*4 affir)ed1

/EO/LE v. :ERC8E> [160 SCRA 7H (1&$$)] Nature: A((eal fro) the decision of the R C of Gacoor  Acc#sed were convicted of M#rder% *r#strated M#rder and violation of P' 1$66 :er "#$ #+ t'e /r# ecut"#$:

/EO/LE v. SANGALANG [8$ SCRA H3H (1&H7)] Nature: A((eal fro) C*4 a+a3ta3 (wowZ) C#d+)ent  "#ne &% 1&6$% 6 a1)15 Ricardo Corte/ left his ni(a h#t in Silan+% Cavite to +ather t#6a fro) a near63 cocon#t tree1







 



A#+ 18% 1&$8 I Ra#l Castaneda E <t1 Marcelo 2ar6o of the S(ecial !(erations 2ro#(s (S!2) of the Central !r+ani/ed Cri)e as. *orce of the Phili((ine Consta6#lar3K4nte+rated ?ational Police led a tea) of +ovFt a+ents in cond#ctin+ a s#rveillance o(erations on a ho#se re(orted to 6e the hideo#t of a +an+ of s#s(ected 6an. ro66ers1 he3 sto((ed a car the ca)e o#t fro) the s#6division1 he driver was Galane and he was as.ed 63 the (olice officers to acco)(an3 the) to where his co)(anions where sta3in+1 Jhen the 1st car a((roached the ho#se the3 were )et wK heav3 volle3 of +#nfire1 ?orcio died while ?oora E Pa+sanCan were inC#red1 Men inside the ho#se event#all3 s#rrendered1 Acc#sed were assisted 63 Att31 'e la Rosa when the3 e-ec#ted their sworn state)ents1 >erche/% Aldave and Galane ad)itted 6ein+ involved in several 6an. heist and >erche/ also ad)itted that he fired the first shot at the (olice)en1 he firear)s of the acc#sed were #nre+istered and #nlicensed1

  A.

?o showin+ that the a((ellants deli6eratel3 intended to offend or ins#lt the ran. of the victi)1 Raidin+ (olice officers were not even in #nifor)

WON t'e1 are *u"&t1 #+ "&&e*a& !# e "#$ #+ +"rear. YES  Ar+#)ent that the3 C#st #sed the firear)s in self defense and that the3 didnFt own the firear) cannot 6e acce(ted 63 the co#rt1 <aw does not (rescri6e a )ini)#) (eriod for the holdin+ of the firear)1 Gesides the3 retrieved the firear)s fro) the ca6inet in their res(ective roo)s1 WON t'e Fua&"+1"$* c"rcu. ta$ce #+ u e #+ a$ u$&"ce$ e% +"rear. "$ '#."c"%e #r .ur%er '#u&% )e a!!rec"ate%. NO  *or it to 6e considered as a ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance it )#st 6e alle+ed in the infor)ation1 /EO/LE v. SIAO [32H SCRA 231 (2000)]

H.

:er "#$ #+ t'e De+e$ e:  >erche/ invited Galane on A#+#st 18% 1&&7 to visited his 6rother1 he3 were Coined 63 Aldave% Jhile the3 were waitin+ for the 6rother of >erche/% Galane went o#t to 6#3 ci+arettes and (#l#tan1 :is car was 6loc.ed and the occ#(ants of the other car (ointed their firear)s at hi)1 he3 dra++ed hi) o#t of the car% handc#ffed and 6lindfolded hi)1  >erche/ saw several cars sto( o#tside the ho#se and he heard a +#nshot1 >erche/ and Aldave +ot loaded firear)s fro) the roo)s and fired 6ac.1  he3 contended that the3 were forced into si+nin+ a (re(ared state)ent confessin+ their ille+al activities% incl#din+ havin+ en+a+ed the (olice officers in a fire fi+ht1 I ue : 1.  WON t'e e5tra<u%"c"a& tate.e$t are a%." ")&e. 4MMA 9R4A<1 hereFs s#fficient evidence% inde(endent of their confessions to hold the) +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1 WON treac'er1 (a u++"c"e$t&1 e ta)&" 'e%. ?!1 wo conditions )#st conc#r o 9)(lo3)ent of )eans of e-ec#tion that +ives the (erson attac.ed no o((ort#nit3 to defend hi)self or to retaliate o Said )eans of e-ec#tion was deli6eratel3 or conscio#sl3 ado(ted <aw)en were (re(ared for an3 resistance that )a3 6e (ossi6l3 6e (#t #( ?orcio was .illed and ?oora was wo#nded d#rin+ and not 6efore the +#n 6attle here is no showin+ that the a((ellants deli6eratel3 and conscio#sl3 ado(ted their )ode of attac.1 ?o showin+ that the3 (lanned to a)6#sh the law)en% )#ch less that the3 .new the law)en were co)in+1 A((ellants were ca#+ht 63 s#r(rise 63 law)en% hence% actin+ on the s(#r of the )o)ent% the3 fired 6ac.1

-. 

  



Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of R C Ce6# (2000)  !n Ma3 2H% 1&&7% at a6o#t 3PM% acc#sed=a((ellant Rene Siao in his residence ordered Re3lan 2i)ena% his fa)il3Fs 1H3r old ho#se6o3% to (#ll 9strella Ra3)#ndo% their 173r old ho#se)aid% to the wo)enFs ,#arters1 !nce inside% a((ellant Siao (#shed her to the wooden 6ed and as.ed her to choose one a)on+ a (istol% candle or a 6ottle of s(rite1 A((ellant lit the candle and dro((ed the )eltin+ candle on her chest1 9strella was )ade to lie down on her 6ac. on the 6ed wK her head han+in+ over one end1 A((ellant then (o#red s(rite into her nostrils as she was )ade to s(read her ar)s wK his +#n (ointed to her face1 A((ellant Siao then tied her feet and hands wK an electric cord or wire as she was )ade to lie face down on the 6ed1 As Siao (ointed his (istol at her% he ordered 9strella to #ndress and co))anded her to ta.e the initiative on 2i)ena1 ?ot #nderstandin+ what he )eant% a((ellant )otioned to her (o.in+ the +#n at her te)(le1 2i)ena was then ordered to re)ove his shorts1 :e did not do so 6#t onl3 let his (enis o#t1 A((ellant Siao s(read the ar)s of 9strella and )ade her lie down s(read= ea+led1 She felt di//3 and sho#ted for hel( twice1 Siao then ordered 2i)ena to ra(e 9strella1 At first% 2i)ena ref#sed 6eca#se he has a sister1 :owever% Siao said that if the3 wo#ld not o6e3% he wo#ld .ill 6oth of the)1  Goth 2i)ena and 9strella were forced and inti)idated at +#n(oint 63 Siao to have carnal .nowled+e of each other1 he3 (erfor)ed the se-#al act 6eca#se the3 were afraid the3 wo#ld 6e .illed1 Siao co))anded 2i)ena to ra(e 9strella in 3 diff (ositions (i1e1 )issionar3 (osition% side=63=side and do+ (osition as narrated vividly in the case)% (ointin+ the hand+#n at the) the whole ti)e1 hereafter% Siao warned the)% B4f 3o# will tell the (olice% 4 will .ill 3o#r )others1D  A((ellant Siao% for his defense% denies the whole event1 :e asserts that she retaliated thro#+h this acc#sation 6eca#se 9strella herself was acc#sed of stealin+ )an3 of his fa)il3Fs (ersonal effects1  C held Rene Siao +#ilt3 as (rinci(al 63 ind#ction of ra(e and i)(osed #(on hi) the (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a and inde)nification of PhP80R1 2i)ena was ac,#itted for havin+ acted #nder the i)(#lse of #ncontrolla6le fear of an e,#al% if not +reater inC#r31 8ELD: SC res(ected CFs findin+ of facts and fo#nd an3 inconsistencies in the witnessesF testi)onies inconse,#ential considerin+ that the3 referred to trivial )atters wKc have nothin+ to do wK the essential fact of the co))ission of ra(e% that is carnal

.nowled+e thro#+h force and inti)idation1 9r+o% even if it was (ointed o#t that in all 3 (ositions% 2i)ena eCac#lated 3- in a s(an of less than 30 )ins% wKc does not confor) to co))on e-(erience% ra(e was still (resent fro) the evidence 6eca#se ra(e is not the e)ission of se)en 6#t the (enetration of the fe)ale +enitalia 63 the )ale or+an1 Penetration% however sli+ht% and not eCac#lation% is what constit#tes ra(e1 Moreover% even if the ho#se was occ#(ied 63 )an3 (eo(le at the ti)e of the cri)e% ra(e was still co))itted 6eca#se l#st is no res(ecter of ti)e and (lace1 And 9strellaFs and 2i)enaFs decision not to flee (roves onl3 the fear and inti)idation that the3 were #nder 6eca#se Siao was after all their Ba)oD or e)(lo3er who threatened to .ill the) or their fa)il3 if the3 did not s#cc#)6 to his de)ands1 he +overnin+ law is Art 338 RPC as a)ended 63 RA H68& wKc i)(oses the (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a to death% if co))itted wK the #se of a deadl3 wea(on1 he C overloo.ed and did not ta.e into acco#nt the a++r circ#)stance of i+no)in3 and sentenced acc#sed=a((ellant to the sin+le indivisi6le (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a1 4t has 6een held that where the acc#sed in co))ittin+ the ra(e #sed not onl3 the )issionar3 (osition i1e1 )ale s#(erior% fe)ale inferior 6#t also the do+ (osition as do+s do% i1e1 entr3 fro) 6ehind% as was (roven in the case% the a++r circ#)stance of i+no)in3 attended the co))ission thereof1 :owever% the #se of a deadl3 wea(on serves to increase the (enalt3 as o((osed to a +eneric a++r circ#)stance wKc onl3 affects the period of the (enalt31 his nonetheless sho#ld 6e alle+ed in the infor)ation% 6eca#se of the acc#sedFs ri+ht to 6e infor)ed of the nat#re and ca#se of the acc#sation a+ainst hi)1 Considerin+ that the co)(laint failed to alle+e the #se of a deadl3 wea(on% the (enalt3 to 6e rec.oned wK in deter)inin+ the (enalt3 for ra(e wo#ld 6e recl#sion (er(et#a% as (rescri6ed for si)(le ra(e1 Si)(le ra(e is (#nisha6le 63 the sin+le indivisi6le (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a% wKc )#st 6e a((lied re+ardless of an3 )itKa++r circ#)stance wKc )a3 have attended the co))ission of the deed1 :ence% the (enalt3 of reclusion perpetua i)(osed 63 the C is correct1 Siao is f#rther ordered to (a3 the offended (art3 )oral da)a+es% wKc is a#to)aticall3 +ranted in ra(e cases wKo need of an3 (roof% in the a)o#nt of PhP80R1 *#rther)ore% the (resence of the a++r circ#)stance of i+no)in3 C#stifies the award of e-e)(lar3 da)a+es (#rs#ant to Art 2230 CC1 "#d+)ent affir)ed wK )odification of da)a+es awarded1

/EO/LE v. ;AELLO [227 SCRA 21$ (1&&3)] Nature: A((eal fro) the C#d+)ent of R C Pasi+  !ct1 10% 1&&0% 8 a1)15 Gr+31 Ca(t1 9#sta,#io GorCa awo.e to find o#t that the front door of his ho#se was o(en E that their > set in the sala was )issin+1 :e E his wife went to the 2nd floor E fo#nd their da#+hter% >eronica Gaello dead1 She was sta66ed to death1 GorCa re(orted the incident to the a#thorities E the3 later on discovered that so)e )ore ite)s were )issin+ in their ho#se1 <ost ite)s a)o#nt to a6o#t P80.1  S#s(ects5 "ohn Gaello% also .nown as oton+ alon+ with one "err3 whoFs still at lar+e1 Jh3S > set discovered in the ho#se of GaelloFs 6ro=in=law% 9#+enio a+ifa1 a+ifa e-ec#ted a sworn state)ent testif3in+ that it was Gaello who 6ro#+ht the > to their ho#se1 Gaello was ca(t#red later on E he ad)itted that he too. (art in the co))ission of the cri)e1 :is testi)on3 was ta.en in the (resence of PA! law3er Att31 2eneroso since he co#ldnFt afford his own co#nsel1 :e ad)itted that the3 (assed thro#+h the window of the ho#seFs 2 nd floor however% he clai)ed that he onl3 +ot the > set E he didnFt .now what ite)s 2err3 too. fro) the ho#se1 :e f#rther clai)ed

,.

WON t'e AC #+ %" re*ar% #+ t'e re !ect %ue t'e #++e$%e% !art1 #$ t'e acc#u$t #+ '" ra$C ca$ )e a!!rec"ate%. YES





that 2err3 was res(onsi6le for >eronicaFs death since he was the one who sta3ed on the 2nd floor of the ho#se1 :e later on clai)ed that he was )a#led E that his law3er (Att31 2eneroso) didnFt reall3 hel(Kdefend hi)1 Accordin+ to hi)% Att31 2eneroso si)(l3 stared at hi) E that the law3er as.ed Gaello to si+n a t3(ewritten state)ent wKthe (ro)ise that heFll 6e released later on1 GaelloFs )other attested to the fact that her son had cont#sions ca#sed alle+edl3 63 one 2a6riel% 9#sta,#ioFs ne(hew% who was in Cail too1 R C fo#nd Gaello +#ilt3 E sentenced hi) to RP (recl#sion (er(et#a) wKinde)nit3 of P80. E ordered to (a3 P80. as re(atriation for the stolen ite)s1





ISSUES 4 RATIO: 1. WON ;ae&&#3 e5tra0<u%"c"a& c#$+e "#$ " a%." ")&e eve$ "+ 'e a&&e*e%&1 (a $#t +u&&1 4 %u&1 a " te% )1 c#u$ e& ('e$ uc' (a *"ve$  @9S1 :e vol#ntaril3 acce(ted 2enerosoFs services (#rs#ant to Sec1 12(1)% Art1 444 of the Consti wKc (rovides that if a (erson canFt afford the services of co#nsel% he )#st 6e (rovided wKone1  'oc#)ent was (resented that the co#nsel d#l3 infor)ed Gaello of his constit#tional ri+hts as well as the conse,#ences of his confession1 :e was even advised not to )a.e an3 6#t he insisted1  4f these were tr#e% then he sho#ld have not si+ned the doc#)ent or he sho#ld have co)(lained1  Si)ilar cases have #(held the ad)issi6ilit3 of s#ch e-tra=C#dicial confessions s#ch as Peo(le vs1 Pin/on E Peo(le vs1 Mason+son+1 -. WON t'ere (a c#$ !"rac1  @9S1 :e ad)itted in his sworn state)ent that he E 2err3 had a (rior a+ree)ent to co))it ro66er31 he3 )et at 7 in the )ornin+ E the3 went in the ho#se to+ether1 a.en as a whole% these acts esta6lish that there was co))on desi+n 6etween the 21  9ven if he onl3 too. (art in the cri)e of ro66er3% since cons(irac3 was (roven% he shall li.ewise 6e lia6le for the ho)icide 2err3 co))itted #nless he can (rove that he (revented 2err3 fro) co))ittin+ s#ch1  esti)onies of witnesses are ad)issi6le1 Res(ect is accorded to the findin+s of the lower co#rts since it did not overloo. or )isa((reciate an3 facts that )a3 chan+e the res#lt1 WON t'e AC #+ u$&a(+u& e$tr1 '#u&% )e a!!rec"ate%.  @9S1 he3 entered the GorCa residence thro#+h the second floor window wKc is not intended for in+ress1  ?!C 0R?4 @ also a((reciated (AC) since the cri)e was co))itted in the dar.ness E the3 too. advanta+e of s#ch circ#)stance to acco)(lish the cri)e1





Go3Fs co#nsel filed a )otion to (#t hi) #nder (s3chiatricK)ental e-a) clai)in+ that he co#ldnFt +et a coherent answer fro) the acc#sed1 G#t the ?atFl Center for Mental :ealth iss#ed a certification that he was in fair condition1 Prosec#tion witnesses5 11 "ac,#eline 2on/ales I <i/etteFs )o) who clai)s that she was fetchin+ water fro) the artesian well when incident ha((ened1 She clai)s she saw <i/ette cr3in+ E the +irl then narrated to her what ha((ened E (#lled her to Go3Fs ho#se however acc#sed was not ho)e1 21 <i/ette testified that she .new the acc#sed E that he inserted his (enis into her va+ina as she was laid down in a +rass3 area1 She li.ewise testified that she .new that it was sin to tell a lie1 31 'r1 9)elita V#iro/ I !2=23ne who e-a)ined <i/ette testified that +irlFs va+ina was (ositive for s(er) cells wKc si+nified that se-#al interco#rse too. (lace1 71 eresita Ma+tano6% )ed tech% corro6orated V#iro/F findin+s re s(er) cells 81 SP!2 Ro)eo G#nso3% P?P )e)6er on d#t3 when <i/ette re(orted incident1 :e cond#cted an oc#lar ins(ection of the alle+ed (lace of incident E discovered that +rasses were flattened1 Peo(le in near63 areas li.ewise testified that the3 saw Go3 6rin+ <i/ette in that area1 'efense witnesses5 11 Carlito Gondoc I testified that Go3 was at ho)e d#rin+ the ti)e the incident occ#rred 6eca#se he E Carlito were havin+ coffee1 21 Go3 I denied havin+ ra(ed the +irl1 Ali6i5 he was in his ho#se (re(arin+ coffee for Carlito1 R C5 convicted of ,#alified ra(e sentenced to death% th#s a#to)atic review1







?!1 ?ot covered 63 hearsa3 r#le% Sec1 36% R#le 130% R!9 wKc (rovides that a witness can testif3 onl3 to those facts wKc he .nows of his (ersonal .nowled+e e-ce(t as otherwise (rovided 63 the R!C1 :earsa35 evidence not fo#nded #(on (ersonal .nowled+e of witness 6#t rather on facts learned fro) a 3rd (erson not sworn as a witness to those facts% wKc testi)on3 is inad)issi6le1 9-cl#ded 6eca#se thereFs no chance for Co#rt to cross=e-a)ine alle+ed so#rce of info E to test his credi6ilit31 ?ot a((lica6le in this case considerin+ that so#rce of info (<i/ette) was act#all3 sworn in E cross= e-a)ined1 Co#rt had the chance to o6serve her )anner of testif3in+1 Gesides% "ac,#elineFs testi)on3 )erel3 corro6orated <i/etteFs testi)on31 RidFs testi)on3 is s#fficient to convict Go31

,.

A.

,.

8ELD: Conviction affir)ed1

/EO/LE v. /RUNA [21R1 ?o1 13$7H1% !ct1 10% 2002] Nature: A#to)atic review of R C Gataan decision  "an1 3% 1&&85 while 3=3r old <i/ette Ara6elle 2on/ales was defecatin+ at their nei+h6orFs 6ac.3ard% a certain Man#el BGo3D Pr#na called hi) E (laced her on his la(1 Go3 was then #nder the 6rid+e% sniffin+ r#+63 E drin.in+ alcohol wKso)e friends1 Go3 later on 6ro#+ht her to a +rass3 area E ra(ed her1 Go3 was later on arrested1

I ue 4 Rat"#: 1. WON L"?ette " a c#.!ete$t 4 cre%")&e ("t$e c#$ "%er"$* t'at 'e (a #$&1 , ('e$ ra!e% 4 H %ur"$* tr"a&  @9S1 2en r#le when a witness ta.es a stand is to (res#)e that heFs co)(etent1 G#rden5 #(on (art3 o6Cectin+ to co)(etenc3 to esta6lish +ro#nd of inco)(etenc31  Sec1 21% R#le 130% R#les on 9vidence (R!9)5 .ids whose )ental )at#rit3 render the) inca(a6le of (erceivin+ the facts res(ectin+ wKc the3Fre e-a)ined E relatin+ the) tr#thf#ll3 are dis,#alified to 6e witnesses1 ?o (recise )ini)#) a+e is fi-ed1  est of co)(etenc35 4ntelli+ence not a+e1 As lon+ as child can (erceive E )a.e .nown his (erce(tion to other E that heFs ca(a6le of relatin+ tr#thf#ll3 facts for wKc heFs e-a)ined1 Consider childFs ca(acit3 5 to receive correct i)(ressions d#rin+ incidentL to co)(rehend o6li+ation of an oathL relate to those facts tr#thf#ll3 to the co#rt at the ti)e heFs offered as a witness1 Rid sho#ld #nderstand the (#nish)ent wKc )a3 res#lt fr false swearin+1  'eter)ined 63 so#nd discretion of the co#rt E s#ch is res(ected #nless fo#nd erroneo#s1 4n this case% Go3 failed to dischar+e 6#rden of (rovin+ <i/etteFs )ental i))at#rit31 R C held that .id had ca(acit3 of o6servation% recollection E co))#nication E that she co#ld discern the conse,#ence of tellin+ a lie1 wo 3ears la(se since ti)e of incident is i))aterial considerin+ that itFs a )ost nat1 reaction for victi)s of cri)Fl violence to have a lastin+ i)(ression of how cri)e was co))itted E identit3 of a++ressor1 -. WON JacFue&"$e3 te t".#$1 " 'ear a1

WON G&#r"a T#&e$t"$# '#u&% t"&& )e !re e$te% a a ("t$e  ?!1 olentino listed as witness who saw acc#sed carr3in+ E 6rin+in+ .id to +rass3 area at the 6ac. of her ho#se1  ?o need co/ she alread3 )oved o#t% 6esides% her testi)on3 wo#ld onl3 6e corro6orative of .idFs testi1 WON !r# ecut"#$3 ev"%e$ce (a u++"c"e$t t# c#$v"ct accu e%  @9S1 >icti) s(ontaneo#sl3 identified acc#sed as ra(ist1  RidFs i))ediate revelation to her )o) of the cri)e1  Rid led her )o) to acc#sedFs ho#se ri+ht after the incident  Pro)(t filin+ of co)(laint 6efore the a#thorities  >icti)Fs s#6)ission to )edical e-a)ination  :3(ere)ia in .idFs (rivate (art  Presence of s(er) cells in .idFs va+inal canal E #rine1  Ali6i not acce(ted considerin+ that his alle+ed location did not )a.e it (h3sicall3 i)(ossi6le for hi) to 6e at the cri)e scene d#rin+ the ti)e cri)e was co))itted1 Ali6i cannot (revail over the (ositive identification of victi)1 9s( since ali6i was onl3 corro6orated 63 acc#sedFs friend1 WON L"?ette3 ."$#r"t1 (a !r#!er&1 e ta)&" 'e% 4 ".!# "t"#$ #+ %eat' !e$a&t1 " !r#!er 0 YES  @9S1 RPC Art1 338% (ar1 H% no1 7% a)ended 63 RA ?o1 H68&5 death (enalt3 shall 6e i)(osed if cri)e of ra(eFs co))itted to a .id 6elow H 3rs old1 Minorit3 )#st 6e (roved wKe,#al certaint3 E clearance as cri)e itself1 *ail#re to (rove s#ch wo#ld 6ar conviction for ,#alified ra(e1  Gest (roof of a+e wo#ld 6e the 6irth certificate1 G#t Co#rt has conflictin+ (rono#nce)ents as to J!? s#ch is a condition sine 'ua non to (rove oneFs a+e to a((reciate )inorit3 as an ele)ent of the cri)e or as a ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance1 So)e cases wherein no 6irth certificate was (resented r#led that the victi)Fs a+e was not (roven1 (see ((1 8&&=603 for list of cases cited) 4n so)e instances% )ere (rono#nce)ent of a+e was considered as hearsa31 !n the other hand SC held in so)e cases that a+e was s#fficientl3 esta6lished des(ite fail#re of (rosec#tion to (resent the 6irth certificate1  Co#rt now sets +#idelines in a((reciatin+ a+e either as an ele)ent of cri)e or a ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance5 11 Gest evidence5 ori+inalKcertified tr#e co(3 of the certificate of live 6irth of (art1

H.







21 a6sence of s#ch5 si)ilar a#thentic records s#ch as 6a(tis)al cert E school records showin+ date of 6irth wo#ld 6e s#fficient1 31 4f doc#)ents were lost% destro3ed or #navaila6le% clear E credi6le testi)on3 of victi)Fs )o) or other fa)il3 )e)6ers either 63 affinit3Kconsan+#init3 ,#alified to testif3 re (edi+ree s#ch as e-act a+eKdate of 6irth of victi) (#rs#ant to Sec1 70% R#le 130% R!9 shall 6e s#fficient #nder ff conditions5 a1 victi)Fs alle+ed to 6e 6elow 3 E see. to (rove that sheFs 6elow H1 61 victi)Fs alle+ed to 6e 6elow H E see. to (rove that sheFs 6elow1$1 c1 victi)Fs alle+ed to 6e 6elow 12 E see. to (rove that sheFs 6elow 1$1 71 A6sence of afore)entioned% victi)Fs testi)on3 will s#ffice as lon+ as s#ch is clearl3 E e-(ressl3 ad)itted1 81 Prosec#tion has 6#rden of (roof of (rovin+ victi)Fs a+e1 Acc#sedFs fail#re to o6Cect to the testi)onial evidence shall not 6e ta.en a+ainst hi)1 61 rial co#rt sho#ld alwa3s )a.e a cate+orical findin+ as to the victi)Fs a+e1 4n this case% R C 6ased its decision on )edico= le+al findin+s E fact that defense did not contest .idFs a+e E even ,#estioned her tender a+e1 *or)er does not esta6lish childFs a+e1 4t doesnFt even )ention childFs a+e1 !nl3 testi)onial evidence (resented to esta6lish childFs a+e was Mo)Fs testi)on31 >icti)Fs testi)on3 was conflictin+ for altho#+h she clai)ed to 6e 8 3rs old at the ti)e% she also testified that she was alread3 8 d#rin+ the ti)e she was ra(ed1 ?ote that 2 3ears have la(sed 6etween the ti)e of the incident E the hearin+1 4n convictin+ acc#sed of ,#alified ra(e E sentencin+ hi) to death% i)(t to esta6lish that <i/ette was indeed 6elow H 3rs old at the ti)e of the co))ission of cri)e1 :owever% d#e to #ncertaint3 of her a+e% corro6orative evidence ((ertinent doc#)ents) sho#ld 6e (resented to a((reciate the ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance of ra(e1 <ac. of o6Cection fro) defense as to victi)Fs a+e does not dischar+e (rosec#tion of its 6#rden1 esti)on3 of <i/etteFs )o)5 s#fficient to hold acc#sed lia6le for stat#tor3 ra(eKra(e of +irl 6elow 121 RPC Art1 338 a)ended 63 RA H68& (rovides that s#ch is (#nisha6le wKRP% th#s sentence is lowered fro) death to RP1 P80. inde)nit3 Y P80. )oral da)a+es1

Medico=le+al !fficer 'r Pre3ra testified that C3ra Ma3 is in vir+in state (h3sicall3 and the (resence of a6rasions in her fe)ale or+an1 She f#rther stated that it was ca#sed 63 friction wK an o6Cect% (erha(s an erect (enis and do#6ted if ridin+ on a 6ic3cle had ca#sed s#ch inC#ries1 Ronnie however later denied havin+ an3thin+ to do wK the a6rasions fo#nd in C3ra Ma3Fs +enitalia1 :e o(ined that it was 6eca#se Mrs 2loria G#enafe was a+ainst hi) for not answerin+ her ,#eries a6o#t her :Fs wherea6o#ts thatFs wh3 she fo#nd fa#lt a+ainst hi)1 R C fo#nd R#lle(a +#ilt 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of ra(e and sentenced hi) to death1 8ELD5 R#lle(a +#ilt3 of stat#tor3 ra(e1 :is (rior ad)ission 6eca)e concl#sive #(on hi)1 Moreover% even if s#ch ad)ission% as well as the i)(lication of his fail#re to den3 the sa)e% were disre+arded% the evidence s#ffices to esta6lish his +#ilt 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1 4n addition% C3ra Ma3Fs acco#nt of the event co#ld not (ossi6l3 6e a )ere (rod#ct of her i)a+ination for it is hardl3 the st#ff of ro)ance or fair3 tales1 ?either is it nor)al tv fare1 Gesides% her testi)on3 was corro6orated 63 the findin+s of 'r1 Pre3ra that there were a6rasions in her la6ia )inora1 :er ver3 tender a+e still )ade her (ossess the necessar3 intelli+ence and (erce(tiveness s#fficient to invest her wK the co)(etence to testif3 a6o#t her e-(erience1 R#lle(a (ra3s that he 6e held lia6le for acts of lascivio#sness instead or ra(e since C3ra Ma3 testified that he )erel3 Bscr#66edD his (enis a+ainst her va+ina1 :owever% it was (roven that there was indeed (enetration1 2 9le)ents of Stat#tor3 Ra(e5 11 Acc#sed had carnal .nowled+e of a wo)an 21 Jo)an is 6elow 12 3rs of a+e C3ra Ma3Fs a+e is relevant in this case of ra(e since it )a3 constit#te an ele)ent of the offense as (er RA H68&1 *#rther)ore% the victi)Fs a+e )a3 constit#te a ,#alif3in+ circ#)stance% warrantin+ the i)(osition of the death sentence as (er the sa)e Article11 Altho#+h no doc#)ent was offered as evidence to (rove C3ra Ma3Fs a+e a (ersonFs a((earance is relevant as evidence of a+e so the tri6#nal )a3 (ro(erl3 o6serve the (erson 6ro#+ht 6efore it 21 Moreover% the testi)on3 of a )e)6er of the fa)il3 )a3 6e acce(ted as re+ards the e-act a+e or date of 6irth of the offended (art3 (#rs#ant to Sec 70% R#le 130 of the R#les of 9vidence1 Geca#se of the vast dis(arit3 6etween the alle+ed a+e (3 3rs old) and the a+e so#+ht to 6e (roved (6elow 12 3rs old 3)% there is no do#6t as re+ards the e-istence of the 2nd ele)ent of stat#tor3 ra(e% i1e1 that the victi) was 6elow 12 3rs old at the ti)e of the co))ission of the offense1

Jherefore% R#lle(a is sentenced to s#ffer the (enalt3 of recl#sion (er(et#a and not the death (enalt31 "#d+)ent affir)ed wK )odification1

/EO/LE v. ;ALGOS [323 SCRA 3H2 (2000)] Nature: A#to)atic Review of R C Ro-as Cit3 decision  !ct1 $% 1&&8% 2 (1)15 Criselle *#entes% 6 3rs1 old% went to the ho#se of acc#sed Alfonso Gal+os to (la3 wKMichelle E Jada3% Gal+osF nieces1 Alfonso then as.ed Michelle to 6#3 cheese c#rls1 Acc#sed then o(ened his /i((er E as.ed Criselle to hold his (enis for a short ti)e1 Jhen Michelle ret#rned% Alfonso as.ed hi) to 6#3 so)e )ore cheese c#rls wKJada31 :e then loc.ed the door E ra(ed the .id1 G#t he co#ldnFt (enetrate E was onl3 a6le to (#sh a+ainst the va+inaFs o(enin+1 Jhen Michelle E Jada3 ret#rned% Alfonso (#t on his (ants E as.ed Criselle to (#t on her #nderwear1 >icti) didnFt tell an3one a6o#t the incident1  !ct1 12% 1&&85 Crisart% CriselleFs older 6ro1 told his )o) that Michelle E Jada3 told hi) that Alfonso ra(ed Criselle1 Child confir)ed the stor3 E the3 re(orted the incident1 Alfonso was ,#estioned 6#t he denied doin+ s#ch1  Medical findin+5 lacerated wo#nd on h3)en  'efense5 Alfonso clai)s he onl3 inserted 1 indefin+er 6eca#se he was se-#all3 aro#sed at that ti)e1 :e li.ewise clai)s that had there 6een (enetration% laceration on the h3)en wo#ldFve 6een 6i++er1 :e also testified that he was not left alone wK.id since his first co#sin E #ncle were also inside the ho#se then1  R C5 convicted hi) of ra(e E sentenced to death I ue: J!? cri)e sho#ld have 6een acts of lascivio#sness 8e&%: ?!1 R C affir)ed wK)odification1  R C correct in +ivin+ credence to CriselleFs testi)on3 wKc was si)(le% concise E coherent1 S#ch was done in a strai+htforward% clear E convincin+ )anner and t3(ical of an innocent child whose virt#e has 6een violated1  4f indeed acc#sed onl3 inserted his fin+ers% wh3 did he (#ll down his (antsF /i((er% (#t his (enis o#t E (#t his or+an into hers while doin+ a (#sh E (#ll )ovFtS Jh3 did victi) feel (ainS Medical e-a)ination revealed lacerated wo#nds in .idFs or+an1 >icti) ad)itted that there was no (enetration 6#t acc#sedFs or+an onl3 to#ched the hole of her va+ina1 esti)on3 of 3o#n+ E i))at#re ra(e victi)s sho#ld 6e +iven f#ll credence1  Gesides% (enetration is not necessar31 Mere introd#ction of (enis into the a(ert#re of the fe)ale or+anKto#chin+ the la6ia of the (#dend#) alread3 cons#))ates the cri)e of ra(e1 AlfonsoFs act of (lacin+ his or+an in the hole CriselleFs va+ina was ra(e1  Ali6i5 co#nsel forced hi) to ad)it that he inserted his fin+er to characteri/e cri)e as )erel3 acts of lascivio#sness 6#t he was act#all3 o#t fishin+ d#rin+ that ti)e1 :e f#rther clai)s that he went ho)e after fishin+ E listened to the radio then he sle(t1 his will not (revail over victi)Fs (ositive identification of acc#sed1 <ast resort #(on reali/in+ that his earlier defense was fa#lt31  'eath (enalt3 is the (ro(er (#nish)ent1 RPC Art1 338 a)ended 63 Sec1 11% RA H68&5 death (enalt3 for ra(e co))itted a+ainst a .id 6elow H1 A+e was s#fficientl3 (roven 63 the testi)on3 of CriselleFs )o) Y CriselleFs certificate of live 6irth1  Civil inde)nit35 PH8. Y Moral da)a+es5 P80.1

8e&%: 2#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1 R C )odified1

/EO/LE v. RULLE/A [21R1 ?o1 131816% March 8% 2003] Nature: A#to)atic Review of a decision of R C VC1 FACTS: 4n ?ov 1&&8% while her )other 2loria G#enafe was a6o#t to set the ta6le% 3 3r old da#+hter C3ra Ma3 said% B $ama, si Kuya (onnie lagay niya titi niya at sina&sa& sa pepe, pu)it at sa "i"ig &o 1D R#3a Ronnie is acc#sed=a((ellant Ronnie R#lle(a% the G#enafeFs ho#se6o31 C3ra Ma3 said she was ra(ed twice in RonnieFs roo)1 2loria waited for her : to arrive that ni+ht1 S(s verified fro) Ronnie if what C3ra Ma3 told her was tr#e1 Ronnie readil3 ad)itted doin+ those thin+s 6#t onl3 once at 7PM of ?ov 1H F&8% 3 da3s earlier1 0na6le to contain her an+er% 2loria sla((ed hi) )an3 ti)es1 he3 waited till )ornin+ to ta.e hi) to Ca)( Rarin+al where he ad)itted the i)(#tations a+ainst hi) E where he was detained thereafter1

1

he death (enalt3 shall also 6e i)(osed if the cri)e of ra(e is co))itted wK an3 of the ff attendant circ#)stances5 (1) when the victi) is #nder 1$ 3rs of a+e and the offender is a (arent% ascendant% ste(=(arent% +#ardian% relative 63 consan+#init3 or affinit3 wK the 3 rd civil de+ree% or the co))on=law s( of the (arent of the victi)PP (7) when the victi) is a child 6elow H 3rs old1
2

:owever% the )inorit3 )a3 a((earance1 4n wK certaint3 the
3

cr#cial 3ears (ertain to the a+es of 18=1H where see) to 6e d#6ita6le d#e to oneFs (h3sical s#ch cases% the (rosec#tion has the 6#rden to (rove victi)Fs a+e was 6elow 1$ 3rs1

RA H68&5 :avin+ carnal .nowled+e of a wo)an #nder 12 3rs of a+e is (#nisha6le 63 recl#sion (er(et#a1

/EO/LE v. ONA;IA [306 SCRA 23 (1&&&)]

   Jilfredo !na6ia was fo#nd +#ilt3 of ra(in+ his ste(sister Ra,#el 96alle (&) on 7 co#nts as char+ed in 7 se(arate infor)ations1 :e raised the followin+ assi+n)ent of errors5 o C +ravel3 erred in holdin+ that the first acco#nt of ra(e was ,#alified with the #se of a deadl3 wea(on o C +ravel3 erred in +ivin+ wei+ht and credit to the testi)on3 of the co)(lainin+ witness Rac,#el o C +ravel3 erred in convictin+ !na6ia of 7 co#nts of ra(e and in orderin+ hi) to (a3 )oral da)a+es of PhP80%000 for each co#nt des(ite fail#re of the (rosec#tion to (rove his +#ilt 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1

he trial co#rt r#led in favo#r of 9lena and Gerana was sentenced to 'eath which the (enalt3 i)(osa6le when the victi) of ra(e is #nder 1$ and the offender is a relative 63 consan+#init3 or affinit3 within the third civil defree1

?at#re5 A#to)atic review of a decision of R C of <a(#=<a(# Cit3 FACTS5 Acc#sed=a((ellant Ansel)o Garin+% alias Si)o3% was held 63 R C to 6e +#ilt3 of 2 co#nts of ra(e a+ainst Ga63 :a3dee 2race Pon+asi and was sentenced to s#ffer the (enalt3 of death in each case and a total of PhP100R as )oral da)a+es1 1st co#nt5 !n A(ril 13% 1&&7% at a6o#t H a)% while her )other went o#t to 6#3 and sell sac.s% then 12 3r old Ga63 :a3dee too. a 6ath in the 6athroo) near the .itchen% after which she wra((ed a towel aro#nd her 6od3 and went #(stairs1 :er )otherFs live=in (artner Garin+ followed her and s#ddenl3 (#lled her towards hi) and too. off her towel1 :e fondled her 6reasts and )ade her sit on his la( facin+ hi) and s#cceeded in (enetratin+ her1 She was threatened that she wo#ld 6e .illed if she sho#ted1 2nd co#nt5 A wee. later% at a6t the sa)e ti)e% while her )other left to 6orrow )one3 fro) a friend% Ga63 :a3dee was a+ain ra(ed 63 Garin+ after her 6ath1 4n 6oth instances% after infor)in+ her )other a6o#t it% she was onl3 told that she C#st fell fro) a +#ava tree1 Ga63 :a3dee felt (ain in her va+ina wKc )ade it diffic#lt for her to wal. and #rinate1 She develo(ed a fever and was finall3 ta.en to 'r a(an+ for treat)ent1 he doctor fo#nd lacerations and infla))ation of her +enitals1 :er )other was advised 63 the doctor that Ga63 :a3dee was (ro6a6l3 se-#all3 )olested and that it 6e 6est to ta.e her to a )edico=le+al e-(ert1 :owever% her )other a+ain insisted that Ga63 :a3dee onl3 fell fro) a tree and her va+ina had 6een (ierced 63 a 6ranch1 4t was onl3 when Ga63 :a3dee went to her a#nt o)asa <ara3os that she was finall3 e-a)ined and was 6ro#+ht to the (olice station to file a co)(laint1 8ELD5 Si)o3 Garin+ +#ilt3 of 2 co#nts of ra(e a+ainst Ga63 :a3dee1 Sentence )odified and red#ced fro) death to reclusion perpetua1 :e cannot 6e held lia6le for ,#alified ra(e and sentenced to death 6eca#se as (er RA H68&% the death (enalt3 shall 6e i)(osed for the co))ission ra(e where the victi) is #nder 1$ 3rs of a+e and the offender is a parent, ascendant, step*parent, guardian, relative "y consanguinity or affinity wK the 3rd civil de+ree% or the common*la) sp of the (arent of the victi)1 4n the alle+ation% the co)(laint stated that he was the ste(father of the co)(lainant1 :owever% he is not le+all3 )arried to the co)(lainantFs )other1 Altho#+h the ra(e of a (erson #nder 1$ 3rs of a+e 63 the co))on= law s( of the victi)Fs )other is also (#nisha6le 63 death% this fact )#st 6e alle+ed in the co)(laint or infor)ation so as to warrant the i)(osition of the death (enalt31 0nfort#natel3% this was not done in the cases at 6ar1

Re&eva$t I ue: J!? cri)e is ,#alified 63 the #se of deadl3 wea(on  ?!1 Jhile !na6ia was indeed carr3in+ a 6olo in his waist% as he #s#all3 does% he never #sed the sa)e o threaten (rivate co)(lainant1  he co#rt also erred in a((reciatein+ the a++ravatin+ circ#)stances of5 (1) a6#se of s#(erior stren+thL (2) a6#se of confidenceL and (3) lac. of res(ect on acco#nt of a+e and relationshi(  hese were neither )entioned in the co)(laint nor in the infor)ation1 o a((reciate the afore)entioned a++ravatin+ circ#)stances and to convict the acc#sed of an offense hi+her than that char+ed in the co)(laint or infor)ation on which he is tries wo#ld constit#te an #na#thori/ed denial of his constit#tional ri+ht (Sec1 17% Art1 444% Consti)1 Considerin+ f#rther that the cri)e is si)(le ra(e% which is (#nisha6le 63 a sin+le indivisi6le (enalt3 of reclusion perpetua, no ordinar3 )iti+atin+ or a++ravatin+ circ#)stances )a3 affect it1  A6#se of s#(erior stren+th5 it )#st 6e s#fficientl3 esta6lished that the sa)e was deli6eratel3 ta.en advanta+e of1  A6#de of confidence5 the confidence )#st faciliatet the co))ission of the offense and the sa)e will not hold tr#e if the victi) had alread3 lost confidence in the acc#sed1  <ac. of res(ect on acco#nt of a+e5 re,#ires the acc#sed sho#ls have deli6eratel3 intended to offend or ins#lt the a+e of the offended (art31  *inall3% the ste(6rother and ste(sister relationshi( 6etween Rac,#el and !na6ia cannot elevate the cri)e to B,#alified ra(eD #nder Art1 338 of the RPC% as a)ended 63 R1A1 H68& for the3 are not considered related either 63 6lood or 63 affinit31  :e is th#s fo#nd +#ilt3 of ra(e witho#t an3 of the ,#alif3in+ circ#)stances and is sentenced to s#ffer the (enalt3 of reclusion perpetua in accordance with R1A1 ?o1 H68& E (a3 the additional a)o#nt of P80R as )oral da)a+es in each of the 7 cases1

I ue : 1. WON t'e TC erre% "$ +"$%"$* t'e accu e% *u"&t1 #+ ra!e.  ?!1 he acc#sed co))itted ra(e the a6sence of an3 (h3sical si+n on the (art of the co)(lainant does not necessaril3 )ean that there was no forci6le interco#rse1  Proof of e-ternal inC#ries on the co)(lainant is not dis(ensa6le in a (rosec#tion for ra(e co))itted with force or violence1 he law does not i)(ose #(on a ra(e victi) the 6#rden of (rovin+ resistance1 Ph3sical resistance need not 6e esta6lished in ra(e cases when inti)idation is e-ercised #(on her and she s#6)itted herself a+ainst her will to the ra(istFs l#st 6eca#se of fear for life and (ersonal safet31 Jhen a wo)an testifies that she was ra(ed% she sa3s in effect all that is necessar3 to show that the cri)e was co))itted1  hat he as.ed her for se- doesnFt necessaril3 i)(l3 that she +ave her consent when he s#cceeded in ravishin+ her a+ain1 4t is indeed (re(ostero#s that a 3o#n+ wo)an% #ntrained in the wa3s of the world E of )en wo#ld initiate E enco#ra+e his advances% as acc#sed=a((ellant clai)s% considerin+ es(eciall3 that he is the h#s6and of her older sister -. WON t'e !r# ecut"#$ (a a)&e t# !r#ve t'e atte$%"$* Fua&"+1"$* c"rcu. ta$ce #+ t'e cr".e.  ?!1 0nder A338 of the RPC as a)ended 63 RA ?o1 H68& % the death (enalt3 shall 6e i)(osed when the victi) is #nder 1$ 3ears of a+e E the offender is a (arent% ascendant% ste(=(arent% +#ardian% relative 63 consan+#init3 or affinit3 within the 3rd civil de+ree or the co))on law s(o#se of the (arent of the victi)1  Affinit3 = the relation which one s(o#se 6eca#se of )arria+e has to 6lood relatives of the other1 he connection e-istin+% in conse,#ence of )arria+e 6etween each of the )arried (ersons and the .indred of the other1 he doctrine of affinit3 +rows o#t of the canonical )a-i) that )arria+e )a.es h#s6and and wife one1 he h#s6and has the sa)e relation 63 affinit3 to his wifeOs 6lood relatives as she has 63 consan+#init3 and vice versa  o effectivel3 (rosec#te acc#se=a((ellant for the cri)e of ra(e co))itted 63 a relative 63 affinit3 within the third civil de+ree% it )#st 6e esta6lished that5 a1 he is le+all3 )arried to co)(lainantOs sister 61 co)(lainant and acc#sed=a((ellantOs wife are f#ll or half 6lood si6lin+s1  he relationshi( of acc#sed=a((ellant E the co)(lainant is not ade,#atel3 s#6stantiated since it is )erel3 6ased on testi)on3 of the co)(lainant% her )otherOs testi)on3 E the acc#sed=a((ellantOs #se of the words% N)a)a at (a(aN in his letters1 he evidence (resented are not s#fficient to dis(el do#6ts a6o#t the tr#e relationshi( of acc#sed=a((ellant and the co)(lainant% to the 6enefit of which the acc#sed is entitled1 Jhere the life of an acc#sed= a((ellant han+s in the 6alance% a )ore e-actin+ (roof )#st 6e add#ced

/EO/LE v. ;ERANA [21R1 ?o1 123877% "#l3 2&% 1&&&] Nature: A#to)atic Review of a decision of the R C of ?a+a  "#ne 2% 1&&7 I 17 31o1 Maria 9lena "arcia was slee(in+ wK her 731o1 niece in one of the two roo)s in a ho#se her fa)il3 was rentin+ at Ga3awas Street% ?a+a Cit3 when she was awa.ened 63 her 6ro=in=law% herein acc#sed=a((ellant% Ra#l Gerana1 Co)(lainant reco+ni/ed hi) 6eca#se li+ht was filterin+ in fro) a near63 window1 :e (ointed a N6#ntot (a+eN at her nec. E warned her not to )a.e an3 noise% otherwise she wo#ld 6e .illed1  9lena "arcia was ra(ed twice1 9lena re(orted the incident to her sister and )other and she #nderwent a )edical e-a)ination 6efore she re(orted the incident to the (olice1  Gerana does does not den3 havin+ se-#al interco#rse with the co)(lainant 6#t% however% )aintains that 9lena consented to it1

/EO/LE v. MAGA;O [380 SCRA 126 (2001)] Nature: A((eal fro) VC R C decision  "#ne 23% 1&&$% 1 (1)15 ?oe)i 'acana3% a )ental retardate was sellin+ fried 6ananas at the *risco Mar.et in VC when Rolando B<anieD Ma+a6o a((roached her E as.ed her to to wKhi) to his ho#se1 :o#se was e)(t3 E so Ma+a6o s#cceeded in ra(in+ 'acana31 She later on went ho)e E told her )o) a6o#t the incident1 he3 re(orted s#ch to the (olice1 Medico= le+al fo#nd healed lacerations on victi)Fs h3)en E a6rasions on her la6ia )inora1

/EO/LE v. ;ARING [387 SCRA 3H1 (2001)]





'efense5 Ma+a6o clai)s he was sellin+ short (ants E t=shirts 63 the sidewal. at Roosevelt Ave1 cor1 San *rancisco del Monte in VC d#rin+ the ti)e of the incident1 :e .nows victi) 6#t he clai)s he didnFt see her that da31 :e alle+es that *reddie G#enaflor wKwho) he had an altercation infor)ed ?oe)iFs dad of alle+ed ra(e to +et 6ac. at hi)1 R C5 convicted hi) ra(e E sentenced to RP Y P80. co)(ensator3 da)a+es Y P80. )oral da)a+es Y P28. e-e)(lar3 da)a+es



I ue: J!? acc#sedFs +#ilt was (roven 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1 8e&%: @es1 Affir)ed wK)odification I 9-e)(lar3 da)a+es deleted1  Ma+a6o clai)s )ental retardation of victi) E that she had a )ental a+e of 12 were not s#fficientl3 (roven1 Jitho#t s#ch% he clai)s that there can 6e no ra(e co))itted1  Carnal .nowled+e of a wo)an who is a )ental retardate is ra(e #nder RA $383 a)endin+ the RPC Art1 266=A (ar1 11 Proof of forceKinti)idation is not necessar3 since a )ental retardate is not ca(a6le of +ivin+ consent to a se-#al act1 Prove5 facts of se-#al contact E )ental retardation of victi)1 *or)er was (roven 63 ?oe)iFs testi)on3 Y )edical findin+s1 <atter was (roven 63 )edico=le+al officerFs testi)on3 Y co#rtFs o6servation of victi)Fs 6ehavior E act#ations s#ch as her haltin+ E a66reviated answers d#rin+ her testi)on31 >icti)Fs )ental condition was not raisedKo6Cected to 63 acc#sed even if s#ch was alle+ed in the co)(laint and (rosec#tion co#nsel even as.ed co#rt to (#t on record that ?oe)i was )entall3 retarded1 oo late to raise s#ch fact#al iss#e es(eciall3 since acc#sed hi)self ac.nowled+ed s#ch )ental retardation1  !ffenderFs .nowled+e of victi)Fs )ental disa6ilit3 at the ti)e of the co))ission ,#alifies the cri)e of ra(e (#nisha6le 63 death1 G#t s#ch can onl3 6e a((reciated if it alle+ed in the infor)ation1 !therwise% acc#sed wo#ld 6e denied of his rt to d#e (rocess1 Since in this case% s#ch was not alle+ed in the info% acc#sed can onl3 6e held lia6le for si)(le ra(e1 VC not alle+ed in the 4nfor)ation 6#t d#l3 (roven wKo o6Cection d#rin+ the trial )a3 6e considered as an AC1 G#t since this circ#)stance doesnFt fall #nder RPC art1 17 (AC)% it cannot 6e a((reciated1



favora6le to herein a((ellant% no other inter(retation is C#stified1 Accordin+l3% a((ellant cannot 6e convicted of 2 se(arate offenses of ille+al (ossession of firear)s and direct assa#lt with atte)(ted ho)icide1 Moreover% since the cri)e co))itted was direct assa#lt and not ho)icide or )#rder% ille+al (ossession of firear)s cannot 6e dee)ed an a++ravatin+ circ#)stance1 he law is clear5 the acc#sed can 6e convicted of si)(le ille+al (ossession of firear)s% (rovided that Bno other cri)e was co))itted 63 the (erson arrested1D he law does not distin+#ish or refer onl3 to ho)icide and )#rder1 :ence% the Co#rt set aside C#d+)ent convictin+ the) of ille+al (ossession of firear)s1

/EO/LE v. ATO/ [2$6 SCRA 18H (1&&$)] Nature: A((eal fro) the A#to)atic Review of the Coint decision of the R C of !r)oc  AleCandro Ato( alias Ali +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of three (3) co#nts of ra(e and sentencin+ hi) to two ter)s of recl#sion (er(et#a for the first two co#nts% and to death for the third1 Acc#r%"$* t# t'e !r# ecut"#$:  Re+ina 2#afin% told the co#rt that she is a +randda#+hter of rinidad MeCos and that the acc#sed AleCandro Ato( is the co))on law h#s6and of said rinidad Ato(  :er )other is a da#+hter of rinidad Ato( and lives in Pan+asinan1 She is an ille+iti)ate child and she does not even .now her father1 Since her earl3 childhood she sta3ed with her +rand)other rinidad Ato( and the acc#sed1 So)eti)e in 1&&1 when she was alread3 10 3ears of a+e the acc#sed started havin+ l#stf#l desire on her1 he acc#sed then inserted his fin+er into her va+ina1 She told her +rand)other a6o#t this 6#t her +rand)other did not 6elieve her1 She was then told 63 her +rand)other% rinidad MeCos% that what her +randfather did to her was C#st a )anifestation of fatherl3 concern1 She contin#ed sta3in+ with her +rand)other and her co))on law h#s6and AleCandro Ato(1  !ct1 &% 1&&2 I Ato( had carnal .nowled+e of Re+ina1 Re+ina infor)ed her +rand)other 6#t her +rand)other ref#sed to 6elieve her1  Re+ina re(orted the incidents of ra(e that ha((ened in 1&&2% 1&&3% and 1&&7 onl3 in "an#ar3 1&&81 She said that she was afraid to re(ort the incident 6eca#se Ali threatened to .ill her1 Acc#r%"$* t# De+e$ e:  Ali denied the acc#sations of Re+ina and i)(#ted ill )otive #(on her a#nts% who were the da#+hters of his live in (artner1 I ue : 1. WON t'e c"rcu. ta$ce #+ $"*'tt".e a$% re&at"#$ '"! a a**ravat"$* ca$ )e a!!rec"ate%.  ?!1 ?oct#rnit3 o M#st have 6een deli6eratel3 so#+ht 63 the offender to facilitate the cri)e or (revent its discover3 or evade his ca(t#re or facilitate his esca(e1 o M#st have (#r(osel3 ta.en advanta+e of the cover of ni+ht as an indis(ensa6le factor to attain his cri)inal (#r(ose1 o he (rosec#tion failed to (rove that ni+htti)e was deli6eratel3 so#+ht 63 a((ellant to facilitate this

/EO/LE v. 8AMTON [3&8 SCRA 186]  Arth#r Pan+ilian% Arnolf <o(e/ and Re3nalso @a)6ot were fo#nd +#ilt3 of the cri)e of .idna((in+ for ranso) and ille+al (ossession of firear)s and i)(osin+ #(on each of the) the s#(re)e (enalt3 of death and a (rison ter) of 6 3rs and 1 da3 to $ 3rs1 !n the other hand% Antonio :a)ton was fo#nd +#ilt3 of ro66er3 and sentenced to an Bindeter)inate (enalt3 of fro) 7 3rs of prision correccional to $ 3ears of prision mayor1 ue: J!? a((ellants are +#ilt3 of ille+al (ossession of firear)s ?!1 A((ellants were char+ed with and convicted of the cri)e of .idna((in+ for ranso) and serio#s ille+al detention (Art1 26H% RPC)1 he co#rt a+reed with the C that the3 were +#ilt3 of .idna((in+ for ranso)1 :owever% the3 cannot 6e held lia6le for ille+al (ossession of firear)s since there was another cri)e;.idna((in+ for ranso) ;which the3 were co))ittin+ at the sa)e ti)e1 4nter(retin+ Sec1 1% P1'1 1$66% as a)ended 63 R1A1 ?o1 $2&7% the SC has consistenl3 r#led that if an #nlicensed firear) is #sed in the co))ission of an3 other cri)e% there can 6e no se(arate offense of si)(le ille+al (ossession of firear)s1 Penal laws are constr#ed li6erall3 in favor of the acc#sed1 Since the (lain )eanin+ of RA $2&7Fs si)(le lan+#a+e is )ost

-.

I 

dastardl3 acts1 4n fact% the (rosec#tion failed to show that a((ellant cons#))ated his carnal desi+ns at ni+ht% e-ce(t onl3 for the 'ece)6er 26% 1&&7 incident which the victi) said occ#rred at 11500 (1)1 here are no evidence s#6stantiatin+ the trial co#rtOs concl#sion that a((ellant intentionall3 so#+ht the dar.ness to advance his cri)inal e-(loits  Sco(e of Relationshi( o S(o#se o Ascendant o 'escendant o <e+iti)ate% nat#ral or ado(ted 6rother or sister o Relative 63 affinit3 in the sa)e de+ree  Relationshi( 63 affinit3 refers to a relation 63 virt#e of a le+al 6ond s#ch as )arria+e1 Relatives 63 affinit3 are those co))onl3 referred to as in=laws% ste(father% ste()other% ste(child and the li.e1  Relatives 63 consan+#init3 or 6lood relatives enco)(assed #nder the second% third and fo#rth en#)eration a6ove1  he law cannot 6e stretched to incl#de (ersons attached 63 co))on=law relations1  here is no 6lood relationshi( or le+al 6ond that lin.s the a((ellant to his victi)1 h#s% the )odif3in+ circ#)stance of relationshi( cannot 6e considered a+ainst hi)  M11 #+ A,,H #+ t'e R/C a a.e$%e%: he death (enalt3 shall also 6e i)(osed if the cri)e of ra(e is co))itted with an3 of the followin+ attendant circ#)stances5 when the victi) is #nder ei+hteen (1$) 3ears of a+e and the offender is a (arent% ascendant% ste(=(arent% +#ardian relative 63 consan+#init3 or affinit3 within the third civil de+ree% or the co))on law s(o#se of the (arent of the victi)  A((ellant is not the co))on=law s(o#se of the parent of the victi)1 :e is the co))on=law h#s6and of the +irlOs grandmother1 ?either is a((ellant the victi)Os N(arent% ascendant% ste(=(arent% +#ardian% relative 63 consan+#init3 or affinit3 within the 3rd civil de+ree1N :ence% heFs not enco)(assed in an3 of the relationshi(s e-(ressl3 en#)erated1  Penal stat#tes are to 6e li6erall3 constr#ed in favor of the acc#sed WON accu e% c#.."tte% t'e cr".e )e1#$% rea #$a)&e %#u)t.  @9S1 ?o si)(le 6arrio lass wo#ld so candidl3 ad)it 6efore the (#6lic that a )an who had lived as co))on=law h#s6and to her +rand)other had inserted his (enis in her va+ina for so )an3 ti)es in the (ast1 4t is #nthin.a6le that co)(lainant% a 3o#n+ lad3 of fifteen 3ears% wo#ld allow her (rivate (arts to 6e e-a)ined and wo#ld withstand the ri+ors of a (#6lic trial ; alon+ with the sha)e% h#)iliation and dishonor of e-(osin+ her own )ortif3in+ defile)ent ; if she was not in fact ravished  4t is #nnat#ral and #n6elieva6le for Re+inaOs a#nts to concoct a stor3 of ra(e of their own ver3 3o#n+ niece% that wo#ld 6rin+ sha)e and scandal not onl3 to her 6#t to the entire fa)il3% es(eciall3 to their )other1



/EO/LE v. RENEJANE [18$ SCRA 28$ (1&$$)] Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of R C Ce6#1 FACTS5 !n ?ov 1% 1&$1% at 11PM% <a6orte and Maraasin were invited to the ho#se of Geniano to (arta.e of so)e food and drin.s1 After a considera6le len+th of ti)e% Pa#lino <a6orte sta66ed (olice)an Mario de "es#s1 4t was followed 63 another sta66in+ done





63 Geniano ReneCane1 <i.ewise% the (olice officerFs co)(anion% Re+ino Maraasin was also sta66ed 63 Rodolfo Ri(dos1 4t was alle+ed that (revio#sl3% in !ct% the (olice officer a((rehended ReneCane for ille+al (ossession of )ariC#ana and that Maraasin was s#s(ected of havin+ 6een the infor)er1 ReneCane% as his )otive% )#st have har6ored a +r#d+e a+ainst the co)rades1 8ELD5 'enials )ade and ali6i advanced 63 the a((ellant cannot (revail over their (ositive identification1 *#rther)ore% ReneCane had a )otive in the .illin+1 I$t#5"cat"#$ is a++ravatin+ if it is ha6it#al or intention1 he fact that the acc#sed dran. li,#or (rior to the co))ission of the cri)e did not necessaril3 ,#alif3 s#ch action as an a++r circ#)stance1 he affair was an ordinar3 drin.in+ (art31 ?either can this 6e considered as a )iti+atin+ circ#)stance in the a6sence of (roof that the inta.e of alcoholic drin.s was of s#ch ,#antit3 as to 6l#r the a((ellantFs reason and de(rive hi) of a certain de+ree of control1 his has 6een stren+thened 63 the fact that treacher3 has 6een esta6lished1 herefore% the )eans of e-ec#tion e)(lo3ed were deli6eratel3 or conscio#sl3 ado(ted1 Moreover% the a++r circ#)stance of the act 6ein+ in disre+ard of ran. is a((recia6le in the case at 6ar1 Jherefore% C#d+)ent a((ealed fro) is affir)ed1 Penalt3 )odified fro) recl#sion (er(et#a to recl#sion te)(oral in its )a- (eriod to recl#sion (er(et#a1  /EO/LE v. CAMANO [118 SCRA 6$$ (1&$2)] Nature: Mandator3 review fro) the C#d+)ent of C*4 Ca)arines S#r  *e61 1H% 1&H0 6et1 7 E 8 (1)1 in ?ato% Sa+na3% Ca)arines S#r5 Ca)ano% after drin.in+ li,#or% sta66ed 2odofredo Pasc#a wKa 6olo while the latter was wal.in+ alon+ the 6arrio street al)ost in front of the store of one Socorro G#ates1 Pasc#a s#stained 2 )ortal wo#nds wKc ca#sed his death1 Afterwards% Ca)ano went to the seashore of the 6arrio where he fo#nd Mariano G#enaflor leanin+ at the +ate of the fence of his ho#se in a .neelin+ (osition wK6oth ar)s on to( of the fence E his head stoo(in+ down1 Ca)ano then hac.ed G#enaflor wKthe sa)e 6olo s#stainin+ $ wo#nds wKc ca#sed latterFs death1 ?o (roof of an3 altercation 6etween the acc#sed E victi)s (rior to the incidents1  3 3rs 6efore the incident% the victi)s had a )is#nderstandin+ wKthe acc#sed1 Ca)ano as.ed for Pasc#a to tow his fishin+ 6oat wKthe )otor6oat owned 63 G#enaflor 6#t the two ref#sed to do so1 Ca)ano resented s#ch ref#sal1 9ven if the3 were seen drin.in+ to+ether later on% the friendl3 attit#de was )ore artificial than real1 Ca)ano ref#sed to associate wKthe 2 E a nei+h6orFs atte)(t to reconcile the 3 was re(eatedl3 ref#sed1 And in instances when Ca)ano was dr#n.% heFd even challen+e G#enaflor to a fi+ht E anno#nce his evil intention to .ill the)1  Prosec#tion5 Ca)ano s#rrendered #(on de)and of the (eace officers1 :e ad)itted that he owned the 6olo #sed in the .illin+ E s#ch was hidden #nder the ta6le of his ho#se1 Patrol)an Gal#3ot fo#nd the 6olo at the (lace indicated 63 Ca)ano1 he 6olo was still stained wKh#)an 6lood1 :e li.ewise ad)itted that .illed Pasc#a E G#enaflor in self=defense 6#t he ref#sed to si+n his state)ent1 :e was char+ed wK)#rder attended 63 evident (re)editation E treacher31  'efense5 Ca)ano clai)s that he went fishin+ earl3 )ornin+ of *e61 1H1 G#enaflor% #(on seein+ that he had a 6i+ catch% de)anded a (ercenta+e for the fisher3 co))ission1



Ca)ano ref#sed to (a3 E saw G#enaflor called hi) hard headed1 :e went ho)e afterwards1 After dinner% he (re(ared to +o o#t to sea a+ain1 Jhile standin+ in the 3ard of his ho#se% he saw G#enaflor E Pasc#a havin+ a drin.in+ session wKa +ro#( of )en at the score of Socorro G#ates1 :e clai)s that the G#enaflorFs +ro#( a((roached hi) E wKo an3 (rovocation% Pasc#a 6o-ed hi)1 G#enaflor (#nched hi) also1 :e clai)s that when Pasc#a was a6o#t to 6olo hi)% he was a6le to +ra6 the 6olo fro) Pasc#a1 Pasc#a then fell on the +ro#nd E the rest of the +ro#( ran awa3 e-ce(t for G#enaflor who a((roached hi)1 G#enaflor was also ar)ed wKa 6olo wKc (ro)(ted Ca)ano to 6olo hi)1 G#enaflor ran awa3 once he was wo#nded 6#t Ca)ano ran after hi) clai)in+ that for)er had a +#n at ho)e wKc he )i+ht #se to shoot Ca)ano later on1 h#s% he hac.ed G#enaflor to death1 :e denies .illin+ Pasc#a E clai)s that the fi+ht was d#e to a heated ar+#)ent E their dr#n.enness1 C*4 Ca)rines S#r5 sentenced Ca)ano to death1 Clai)s of Ca)ano are wKo evidentiar3 s#((ort E are )ere fictions1 :is co#sin E lone witness% ?e)esio Ca)ano is not credi6le either1 :is testi)onies had a lot of inconsistencies1 Gesides% if Ca)ano were reall3 innocent% he sho#ld have (rod#ced )ore witnesses considerin+ that the cri)e was co))itted in 6road da3li+ht wK)an3 (eo(le witnessin+ it1 G#t onl3 ?e)esio was (resented1 ?e)esio E Ca)anoFs testi)onies were chan+ed )an3 ti)es too1 9vidence show that he is +#ilt3 of )#rder 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t wKevident (re)editation% treacher3% a6#se of s#(erior stren+th E into-ication1 A((eal5 Ca)anoFs co#nsel clai)s that the acc#sed is onl3 +#ilt3 of ho)icide E not )#rder1

,. A. 

WON a)u e #+ u!er"#r tre$*t' '#u&% )e a) #r)e% "$ treac'er1. N YES. WON t'e a&ter$at"ve c"rcu. ta$ce #+ "$t#5"cat"#$ '#u&% )e a!!rec"ate% a a$ a**ravat"$* c"rcu. ta$ce. ?!1 4 FS M4 42A 4?21 Ca)anoFs co#nsel clai)s that there was no (roof of acc#sedFs into-ication at the ti)e of the .illin+ other than Pa3a+oFs testi)on3 that he saw Ca)ano drin.in+ in his ho#se a6o#t 30 )eters awa31 ?o (olice re(ortKdoctorFs certification was (resented either1 *#rther)ore% thereFs no (roof that acc#sed (#r(osef#ll3 +ot dr#n. to facilitate the co))ission of the offense1 4f into-ication sho#ld 6e a((reciated it sho#ld 6e #sed as )iti+atin+ circ#)stance since it di)inished his ca(acit3 to .now the inC#stice of his acts E co)(rehend f#ll3 the conse,#ence of his acts1 Miti+atin+ if accidental% not ha6it#al or intentional E not s#6se,#ent to the (lan to co))it the cri)e1 4t )#st 6e ind#6ita6l3 (roven1 A++ravatin+ if ha6it#al or intentional1 :a6it#al dr#n.ard is one +iven to into-ication 63 e-cessive #se of into-icatin+ drin.s1 :a6it sho#ld 6e act#al E confir)ed1 ?ot necessaril3 a dail3 occ#rrence 6#t it )#st lessen the individ#alFs resistance to evil tho#+ht E #nder)ine will (ower )a.in+ its victi) a (otential evildoer1 ?o (roof that Ca)ano was a ha6it#al drin.er altho#+h he #sed to +et dr#n. ever3 now E then1 9ven Pa+a3oFs testi)on3 does not esta6lish the ha6it#al drin.in+ of Ca)ano1 he into-ication not 6ein+ ha6it#al E since acc#sed was in a state of into-ication at the ti)e of the co))ission of the cri)e% into-ication sho#ld 6e a((reciated as a )iti+atin+ circ#)stance1







I ue 4 Rat"#: 1. WON ev"%e$t !re.e%"tat"#$ '#u&% )e a!!rec"ate%.  ?!1 9vident Pre)editation is (resent when the offender had caref#ll3 (lanned the .illin+1  Re,#isites5 a) ti)e when offender deter)ined to co))it the cri)eL 6) act )anifestl3 indicatin+ that the c#l(rit had cl#n+ to his deter)inationL c) s#fficient la(se of ti)e 6et the deter)ination E e-ec#tion of the cri)e to allow hi) to reflect #(on the conse,#ences of his act E to allow his conscience to overco)e the resol#tion of his will1  ?o (roof of the re,#isites in this case1 rial co#rt )erel3 concl#ded that cri)e was (re)editated d#e to the incident wKc occ#rred 3 3rs a+o1 G#t s#ch did not esta6lish the ti)e when Ca)ano decided to co))it the cri)e1 4t can onl3 esta6lish his )otive for .illin+ the victi)s1 Previo#s incidents wherein Ca)ano challen+ed G#enaflor to a fi+ht did not reveal a (ersistence of cri)inal desi+n since thereFs no (roof that he was )a.in+ (lans in 6etween those threats E the cons#))ation of the cri)e1 -.  WON treac'er1 '#u&% )e a!!rec"ate% @9S1 A)ado Pa3a+o% one of the )en drin.in+ wKPasc#a E G#enaflor d#rin+ the incident% testified that Ca)ano attac.ed Pasc#a fro) 6ehind1 S#ch is a )eas#re wKc ens#res the acco)(lish)ent of cri)inal act wKo an3 ris. to the (er(etrator arisin+ fro) the defense that his victi) )a3 (#t #( characteri/in+ treacher31 Pa3a+oFs testi)on3 is f#rther stren+thened 63 the nat#re E location of the wo#nds s#stained 63 Pasc#a wKc show that the (oint of entr3 of the sta6 wo#nds were at the 6ac. E (oint of e-it were in front1 G#enaflor was hac.ed while he was in a .neelin+ (osition1 he attac. was s#dden% #ne-(ected E lethal s#ch as to disa6le E inca(acitate hi) fro) (#ttin+ #( an3 defense1

H.

WON %eat' " a crue& 4 u$u ua& !e$a&t1 4 $#t !r#!er "$ t'e ca e at )ar.  ?!1 Ca)anoFs co#nsel clai)s that the (enalt3 violates Art1 4>% Sec1 21 of the Consti wKc (rovides that e-cessive fines shall not 6e i)(osed nor cr#el or #n#s#al (#nish)ent inflicted1  :arden vs1 'ir of Prisons5 'P is not cr#el% #nC#st or e-cessive1 P#nish)ents are cr#el when the3 involve tort#re or a lin+erin+ death 6#t the (#nish)ent of death is not cr#el wKin the )eanin+ of that word as #sed in the Consti1 4t i)(lies so)ethin+ inh#)an E 6ar6aro#s% so)ethin+ )ore that the )ere e-tin+#ish)ents of life1 8e&%: Ca)ano +#ilt3 of )#rder% there 6ein+ 1 MC E no AC% (enalt3 of R i)(osed1 AFu"$# %" e$t"$*: Pre)editation is a++ravatin+ th#s acc#sed sho#ld 6e sentenced to 2 RPs1 MaCa "ar c#$curr"$*: >ol#ntar3 s#rrender will also )iti+ate +#ilt of the acc#sed1 :e had a choice to s#rrender or not when de)anded 63 the (olice)en who didnFt (lace hi) #nder arrest nor did the3 have an3 arrest warrant1

/EO/LE v. LUA C8U AND UY SE TIENG [86 Phil1 77 (1&31)] ;acC*r#u$% #+ Ca e: !n ?ov1 1&2&% 03 Se ien+% was the consi+nee of the Shi()ents of !(i#) co)in+ fro) :on+.on+% who re(resented a+ents of the real !wners of Shi()ents of !(i#) containin+ 3%282 tins1 :e colla6orated wK Sa)son E ?atividad of the C#sto)s 63 (a3in+ the) an a)o#nt of P6R for the o(i#) to 6e released safel3 fro) C#sto)s1



!n 'ec1 1&2&% #(on arrival of the Shi()ent of !(i#) in the (orts of Ce6#% 03 Se ien+ infor)ed Sa)son that the for)er cons#lt the real owners on how to (roceed the (a3)ent of P6R E will co)e over to Sa)son ho#se on 'ec1 1H% 1&2& to infor) the decision of the owners1 !n the sa)e da3 Sa)son infor)ed the Consta6#lar3 re(resented 63 Ca(tain G#encoseCo E the Provincial *iscal re,#estin+ a steno+ra(her to ta.e down the conversation 6etween Sa)son E 03 Se e#n+1 !n the ni+ht of 'ec1 1H% 1&2&% Ca(tain G#encoseCo and a steno+ra(her na)ed "#)a(ao fro) a law fir) and hid the)selves 6ehind the c#rtains in the ho#se of Sa)son to witness the conversation 6etween Sa)son% 03 Se e#n+ and <#a Ch#1 Ca(tain G#encoseCo E "#)a(ao noted the ff1 i)(ortant facts5 11 03 Se e#n+ infor)ed Sa)son that <#a Ch# was one of the owners of the !(i#)1 21 <#a Ch# infor)ed Sa)son that aside fro) hi)% there were co=owners na)ed an and another located in A)o31 31 <#a Ch# (ro)ised to (a3 the P6%000 #(on deliver3 of the o(i#) fro) the wareho#se of 03 Se ien+1 71 A C#sto)s Collector had a conversation 6efore when Sa)son was on vacation in 9#ro(e% with <#a Ch# and a+reed on the 6#siness of shi((in+ the !(i#)1 he followin+ )ornin+ 03 Se ien+ and co)(anion% 03 A3 (resented (a(ers to Sa)son E Ca(tain G#encoseCo showed #( E ca#+ht the) in the act E arrested the two Chinese1 he Consta6#lar3 then arrested <#a Ch# E confiscated P80R worth of !(i#) (3%282 tins)1 Fact #+ Ca e: An A((eal was )ade 63 03 Se ien+ E <#a Ch# E )ade 10 assi+n)ents of errors )ade 63 the C in its C#d+)ent1 A!!e&a$t3 /#"$t #+ De+e$ e "#an Sa)son ind#ced the defendants to i)(ort the o(i#)1 8e&% 11 A (#6lic official shall 6e involved in the cri)e if5 • :e ind#ces a (erson to co))it a cri)e for (ersonal +ain • 'oes not ta.e the necessar3 ste(s to sei/e the instr#)ent of the cri)e and to arrest the offenders 6efore he o6tained the (rofits in )ind1 • :e o6tained the (rofits in )ind even thro#+h afterwards does ta.e the necessar3 ste(s sei/e the instr#)ent of the cri)e E to arrest the offenders1 21 9ven tho#+h "#an Sa)son s)oothed the wa3 for the introd#ction of the (rohi6ited dr#+s% the ff sho#ld 6e noted that held Sa)son not +#ilt3 for the cri)e5 • he acc#sed have alread3 (lanned and act#all3 ordered the o(i#) witho#t the consent or (artici(ation of "#an Sa)son1 • 'id not hel( the acc#sed to s#ccessf#ll3 i)(le)ent there (lan rather% Sa)son ass#red the sei/#re of the i)(orted dr#+ and the arrest of the s)#++lers1 ?ot one of the )eans (rescri6ed in section 372 of the Code of Civil Proced#res

alread3 dis)issed fro) the C#sto)s secret service 4n acce(tin+ the 11 transcri(t ta.en down 63 "#)a(ao as the 21 tr#e E correct conversation 6etween 31 "#an Sa)son E 03 Se ien+

he transcri(t contains certain ad)issions )ade 63 the defendants1 Steno+ra(her attested that it was faithf#ll3 ta.en down1 Corro6orated 63 state)ent of "#an State)ent in the co#rt1

he co)(lainant went to the officer alon+ wK C4C Galcos who (retended to 6e her ne(hew1 She a+ain re,#ested the officer to (rocess her clai) 6#t was a+ain as.ed if she alread3 had P1001 4n answer% @o3on+co 6ro#+ht o#t the 2 P80 6ills E handed the) to the a((ellant1 As she too. hold of the )one3% C4C Galcos +ra66ed her hand E arrested her1 4n the PC head,#arters% Att3 AranetaFs hands were e-a)ined for the (resence of 0> (owder E res#lt was (ositive1 A((ellant contends that the 6ills% wKc she never acce(ted% were r#66ed a+ainst her hand and dress1 8ELD5 here is e$tra!.e$t when law officers e)(lo3 r#ses and sche)es to ens#re the a((rehension of the cri)inal while in the act#al co))ission of the cri)e1 here is "$ t"*at"#$ when the acc#sed was ind#ced to co))it the cri)e1 he %"++ere$ce in the nat#re of the two lies in the ori+in of the cri) intent1 4n entra()ent% the )ens rea ori+inates fro) the )ind of the cri)inal1 he idea and the resolve to co))it the cri)e co)es fro) hi)1 4n insti+ation% the law officer conceives the co))ission of the cri)e and s#++ests to the acc#sed who ado(ts the idea and carries it into e-ec#tion1 Jherefore% a((ellant is +#ilt3 of the cri)e of 6ri6er3% a violation of Sec 3 RA ?o 301& .nown as the BAnti=2raft and Corr#(t Practices Act1D Considerin+ tho#+h that this case was (endin+ since 1&H1 and she is a )other of fo#r and the a)o#nt involved is onl3 PhP100% it is reco))ended that (etitioner 6e +ranted either e-ec#tive cle)enc3 or the (rivile+e of (ro6ation if she is ,#alified1 'ecision affir)ed1

C#$c&u%"$* Re.arC : E$tra!.e$t 11 he (ractice of entra((in+ (ersons into cri)e for the (#r(ose of instit#tin+ cri)inal (rosec#tions 21 4t is a sche)e or techni,#e ens#rin+ the a((rehension of the cri)inals 63 6ein+ in the act#al cri)e scene1 31 he law officers shall not 6e +#ilt3 to the cri)e if he have done the followin+5 a1 :e does not ind#ce a (erson to co))it a cri)e for (ersonal +ain or is not involved in the (lannin+ of the cri)e1 61 'oes ta.e the necessar3 ste(s to sei/e the instr#)ent of the cri)e and to arrest the offenders 6efore he o6tained the (rofits in )ind1 I$ t"*at"#$: his is the involve)ent of a law officer in the cri)e itself in the followin+ )anners5 a1 :e ind#ces a (erson to co))it a cri)e for (ersonal +ain 61 'oesnFt ta.e the necessar3 ste(s to sei/e the instr#)ent of the cri)e E to arrest the offenders 6efore he o6tained the (rofits in )ind1 c1 :e o6tained the (rofits in )ind even thro#+h afterwards does ta.e the necessar3 ste(s sei/e the instr#)ent of the cri)e and to arrest the offenders1

CA;RERA v. /AJARES [172 SCRA 12H (1&$6)] Nature: Ad)inistrative Matters in the SC  Ca6rera is the defendant in a civil case wKc PaCares was tr3in+1 he case filed 63 Ca6reraOs dad E half=si6lin+s for the ann#l)ent of the sale )ade to Ca6rera of 2$ ha1 of land in Ca)arines S#r1 Ca6rera was advised 63 his co#nsel to acco))odate an3 re,#est for )one3 fro) the C#d+e so that latter wonOt +ive hi) a hard ti)e  Se(t1 1&$75 PaCares inti)ated that he needed )one3 E so Ca6rera +ave hi) P1.1  After 2 )osK6efore Christ)as of $75 PaCares E Ca6rera )et in front of the ?a+a :all of "#stice E the PaCares told Ca6rera that he needed )one3 a+ain1 his ti)e% Ca6rera as.ed the assistance of the ?G4 in entra((in+ PaCares1 :e s#6)itted 10 P100 6ills for )ar.in+ to 6e #sed in the entra()ent1 S#ch 6ills were )ar.ed wKoran+e flo#rescent cra3on E d#sted wKoran+e flo#rescent cra3on 63 the ?G41 A fe)ale a+ent 6et 38 E 70 3rs old was sent to ?a+a to ta.e (art in the o(erations1  "an1 22% 1&$8% $518 a1)15 Ca6rera went to PaCaresF cha)6er wK?G4 a+ent An+elica So)era who (retended to 6e Ca6reraFs wife1 Ca6rera told the C#d+e that he decided not to settle the case 6#t instead he filed a M*R a((ointin+ a s#rve3or to delineate a (ortion of the land in dis(#te for his half=si6lin+s in settle)ent1 hen PaCares as.ed B! ano n+a3on an+ atin1D Ca6rera then +ot the envelo(e wKthe )ar.ed )one3 E +ave it PaCares1 Ca6rera then r#shed o#t of the cha)6er on the (rete-t that he for+ot the .e3s in the car as a si+nal to the other ?G4 a+ents1 As soon as the3 +ot in% So)era (ointed o#t where the )one3 was1 4t was inserted 6etween the (a+es of a diar3 on the C#d+eFs ta6le1 Photos were ta.en1 ?G4 *orensic Che)ist >allado esta6lished that the envelo(e E the )one3 in it were those )ar.ed 63 the ?G41 PaCares E his diar3 were 6oth fo#nd (ositive of oran+e fl#orescent (owder1 (so thatFs how the3 do itZ :ehehe1)

ARANETA v. CA [172 SCRA 832 (1&$6)] Nature: Petition to review the decision of CA1 FACTS5 Co)(lainant 2ertr#des @o3on+co is the widow of Antonio @o3on+co% an e)(lo3ee of ?4A1 She a((roached the a((ellant% Att3 A,#ilina Araneta% a hearin+ officer of the Jor.)enFs Co)(ensation 0nit at Ca6anat#an Cit3% to in,#ire a6o#t the (roced#re for filin+ a clai) for death co)(ensation1 <earnin+ the re,ire)ents% @o3on+co (re(ared the for)s and filed the) at the 0nit1 Jhen she went a+ain to follow #( on the stat#s of the a((lication% she was told 63 the a((ellant that she had to (a3 PhP100 so that her clai) wo#ld 6e acted #(on1 She told the officer that she had no )one3 then 6#t if she wo#ld (rocess her clai)% @o3on+co wo#ld +ive her the PhP100 #(on a((roval1 o this% Att3 Araneta ref#sed and said that on (revio#s occasions certain clai)ants )ade si)ilar (ro)ises 6#t the3 failed to live #( to the)1 @o3on+co then went to her 6ro=in=law% Col1 @o3on+co (hala .a)% the Chief of Cri)inal 4nvesti+ation Service% Phil Consta6#lar3% and infor)ed hi) the de)and of the a((ellant1 he Col then +ave her 2 PhP80 6ills and instr#cted her to +o to Col <a#rea+a1 he latter concocted a (lan to entra( the a((ellant1 he 2 PhP80 6ills were )ar.ed wK notations BCC=?9=1D and BCC=?9=2D% (hoto+ra(hed and d#sted wK #ltra=violet (owder1

rial C#d+e ref#sal of e-cl#sion of "#an Sa)son in the witness stand eventho#+h he was



PaCaresF defense5 he too. the )one3 thin.in+ that it was for the s#rve3or1 (3eah% 3eahZ) And he clai)s that when he reali/ed it was for the s#rve3or% he threw it 6ac. to Ca6rera tellin+ hi)% BGa.it )o sa .in 3an i6i6i+a3S 4.aw na an+ )a+6i+a3 ni3an .a3 S#rve3or Pala3(a3on1D :e f#rther clai)s that the envelo(e fell on the o(en (a+es of his diar3 E thatFs where the ?G4 a+ents fo#nd it1

-.

I ue 4 Rat"#: 1. WON /a<are acce!te% t'e .#$e1 C$#("$* t'at "t (a *"ve$ t# '". )1 rea #$ #+ '" #++"ce.  @9S1 S#rve3orFs fee was P2. E it wo#ld have 6een (aid 63 Ca6rera E the (laintiffs e,#all3 at P800 each E not 63 Ca6rera alone1 Gesides% PaCares had no reason to 6elieve that the )one3 was Ca6reraFs share of the s#rve3orFs fees1 :is clai) that a s#rve3 (lan was needed for the final dis(osition of the case has no 6asis either 6eca#se the (laintiffs were see.in+ the ann#l)ent of the sale% th#s a s#rve3 was not necessar31  9vidence shows that C#d+e did not reall3 tr3 to ret#rn the envelo(e to Ca6rera 6#t instead% he (laced it 6etween the (a+es of his diar31 S#ch evidence is 6ased on5 o So)eraFs testi)on3 E affidavit1 o Photos showin+ that the envelo(e was (laced 6etween the (a+es of the C#d+eFs diar31 A hand was shown in one of the (hoto+ra(hs E was identified as that of ?G4 a+ent Arte)io Saca+#in+1 Saca+#in+ confir)ed this clai)in+ that he was in the act of (ic.in+ the diar3 fro) the ta6le1 o esti)on3 of Man#el o6ias% chief a+ent of ?G4 s#6= office in <e+as(i o Mel,#iades >olante% PaCaresF 6ranch cler. of co#rt% corro6orated PaCaresF state)ent clai)in+ that the C#d+e did tr3 to ret#rn the envelo(e to Ca6rera1 :owever% he iss#ed another affidavit re(#diatin+ his first testi)on31 :e clai)s that he was C#st (ress#red 63 PaCares to testif3 E that he did not reall3 see the incident1 o Constancio 9l,#iero% a Canitor% corro6orates PaCaresF state)ent1 :owever% the testi)onies of the 3 law enforce)ent a+ents sho#ld 6e +iven )ore credence since the3Fre (res#)ed to have acted in the re+ (erfor)ance of their d#ties1 o Photos a((ear to have 6een ta.en as soon as the a+ents +ot into the C#d+eFs cha)6er1 9ven the C#d+e hi)self co)(lained that as soon as the a+ents 6ar+ed into his office% the3 6e+an to ta.e (ict#res1 his r#les o#t the (ossi6ilit3 that the a+ents were res(onsi6le for (#ttin+ the envelo(e in his diar31 he (hotos loo. li.e sna(shots rather than for)al (ict#res1  he (lan to entra( the C#d+e was cleared wK9-ec1 "#d+e :on1 "#an <la+#no 6efore who) Ca6rera swore to his state)ent1 ?ot li.el3 for a C#d+e to a((rove a fra)e=#( of a collea+#e1 ?ot li.el3 either for ?G4 Re+ional 'ir1 9(i)aco >elasco to a#thori/e a fra)e=#( considerin+ that accordin+ to PaCares hi)self% >elasco is his close friend1  here was a disc#ssion a6o#t how the envelo(e was folded% etc1 G#t itFs (ro6a6le that the C#d+e #nfolded it when it was handed to hi)1  PaCares clai)s that he was o#tra+ed 63 the fra)e=#( E that he (rotested1 G#t the (hotos of his arrest show that he was s)ilin+1 :e clai)s it was in derision ()oc.er3% scorn) E that heFs Coll3 63 nat#re1 G#t a s)ile is not a nor)al reaction to e-(ress o#tra+e1 (4 donFt ,#ite #nderstand wh3 this sho#ld 6e )entioned1 So what if he was s)ilin+S)

W'et'er t'" (a a$ e$tra!.e$t #r "$ t"*at"#$ #!erat"#$.  9? RAPM9? 1 4nsti+ation E entra()ent distin+#ished5 o 4nsti+ation5 officers of the lawKtheir a+ents incite% ind#ce% insti+ate or l#re an acc#sed into co))ittin+ an offense wKc he otherwise wo#ldnFt co))it E has no intention of co))ittin+1 Acc#sed cannot 6e held lia6le1 4tFs a tra( for #nwar3 innocent1 o 9ntra()ent5 cri)inal intentKdesi+n to co))it the offense char+ed ori+inates in the )ind of the acc#sed E law enforce)ent officials )erel3 facilitate the co))ission of the cri)e% the acc#sed cannot C#stif3 his cond#ct1 ra( for the #nwar3 cri)inal1  4nsti+ation is not act#all3 an iss#e since PaCares clai)s that this was a fra)e=#(1 :owever% this clai) has no 6asis as (roven 63 the evidence (resented1 WON /a<are " *u"&t1 #+ act u$)ec#."$* #+ a <u%*e.  ?!1 204< @ !?<@ !* 4?'4R9C GR4G9R@1 9vidence onl3 shows that he acce(ted the )one3 E that he .new it was 6ein+ +iven to hi) 63 reason of his office as (er the investi+ation cond#cted 63 4nvesti+atin+ "#stice Mendo/a1 0nfort#nate since the Co#rt has alwa3s stressed that )e)6ers of the C#diciar3 sho#ld dis(la3 not onl3 the hi+hest inte+rit3 6#t )#st at all ti)es cond#ct the)selves in s#ch )anner as to 6e 6e3ond re(roach E s#s(icion1 *or the C#d+e to ret#rn the (eo(leFs re+ard of hi) as an inter)ediar3 of C#stice 6etween 2 conflictin+ (arties% he )#st 6e the first to a6ide 63 the law E weave an e-a)(le for the others to follow1 :e sho#ld 6e st#dio#sl3 caref#l to avoid even the sli+htest infraction of law1 G#t Mendo/aFs reco))endation of )erel3 s#s(endin+ the C#d+e for 2 3rs E 7 )os as the (ro(er ad)inistrative (enalt3 63 virt#e of PaCaresF serio#s )iscond#ct (reC#dicial to the C#diciar3 E (#6lic interest cannot 6e #(held1  Co#rt a((roves Mendo/aFs reco))endation to ac,#it PaCares for lac. of evidence of the 2 nd char+e of havin+ co))itted acts #n6eco)in+ of a )e)6er of the C#diciar31

 I 

3rs of prision correccional as )ini)#) to 6 3rs 1 da3 to $ 3rs of prision mayor as )a-i)#) and to (a3 P80R civil inde)nit3 and costs for the death of "es#s and to recl#sion (er(et#a% to (a3 P80R and costs for the death of his wife ita1 :e a((ealed% ad)ittin+ the .illin+s 6#t ar+#in+ that he .illed the) 6oth #nder the e-ce(tional circ#)stance (rovided in A27H RPC ue: J!? heFs entitled to the e-ce(tional (rivile+e #nder RPC A27H @9S1 :e invo.ed Art1 27H% RPC as an a6sol#tor3 and an e-e)(tin+ ca#se1 BAn a6sol#tor3 ca#se is (resent where the act co))itted is a cri)e 6#t for reasons of (#6lic (olic3 and senti)ent there is no (enalt3 i)(osed1D :avin+ ad)itted the .illin+% it is in#c#)6ent #(on acc#sed to (rove the e-e)(tin+ circ#)stan6ces to the satisfaction of the co#rt in order to 6e relived of an3 cri)inal lia6ilit31 RPC A27H (rescri6es the ff essential ele)ents for s#ch defense5 o hat a le+all3 )arried (erson s#r(rises his s(o#se in the act of co))ittin+ se-#al interco#rse with another (ersonL o hat he .ills an3 of the) or 6oth of the) in the act or i))ediatel3 thereafterL and o hat he has not (ro)oted or facilitated the (rostit#tion of his wife (or da#+hter) or that he or she has not consented to the infidelit3 of the other s(o#se1 Acc#sed )#st (rove these ele)ents 63 clear and convincin+ evidence% otherwise% his defense wo#ld 6e #ntena6le1 he death ca#sed )#st 6e the (ro-i)ate res#lt of the o#tra+e overwhel)in+ the acc#sed after chancin+ #(on his s(o#se in the act of infideltit31 Si)(l3 (#t% the .illin+ of the h#s6and of his ide )#st conc#r with her fla+rant ad#lter3 he Co#rt finds the acc#sed to have acted within the circ#)stances conte)(leated in Art1 27H% RPC he law i)(oses ver3 strin+ent re,#ire)ents 6efore affordin+ offended s(o#se the o((ort#nit3 to avail hi)self of RPC A27H1 he vindication of a ManFs honor is C#stified 6eca#se of the scandal an #nfaithf#l wife createsL the law is strict on this% a#thori/in+ as it does% a )an to chastise her% even with death1 G#t .illin+ the errant s(o#se as a (#rification is so sever that it can onl3 6e C#stified when the #nfaithf#l s(o#se is ca#+ht in fla+rante delicto% E it )#st 6e resorted to onl3 wK +reat ca#tion so )#ch so that the law re,#ires that it 6e inflicted onl3 d#rin+ the se-#al interco#rse or i))ediatel3 thereafter (Peo(le v1 Ja+as) Co#rt th#s sentenced Manolito to 2 3rs E 7 )os of destierro and shall not 6e (er)itted to enter or 6e wKin a 100 .) radi#s fro) 4li+an Cit31





,.

 

  

8e&%: PaCares dis)issed fro) the service wKforfeit#re of all retire)ent 6enefits E (a3 E wK(reC#dice to reinstate)ent in an3 6ranch of the +ovFt or an3 of its a+encies or instr#)entalities1 Cler. of Co#rt ordered to ret#rn the ten )ar.ed P100100 6ills to Ca6rera1



/EO/LE v. OYANI; [387 SCRA 1&6 (2001)]  Manolito !3ani6 E ita !3ani6 were le+all3 )arried1 @ears thereafter the3 se(arated1 ita had affairs wK other )en1 Manolito re)inded her that the3 were still le+all3 )arried% 6#t ita still contin#ed with her affairs1 !ne da3% Manolito ca)e to see ita to infor) her of a )eetin+ wK their sonFs school re+ardin+ their sonFs failed s#6Cect1 :e then ca)e #(on ita and his (ara)o#r% "es#s 9s,#ierdo% havin+ sewK the latter on to( of the other wK his (ants down to his .nees1 0(on seein+ hi)% "es#s .ic.ed Manolito in the chec. and Manolito i))ediatel3 sta66ed "es#s1 ita left the roo)% +ot a and#a3 6ottle and hit Manolita with it in the head1 ital then sta66ed Manolito in the ar) with the 6ro.en and#a3 6ottle1 his an+ered Manolito and he sta66ed ita as well1 here#(on% 9d+ardo% owner of the ho#se where ita was sta3in+ entered the roo)1 Manolito hid 6#t later +ave hi)self #(1 :e was fo#nd +#ilt3 of ho)icide and (arricide and was sentenced to an indeter)inate (enalt3 of 6 )onth% 1 da3 to 6 /EO/LE v. :ENERACION [27& SCRA 277 (1&&8)] Nature: Petition for certiorari to review a decision of R C of Manila  A#+ 2% 1&&7 = cadaver of a 3o#n+ +irl identified as An+el Al,#i/a was seen floatin+ alon+ 'el Pan St1 near the corner of <avesares St1% Ginondo% Manila1 She was wra((ed in a sac. E 3ellow ta6le cloth tied with a n3lon cord with 6oth feet E left hand (rotr#din+ fro) it was seen floatin+ alon+1  A6#ndio <a+#nda3% a1.1a1 "r1 "eofre3 and :enr3 <a+arto 3 Petilla were later char+ed with the cri)e of Ra(e with :o)icide in an 4nfor)ation dated A#+#st $% 1&&7 filed with the Re+ional rial Co#rt of Manila% ?ational Ca(ital "#dicial Re+ion  rial Co#rt = rendered a decision on "an#ar3 31% 1&&8 findin+ the defendants :enr3 <a+arto 3 Petilla and 9rnesto Cordero 3 Maristela +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of the cri)e of Ra(e with :o)icide and sentenced 6oth acc#sed with the N(enalt3 of reclusion perpetua with all the accessories (rovided for 63 law1N





 



*e6r#ar3 $% 1&&8 I Cit3 Prosec#tor of Manila filed a Motion for Reconsideration (ra3in+ that the 'ecision 6e N)odified in that the (enalt3 of death 6e i)(osedN a+ainst res(ondents <a+arto and Cordero% in (lace of the ori+inal (enalt3 (reclusion perpetua)1 *e61 10% 1&&8 the )otion was denied 63 the co#rt1





I ue: J!? the res(ondent C#d+e acted with +rave a6#se of discretion and in e-cess of C#risdiction when he failed andKor ref#sed to i)(ose the )andator3 (enalt3 of death #nder RA H68&% after findin+ the acc#sed +#ilt3 of the cri)e of Ra(e with :o)icide1  @9S1 ?o ,#estion on the +#ilt of the acc#sed1  A +overn)ent of laws% not of )en e-cl#des the e-ercise of 6road discretionar3 (owers 63 those actin+ #nder its a#thorit31 0nder this s3ste)% C#d+es are +#ided 63 the R#le of <aw% and o#+ht Nto (rotect and enforce it witho#t fear or favor%N resist encroach)ents 63 +overn)ents% (olitical (arties% or even the interference of their own (ersonal 6eliefs1  he R C C#d+e fo#nd the acc#sed 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of the cri)e of ra(e and ho)icide1 A11 of RA ?o1 H68& (rovides5 Article 338 of the sa)e Code is here63 a)ended to read as follows5 Art1 3381 Jhen and how ra(e is co))itted1 ; Ra(e is co))itted 63 havin+ carnal .nowled+e of a wo)an #nder an3 of the followin+ circ#)stances5 11 G3 #sin+ force or inti)idation1 21 Jhen the wo)an is de(rived of reason or otherwise #nconscio#sL and 31 Jhen the wo)an is #nder 12 3ears of a+e or is de)ented1 he cri)e of ra(e shall 6e (#nished 63 recl#sion (er(et#a1 Jhenever the cri)e of ra(e is co))itted with the #se of a deadl3 wea(on or 63 two or )ore (ersons% the (enalt3 shall 6e recl#sion (er(et#a to death1 Jhen 63 reason or on the occasion of the ra(e% the victi) has 6eco)e insane% the (enalt3 shall 6e death1 Jhen the ra(e is atte)(ted or fr#strated and a ho)icide is co))itted 63 reason or on the occasion thereof% the (enalt3 shall 6e recl#sion (er(et#a to death1 Jhen 63 reason or on the occasion of the ra(e% a ho)icide is co))itted% the (enalt3 shall 6e death1 1 1 1  0nder the law the (enalt3 i)(osa6le for the cri)e of ra(e with ho)icide is ?! recl#sion (er(et#a 6#t 'eath1 he law (rovides that when 63 reason or on the occasion of ra(e% a ho)icide is co))itted% the (enalt3 shall 6e death A co#rt of law is no (lace for a (rotracted de6ate on the )oralit3 or (ro(riet3 of the sentence% where the law itself (rovides for the sentence of death as a (enalt3 in s(ecific E well= defined instances1 Peo(le vs1 <i)aco = as lon+ as that (enalt3 re)ains in the stat#te 6oo.s% and as lon+ as o#r cri)inal law (rovides for its i)(osition in certain cases% it is the d#t3 of C#dicial officers to res(ect and a((l3 the law re+ardless of their (rivate o(inions1 4t is a well settled r#le that the co#rts are not concerned wK the wisdo)% efficac3 or )oralit3 of laws1 R#les of Co#rt )andates that after an adC#dication of +#ilt% the C#d+e sho#ld i)(ose the (ro(er (enalt3 and civil lia6ilit3 (rovided for 63 the law on the acc#sed1 /EO/LE v. DORIA [301 SCRA 66$ (1&&&)]









 

wo civilian infor)ants infor)ed the P?P ?arco) that one B"#n was en+a+ed in ille+al dr#+ activities and the ?arco) a+ents decided to entra( and arrenst B"#nD in a 6#3=6#st o(eration1 !n the da3 of entra()ent% P!3 Manlan+it handed B"#nD the )ar.ed 6ills and B"#nD instr#cted P!3 Manlan+it to wait for hi) while he +ot the )ariC#ana fro) his associate1 Jhen the3 )et #(% B"#nD +ave P!3 so)ethin+ wra((ed in (lastic #(on which P!3 arrested B"#nD1 he3 fris.ed "#n 6#t did not find the )ar.ed 6ills on hi)1 B"#nD revealed that he left the )one3 at the ho#se of his associate na)ed BnenethD he3 wen to ?enethFs ho#se1 P!3 Manlan+it noticed a carton 6o- #nder the dinin ta6le and noticed so)ethin+ wra((ed in (lastic inside the 6o-1 S#s(icio#s% P!3 entered the ho#se and too. hold of the 6o- and fo#nd that it ha 10 6ric.s of what a((eared to 6e dried )ariC#ana leaves1 Si)#ltaneo#sl3% SP!1 Gad#a recovered the )ar.ed 6ills fro) ?eneth1 he (olice)en arrested ?eneth and too. 6oth her and "#n% to+ether with the co/% its contents and the )ar.ed 6ill and t#rned the) over to the investi+ator at head,#arters% "#n was then learned to 6e *lorencio 'oria while ?eneth is >iolata 2addao1 he3 were 6oth convicted felonio#sl3 sellin+% ad)inisterin+ and +ivin+ awa3 to another 11 (lastic 6a+s of s#s(ected )ariC#ana fr#itin+ to(s% in violation of R1A 6728% as a)ended 63 RA H68& ue: J!? >ioleta 2addao is lia6le 9ntra()ent is reco+ni/ed as a valid defense that can 6e raised 63 an acc#sed E (arta.es the nat#re of a confession E avoidance1 A)erican federal co#rts and state co#rts #s#all3 #se the Bs#6CectiveD or Bori+in of intentD test laid down in Sorrells v1 01S1 to deter)ine whether entra()ent act#all3 occ#rred1 he foc#s of the in,#ir3 is on the acc#sedFs (redis(osition to co))it the offense is char+ed% his state of )ind and inclination 6efore his initial e-(os#re to +overn)ent a+ents1 Another test is the o6Cective test where the test of entra()ent is whether the cond#ct of the law enforce)ent a+enst was li.el3 to ind#ce a nor)all3 law=a6idin+ (erson% other than one who is read3 and willin+% to co))it the offense1 he o6Cective test in 6#3=6#st o(erations de)ands that the details of the (#r(orted transaction )#st 6e clearl3 E ade,#atel3 shown1 Co#rts sho#ld loo. at all factors to deter)ine the (redis(osition of an acc#sed to co))it an offense in so far as the3 are relevant to deter)ine the validt3 of the defense of ind#ce)ent1 4n the case at 6ar% 2addao was not ca#+ht red=handed d#rin+ the 6#3=6#st o(eration to +ive +ro#nd for her arrest #ner Sec1 8a of R#le 1131 She was not co))ittin+ an3 cri)e1 Contrar3 to the findin+ of the C% there was no occasion at all for 2addao to flee fro) the (olice)ent to C#stif3 her arrest in Bhot (#rs#itD ?either co#ld her arrest ne C#stified #nder second instance of B(ersonal .nowled+eD in R#le 113 as this )#st 6e 6ased #(on (ro6a6le ca#se which )eans an act#al 6elief or reasona6le +ro#nds for s#s(icion1 2addao was arrested solel3 on the 6asis of the alle+ed indentification )ade 63 her co=acc#sed1 P!3 Manlan+t% however% declared in his direct e-a)ination that a((ellant 'oria na)ed his co=acc#sed in res(onse to his ,#er3 as to where the )ar.ed )one3 was1 'oria did not (oint to 2addao as his associate in the dr#+ 6#siness% 6#t as the (erson with who) he lfet the )ar.ed 6ills1 his identification does not necessaril3 lead to the concl#sion that 2addao cons(ired with 'oria in (#shin+ dr#+s% 4f there is no showin+ that the (erson who effected the warrantless arrest had% in his own ri+ht% .nowled+e of the acts i)(licatin+ the





(erson arrested to the (er(etration of a cri)inal offense% the arrest is le+all3 o6Cectiona6le1 *#rther)ore% the fact that the 6o- containin+ a6o#t 6 .ilos of )ariC#ana was fo#nd in 2addaoFs ho#se does not C#stif3 a findin+ that she herself is +#ilt3 of the cri)e char+ed1 he (rosec#tion th#s had failed to (rove that 2addao cons(ired with 'oria in the sale of the said dr#+1 h#s% 2addao is ac,#itted

/EO/LE v. NUNAG [1H3 SCRA 2H7 (1&$&)] Nature: A((eal fro) the C#d+)ent of C*4 Pa)(an+a1 1&$& FACTS5 Co)(lainant% <oren/a <o(e/% then a6o#t 1818 31o1% declared that in the 2nd w. of Ma3 1&H$% at H30PM% while she was watch a > (ro+ra) in the ho#se of her nei+h6or% <a-a)ana% she saw the acc#sed Mario ?#na+% 1 of her nei+h6ors% co)in+ towards her1 ?#na+% sta++erin+ E dr#n.% ca)e to her E as.ed her to +o wK hi)1 Geca#se she ref#sed% ?#na+ held her 63 the hand E (o.ed a .nife at her sto)ach E threatened to .ill her1 ?#na+ (laced so)ethin+ in her )o#th E led her to a near63 ricefield% a6o#t 18)1 awa3 fro) <a-a)anaFs ho#se1 >er3 soon thereafter% the acc#sed was Coined 63 7 others% who) she .new also1 After cons(irin+ in whis(ers% Manda( E Salan+san+ held her hands while Car(io E Manalili held her feet E forced her to lie on the +ro#nd1 ?#na+ #ndressed her E had se-#al interco#rse wK her1 After hi)% Manda( followed1 She lost conscio#sness E onl3 re+ained it while Manalili was a6#sin+ her1 he 8 acc#sed left wK a threat that the3 wo#ld .ill her E her fa)il31 After the incident% the co)(lainant )issed her )enstr#ation (eriod whenit 6eca)e d#e and noticed that her sto)ach was +ettin+ 6i++er1 @et she didnFt tell an36od3 #ntil her fa)il3 noticed1 4n !ct 1&H$% she +ave 6irth (re)at#rel3 to fe)ale twins who died after 6a(tis)1 Acc#sed ?#na+ ad)itted havin+ se-#al interco#rse wK <o(e/ 6#t denied the char+e of ra(e1 :e asserted that it was while he was slee(in+ when she ca)e on to hi) and the3 went to the ricefield to relieve their lascivio#sness1 She as.ed )one3 after the act and he +ave her PhP7100 and went ho)e1 Acc#sed Salan+san+ offers the sa)e testi)on3 6#t asserts that he +ave <o(e/ P2 instead1 Acc#sed Manalili also contends that it was <o(e/ who ca)e on to her 6#t he ref#sed to +ive her )one31 4t was onl3 Car(io E Manda( who denied havin+ se-#al interco#rse wK her1 R C fo#nd the) +#ilt3 of the char+e E sentenced ?#na+% Manda( E Salan+san+ to s#ffer recl#sion (er(et#a while Car(io E Manalili% who were 6oth a6ove 16 E 6elow 1$ at the ti)e of the co))ission of the offense% to s#ffer the indeter)inate (enalt3 of 10 3rs of (rision )a3or as )in to 1H 3rs E 7 )os of recl#sion te)(oral as )a-1 8ELD5 *indin+ that <o(e/% a (oor 6arrio +irl who loo.ed ti)id and ine-(erienced in the wa3s of the world% had no )otive whatsoever to testif3 falsel3 a+ainst the a((ellants% each of the 8 acc#sed )#st 6e fo#nd +#ilt3 of 3 distinct and se(arate cri)es of ra(e% the first 3 )en 63 direct act E (artici(ation E the other 2 63 indis(ensa6le coo(eration1 ?#na+% Manda( E Salan+san+ sentenced to s#ffer 3 (enalties of recl#sion (er(et#a while Manalili E Car(io 6oth 6ein+ a6ove 16 6#t 6elow 1$ 3rs at that ti)e% sentenced to s#ffer 3 indeter)inate (enalties of 10 3rs of (rision )a3or as )in E 1H 3rs 7 )os of recl#sion te)(oral as )a-1 "#d+)ent affir)ed wK )odification1

I  

















/EO/LE v. YANSON0DUMANCAS [320 SCRA 8$7 (1&&&)]  !n *e6r#ar3 20% 1&&2% "eanette @anson '#)ancas was swindled in a fa.e +old 6ar transaction losin+ P382%000 to 'anilo <#)an+3ao and R#fino 2ar+ar% "r1









!n A#+1 8% 1&&2 10530 AM Mario <a)is% 'o)inador 2eroche% Rolando *ernande/% "ai)e 2ar+allano% 9dwin 'ivina+racia% eod3 'el+ado% Moises 2rande/a were (lannin+ to a6d#ct <#)an+3ao E 2ar+ar "r1 6eca#se the3 swindled the '#)ancas fa)il31 Col ?icolas orres was also infor)ed of the (lan of the +ro#(1 !n A#+#st 6% 1&&2% "eannette investi+ated the two a6d#cted and told the +ro#( of 2eroche to ta.e care of the two1 !n A#+ H% 1&&2% 2ar+allano shot 2ar+ar while 2eroche shot <#)an+3ao1 hen the 2 6odies were 6#ried 63 Pecha E :ilado1 he R C fo#nd the followin+ +#ilt3 of5 o Princi(als 63 4nd#ction5 "eanette @anson '#)ancas o Princi(als 63 4nd#ction and 63 'irect Partici(ation andKor 4ndis(ensa6le Coo(eration5 Police Col1 ?icolas M1 orres o Princi(als 63 Partici(ation5 Police 4ns(ector Adonis C1 A6eto Police !fficer Mario <a)is @ *ernande/% 'o)inador 2eroche @ Mah#sa3% "ai)e 2ar+allano% Rolando R1 *ernande/% 9dwin 'ivina+racia% eod3 'el+ado o Princi(als 63 Partici(ation5 Cesar Pecha E 9d+ar :ilado

,.

I ue : 1. WON C'ar&e Du.a$ca a$% Jea$$ette Ya$ #$ Du.a$ca ca$ )e c#$ "%ere% !r"$c"!a& )1 "$%uct"#$2  ?!1 "eanette @anson '#)ancas is not +#ilt3 as (rinci(als 63 ind#ction 6eca#se there are not other evidence that can (rove the sheFs +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1  Article 1H1 Princi(als I he followin+ are considered (rinci(als5 11 hose who ta.e a direct (art in the e-ec#tion of the acts1 21 hose who directl3 force or ind#ce other to co))it itL 31 hose who coo(erate in the co))ission of the offense 63 another act witho#t which it wo#ld not have 6een acco)(lished1  here are 2 wa3s of directl3 forcin+ another to co))it a cri)e% na)el35 (1) 63 #sin+ irresisti6le force or (2) 63 ca#sin+ #ncontrolla6le fear1 <i.ewise there are two wa3s of ind#cin+ another to co))it a cri)e% na)el35 (1) 63 +ivin+ a (rice or offerin+ reward or (ro)ise and (2) 63 #sin+ wor.s of co))and1 All of the factors arenFt ad)issi6le to "eanette1 he onl3 evidence that )a3 6e considered is the word Bto ta.e care of the twoD wKc )a3 constit#te words of co))and1 9videnced sho#ld the "eanette )eant the Bto ta.e care of the twoD is to allow the law to its co#rse #(on cross e-a)ination of Moises 2rande/a1 his also raises so)e do#6t of what the inter(retation of the (hrase1 h#s it cannot 6e concl#ded since it cannot 6e concl#ded that there is co))and to .ill the victi)s 6e3ond reasona6le 63 the va+#e (hase itself1 -. WON /#&"ce I$ !ect#r A%#$" A)et# ca$ )e c#$ "%ere% !r"$c"!a& )1 !art"c"!at"#$2  ?!1 Police 4ns(ector Adonis A6eto (artici(ation was to serve a search warrant on :elen ortocioFs residence ((erson which 2ar+ar and <#)an+3ao told the (olice officers where the )one3 )i+ht have +one) and that s#6se,#entl3 interro+ated 2ar+ar and <#)an+3ao1

WON /#&"ce C#& N"c#&a M. T#rre ca$ )e c#$ "%ere% !r"$c"!a& )1 "$%uct"#$2  ?!1 Police Col ?icolas M1 orres sho#ld have 6een cri)inall3 lia6le 6#t since his death the cri)inal lia6ilit3 is e-tin+#ished 6#t the civil lia6ilit3 still s#6sists1 11 'eath of the acc#sed (endin+ a((eal of his conviction e-tin+#ishes his cri)inal lia6ilit3 as well as the civil lia6ilit3 6ased solel3 thereon1 As o(ined 63 "#stice Re+alado% in this re+ard% Nthe death of the acc#sed (rior to final C#d+)ent ter)inates his cri)inal lia6ilit3 and onl3 the civil lia6ilit3 directl3 arisin+ fro) and 6ased solel3 on the offense co))itted% i1e1% civil lia6ilit3 edelicto in senso strictiore1N 21 Corollaril3% the clai) for civil lia6ilit3 s#rvives notwithstandin+ the death of acc#sed% if the sa)e )a3 also 6e (redicated on a so#rce of o6li+ation other than delict1 CC A118H en#)erates these other so#rces of o6li+ation fro) which the civil lia6ilit3 )a3 arise as a res#lt of the sa)e act or o)ission5 (a) <aw% (6) Contracts% (c) V#asi=contracts% and (d) V#asi=delicts  Jhere the civil lia6ilit3 s#rvives% as e-(lained in ?#)6er 2 a6ove% an action for recover3 therefor )a3 6e (#rs#ed 6#t onl3 63 wa3 of filin+ a se(arate civil action and s#6Cect to A1% 1&$8 RCP 111% as a)ended1 his se(arate civil action )a3 6e enforced either a+ainst the e-ec#torKad)inistrator of the estate of the acc#sed% de(endin+ on the so#rce of o6li+ation #(on wKc the sa)e is 6ased as e-(lained a6ove1  *inall3% the (rivate offended (art3 need not fear a forfeit#re of his ri+ht to file a se(arate civil action 63 (rescri(tion% in cases where d#rin+ the (rosec#tion of the cri)inal action E (rior to its e-tinction% the (rivate=offended (art3 instit#ted to+ether therewith the civil action1 4n s#ch case% the stat#te of li)itations on the civil lia6ilit3 is dee)ed interr#(ted d#rin+ the (endenc3 of the cri)inal case% confor)a6l3 wK (rovisions of CC A1188% that sho#ld there63 avoid an3 a((rehension on (ossi6le (rivation of ri+ht 63 (rescri(tion1

R C fo#nd all the acc#sed +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of the co)(le- cri)e of )#rder wK fr#strated )#rder1 he case of 2raciano Golivar who died of cardio=res(irator3 arrest in 1&&3 is dis)issed1 'eath of the acc#sed (endin+ a((eal of his conviction e-tin+#ishes his cri)inal and civil lia6ilit31 8ELD5 Jitness Rodolfo Pana+a testifies that he saw Garrion and Cana+#ran tal.in+ 6#t a((arentl3% the s#6Cect of s#ch disc#ssion was not the .illin+ of Callao1 :ence% the testi)on3 of the witness is not concl#sive to (rove 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t that Garrion was a (rinci(al 63 ind#ce)ent of the cri)e1 he fact that he wo#ld Bta.e careD of the (ro6le)% as overheard 63 the witness% is a)6i+#o#s E doesnFt necessaril3 lead to the concl#sion that he (lotted to .ill Callao1 /r"$c"!a& are those who directl3 force or ind#ce others to co))it an offense1 !ne is ind#ced to co))it a cri)e either 63 a co))and (precepto) or for a consideration (pacto)% or 63 an3 other si)ilar act wKc constit#tes the real and )ovin+ ca#se of the cri)e and wKc was done for the (#r(ose of ind#cin+ s#ch cri)inal act and was s#fficient for that (#r(ose1 he "$%uce.e$t e-ists whenever the act (erfor)ed 63 the (h3sical a#thor of the cri)e is deter)ined 63 the infl#ence of the ind#cer over the )ind of hi) who co))its the act whatever the so#rce of s#ch infl#ence1 4n the case at 6ar% onl3 the testi)on3 of the witness is offered and no evidence of force% fear% (rice% (ro)ise or reward e-erted over or offered to Cana+#ran 63 Garrion that i)(elled hi) to .ill Callao was (resented1 Moreover% fro) the e-a)ination of evidence% there is nothin+ to show that a cons(irac3 in fact e-isted a)on+ the acc#sed= a((ellants1 he factors +iven (S#ch factors incl#de drin.in+ to+ether in the ni+ht of the cri)e% seen r#nnin+ awa3 to+ether fro) the scene of the cri)e after the shots were fired) are circ#)stantial in nat#re% wKc even ta.en collectivel3% do not reasona6l3 lead to (roof GR' that a cons(irac3 e-isted1 Jherefore% R C r#lin+ reversed1 he acc#sed=a((ellants are ac,#itted 6ased on reasona6le do#6t1

/EO/LE v. DE LA CRU> [&H SCRA 3$8 (1&$0)]  A+a(ito de la Cr#/ was fo#nd +#ilt3 as (rinci(al 63 ind#ce)ent of the cri)e of Ridna((in+ and Serio#s 4lle+al 'etention% and sentencin+ hi) to death1 he facts are s#ch that A+a(ito )et #( wK Moha)ad Sa+a( Sali(% Alih 4t#) and a certain As)ad and (ro(osed to the) the .illin+ of Antonio @# E the .idna((in+ of the AntonioFs 3o#n+er 6ro @# Chi Chon+% for ranso)1 A+a(ito ha((ened to 6e the oversser of AntonioFs r#66er E cocon#t land for no less than 10 3rs :e +ave the) instr#ctions as to how and where to locate the @# 6rothers at a +iven ti)e and how the3 were to a)6#sh the 6rothers1 (G#t he didnFt directl3 (artici(ate in act#al cri)e) G#t Antonio had to +o so)ewhere and so the 3o#n+er @# went with 4sa6elo Mancenido to 4sa6ela (4sa6elo 4sa6ela hehe11 f#nn311)1 he 3o#n+er @# was a)6#shed as instr#cted 6#t when @# Chi Chon+ tried to esca(e 63 stri.in+ An+ih with a (iece of wood% An+ih +ot so (issed he shot @# several ti)es% .illin+ hi)1 he +#n shots alerted the villa+ers so the .idna((ers fled1 Jhen the villa+ers left after seein+ the 6od3 (the3 said the3Fll co)e 6ac. in the )ornin+ with (olice in tow)% the .idna((ers too. the 6od3 and threw it in the ocean1 Antonio testified and (rovided the (ossi6le )otive for A+a(ito to co))it s#ch cri)e1 A+a(ito was assi+ned )ana+er and ad)inistrator of the far) 6#t when the 3o#n+er @# ca)e 6ac.% A+a(ito was de)oted to overseer1 *#rther% (rofits were hi+her with @# as )ana+er and Antonio 6eca)e stricter with A+a(ito1 A+a(ito was convicted as )aster)ind or (rinci(al 63 ind#ce)ent

/EO/LE v. ;OLI:AR [31H SCRA 8HH (1&&&)]  Nature: A((eal fro) a decision of R C of 4loilo1 FACTS5 !n *e6 17% 1&$H% at aro#nd & PM% 'a)aso S#elan ca)e ho)e alon+ wK Roll3 Grendia a6oard a tric3cle fro) the town of Garotac to Gr+3 >ista Ale+re1 After the3 ali+hted fro) the vehicle% the3 (assed 63 the store of Rodne3 Galaito to 6#3 so)e ci+arettes1 he3 were then invited 63 the storeowner to drin. a 6ottle of 6eer to wKc the 2 o6li+ed1 After )#ch drin.in+% the )oved o#t to drin. 6eer at the s)all h#t sit#ated at the 6ac. of the store1 here the3 Coined the +ro#( acc#sed Renato Gal6on% 2racian Golivar% "oel So6erano and Cresenciano Cana+#ran1 Jhile the +ro#( inside the h#t was still drin.in+% a certain V#irino arrived carr3in+ wK hi) a 112 +a#+e (istoli/ed firear) wKc he handed to Cana+#ran1 hen the +ro#( acc#sed as.ed (er)ission to +o ho)e1 At aro#nd 1130PM% while there was still a +ro#( drin.in+% a shot 6#rst E a s(ra3 of (ellets hit 'a)aso% "r1 on the sho#lder E on the ri+ht forear)% while 7 shots were tar+eted to E hit :#+o Callao res#ltin+ to his death1 he inC#red 'a)aso% "r1 loo.ed for a tric3cle for Callao1 :e (assed thro#+h the )ain +ate of the storeownerFs co)(o#nd E saw 7 (ersons r#nnin+ awa3 fro) the (lace where the shot ca)e fro)1 :e identified the 7 to 6e the +ro#( of Golivar that (revio#sl3 as.ed (er)ission to +o ho)e1









I ue: J!? A+a(ito sho#ld 6e convicted as )aster)ind or (rinci(al 63 ind#ce)ent in the a6sence of the ele)ents of cons(irac3 to the cri)e char+ed1  ?!1 he re,#isites necessar3 in order that a (erson )a3 6e convicted as a (rinci(al 63 ind#ce)ent are5 o hat the ind#ce)ent 6e )ade directl3 with the intention of (roc#rin+ the co))ission of the cri)eL and o hat s#ch ind#ce)ent 6e the deter)inin+ ca#se of the co))ission of the cri)e 63 the )aterial e-ec#tor  he fore+oin+ re,#isites are ind#6ita6le (resent in this case  "a)as "#)aidi E !3on+ Asidin% 2 dischar+ed witnesses% testified that As)ad E A)il contected the) to +o to Gasilan to do a Co6 for A+a(ito1  Jhen the +ro#( was 6ro#+ht face to face with hi)% he lost no ti)e in latin+ down the strate+3 for the .illin+ of Antonio @# and the .idna((in+ of @# Chi Chon+ for ranso)1  4t was he who .new when the tr#c. of the intended victi)s wo#ld +o to <atawan to load the co(ra to 6e delivered to 4sa6ela1  :e .new the ro#te the tr#c. wo#ld ta.e E the a((ro-i)ate ti)e that it was to (ass 631 :e even selected the a)6#sh (lace1  Clearl3% he had (ositive resol#tion to (roc#re the co))ission of the cri)e1 :e% too% (resented the stron+est .ind of te)(tation% a (ec#niar3 +ain in the for) of ranso)% wKc was the deter)inin+ factor of the co))ission of the cri)e 63 his co=acc#sed1  JKo hi)% the cri)e wo#ld not have 6een conceived% )#ch less co))itted1 Clearl3% he was a (rinci(al 63 ind#ction% with collective cri)inal res(onsi6ilit3 with the )aterial e-ec#tors1  !ne is ind#ced to co))it a cri)e either 63 a co))ans ((rece(to) or for a consideration ((acto)% or 63 an3 other si)ilar act wKc constit#tes the real and )ovin+ ca#se of the cri)e E wKc was done for the (#r(ose of ind#cin+ s#ch cri)inal act E was s#fficient for that (#r(ose1 he (erson who +ives (ro)ises% or offers the consideration E the one who act#all3 co))its the cri)e 63 reason of s#ch (ro)ise% re)#neration or reward are 6oth (rinci(als1  he ind#cer need not ta.e (art in the co))ission of the offense1 1 who ind#ces another to co))it a cri)e is +#ilt3 as (rinci(al even tho#+h he )i+ht have ta.en no (art in its )aterial e-ec#tion1







!ne is ind#ced directl3 to co))it a cri)e either 63 co))and% or for a consideration% or 63 an3 other si)ilar act wKc constit#tes the real E )ovin+ ca#se of the cri)e E wKc was done for the (#r(ose of ind#cin+ s#ch cri)inal act E was s#fficient for that (#r(ose1 JeFve alread3 seen in o#r co))entar3 on (ar1 12 of A$ that the 1 who (h3sicall3 co))its the cri)e )a3 esca(e cri)inal res(onsi6ilit3 63 showin+ that he acted wK d#e o6edience to an orderL in s#ch case the cri)inal res(onsi6ilit3 falls entirel3 #(on the 1 who orders% i1e1% #(on hi) who 63 his co))ands has directl3 ind#ced the other to co))it the act1 G#t in case the o6edience of the inferior isnFt d#e to the s#(erior E th#s not necessar3% E doesnFt% th#s% e-e)(t hi) fro) cri)inal res(onsi6ilit3 as the (h3sical a#thor of the cri)e% he who th#s% 63 his co))and% directl3 ind#ced hi) to the cri)inal act is considered 63 the law also as (rinci(al in the cri)e1 he (acto 63 virt#e of wKc 1 (#rchases for a consideration the hand wKc co))its the cri)e )a.es hi) who +ives% (ro)ises% or offers the consideration the (rinci(al in the cri)e 63 direct ind#ce)ent% 6eca#se wKo s#ch offer or (ro)ise the cri)inal act wo#ld never have 6een co))itted1 G#t this doesnFt )ean that the 1 who act#all3 co))its the cri)e 63 reason of s#ch (ro)ise% re)#neration or reward is e-e)(ted fro) cri)inal res(onsi6ilit3L on the contrar3% s#ch circ#)stance constit#tes an a++ravation of his cri)e1 Je have heretofore said that in addition to the (rece(to E the (acto there are si)ilar )eans 63 wKc another )a3 6e ind#ced to co))it a cri)e wKc also )a.e the 1 who offers the ind#ce)ent the (rinci(al in the cri)e 63 virt#e of the (rovisions of A13(2)1 G#t it )#st 6e 6orne in )ind that these acts of ind#ce)ent do not consist in si)(le advice or co#nsel +iven 6efore the act is co))itted% or in si)(le words #ttered at the ti)e the act was co))itted1 S#ch advice E s#ch words constit#te #ndo#6tedl3 an evil act% an ind#ce)ent conde)ned 63 the )oral lawL 6#t in order that% #nder the (rovisions of the Code% s#ch act can 6e considered direct ind#ce)ent% it is necessar3 that s#ch advice or s#ch words have a +reat do)inance E +reat infl#ence over the (erson who actsL it is necessar3 that the3 6e as direct% as efficacio#s% as (owerf#l as (h3sical or )oral coercion or as violence itself1

8ELD5 Altho#+h it is alle+ed that Riichi !)ine #ttered words of ind#ce)ent to 9d#ardo A#tor% it wo#ld 6e ins#fficient to )a.e hi) a (rinci(al 63 ind#ction1 9d#ardo A#tor tho#+h wor.in+ #nder the direction of !)ine was still 6ein+ (aid 63 P#lido1 Moreover% it is necessar3 that "$%uce.e$t 6e )ade directl3 wK the intention of (roc#rin+ the co))ission of the cri)e and that s#ch ind#ce)ent 6e the deter)inin+ ca#se of the co))ission of the cri)e1 4t )#st 6e (recede the act ind#ced and )#st 6e so infl#ential in (rod#cin+ the cri)inal act that wKo it the act wo#ldnFt have 6een (erfor)ed1 Moreover% as words of direct ind#ce)ent% it is essential that s#ch advice or words have +reat do)inance and +reat infl#ence over the (erson who acts% that the3 6e as direct% as efficacio#s% as (owerf#l as (h3sical or )oral coercion or as violence itself1 :ence% the 3 co=defendants of A#tor are not res(onsi6le for the inC#r3 inflicted 63 hi) on An+el P#lido1 "#d+in+ fro) the nat#re of the wo#nd% wKc was a6t 11 inches in len+th% it is (ro6a6le that it was ca#sed 63 the (oint of the 6olo on a downward stro.e1 4t was not a sta6 wo#nd% and was (ro6a6l3 +iven d#rin+ a co))otion and wKo 6ein+ ai)ed at an3 (artic#lar (art of the 6od31 Moreover% as A#tor str#c. the offended onl3 once% it is indicative that it was not his intention to ta.e the offended (art3Fs life1 Jherefore% 9d#ardo A#tor is +#ilt3 of lesiones graves wK a sentence of 13r $ )os E 21 da3s of (rision correccional% since the offended (art3 was inca(acitated for the (erfor)ance of his #s#al wor. for a (eriod of )ore than &0 da3s% and not of fr#strated ho)icide1 he rest of the co=defendants are ac,#itted1

/EO/LE v. MONTEALEGRE [161 SCRA H00 (1&$$)]   9d)#ndo A6adilla was eatin+ in a resto when he detected the s)ell of )ariC#ana s)o.e co)in+ fro) a near63 ta6le1 4ntendin+ to call a (olice)an% he ,#ietl3 went o#tside and saw Pfc1 Renato Ca)anti+#e1 Ca)anti+#e Coined A6adilla in the resto and the3 6oth s)elled the )ariC#ana s)o.e fro) the ta6le of >icente Ca(alad and ?a(oleon Monteale+re1 Ca)anti+#e collared the 2 E said B?a+)a)ariC#ana .a3o% anoSD :e forced the) #(% holdin+ 1 in each hand 6#t Ca(alad (#lled o#t a .nife E started sta66in+ Ca)anti+#e at the 6ac.1 Ca)anti+#e let +o of Monteale+re to +et his +#n 6#t Monteale+re restrained Ca)anti+#eFs hand to (revent the latter fro) defendin+ hi)self1 he3 +ra((led E fell on the floor1 Ca(alac fled and Ca)anti+#e (#rs#ed hi) firin+ so)e shots1 hen he sto((ed and as.ed to 6e 6ro#+ht to a hos(ital1 Ca(alac was fo#nd sl#)(ed in the street% with a 6#llet to his chest1 Goth he and Ca)anti+#e died the ne-t da31 Monteale+re on the other hand% esca(ed thro#+h the conf#sion1 :e was later a((rehended1



UNITED STATES v. INDANAN [27 Phil1 203 (1&13)]  Paran+1  !n Mar1 27% 1&12% 4ndanan ordered the .illin+ of Sariol to his )en A.iran% Ral3a.an E S#h#ri in the Chinese Ce)etar3 assertin+ that 4ndanan had an order to that effect fro) the +overnor1 he C*4 fo#nd 4ndanan +#ilt3 of the cri)e of )#rder E sentencin+ hi) to 6e han+ed1 ue : J!? 4ndanan is +#ilt3 of )#rder 63 ind#ce)entS @9S1 A13(2)% of the Penal Code declares those to 6e (rinci(als in a cri)e Nwho directl3 force or ind#ce others to co))it it1N Co))entin+ #(on this (ara+ra(h% >iada sa3s5 he3 force another to co))it a cri)e who (h3sicall3 63 act#al force or +rave fear% for e-a)(le% with a (istol in hand or 63 an3 other threatenin+ )eans% o6li+e another to co))it the cri)e1 4n o#r co))entar3 on (ar1 & of A$ ((a+e 2$)% we have alread3 said that he who s#ffers violence acts wKo will E a+ainst his will% is no )ore than an instr#)ent% E therefore is +#ilt3 of no wron+1 he real c#l(rits in s#ch case% the onl3 +#ilt3 (ersons% are those who #se the violence% those who force the other to co))it the cri)e1 Pan+li)a 4ndanan% acc#ssed is the head)an of /EO/LE v. 6IIC8I OMINE [61 Phil 60& (1&38)] Nature: A((eal fro) a C#d+)ent of C*4 'avao1 FACTS5 'efendants a((eal fro) a decision of the C*4 findin+ the) +#ilt3 of fr#strated ho)icide% wK the AC that advanta+e was ta.en of their s#(erior stren+th% E sentencin+ the) each to s#ffer an 4S fro) 6 3rs of (rision correccional to 12 3rs of (rision )a3or1 'efendants 9d#ardo A#tor% <#is <adion and A+a(ito Cortesano were wor.in+ #nder co=defendant Riichi !)ine% the overseer or )ana+er of the he)( (lantation owned 63 An+el P#lido1 he 7 defendants lived to+ether in a ho#se on the (lantation1 Riichi !)ine as.ed An+el P#lido (er)ission to o(en a new road thro#+h the (lantation1 Acd+ to !)ine% P#lido did +ive his (er)ission thatFs wh3 he 6e+an wor.in+ on the new road1 G#t acd+ to P#lido% he ref#sed to +rant this re,#est 6eca#se there was alread3 an #nfinished road1 As P#lido and his son alon+ wK 2 others were ret#rnin+ ho)e fro) a coc.(it% the3 noticed that a considera6le n#)6er of he)( (lants were destro3ed 63 the constr#ction of the new road1 An+ered 63 this% the3 went to the defendantsF ho#se and there ha((ened a violent altercation res#ltin+ to the owner P#lidoFs death fro) a wo#nd 63 a 6olo str#c. in his 6reast1 

 I 

 

I ue: J!? Monteale+re was ri+htl3 considered a co=(rinci(al for havin+ corro6orated with Ca(alad in the .illin+ of the (olice officer1  @9S1 he two acted in concert% with Ca(alad act#all3 sta66in+ Ca)anti+#e H ti)es and Monteale+re holdin+ on to victi)Fs hands to (revent hi) fro) drawin+ the (istol and defendin+ hi)seld% as A6adilla had testified1  Jhile it is tr#e that Monteale+re did not hi)self co))it the act of sta66in+% he was nonetheless e,#all3 +#ilt3 thereof for havin+ (revented Ca)anti+#e for resistin+ the attac. a+ainst hi)1  Monteale+re was a (rinci(al 63 indis(ensa6le coo(eration #nder A1H(3)% RPC1 he re,#isites of this (rovision o Partici(atin+ in the cri)inal resol#tion% i1e1% thereFs either anterior cons(irac3 or #nit3 of cri)inal (#r(ose E intention i))ediatel3 6efore the co))ission of the cri)e char+edL E





Coo(eration in the co))ission of the offense 63 (erfor)in+ another act wKo wKc it wo#ld not have 6een acco)(lished1 G#t altho#+h there was no evidence of (rior a+ree)ent 6etween Ca(alad E Monteale+re% their s#6se,#ent acts sho#ld (rove the (resence of s#ch cons(irac31 he Co#rt has consistentl3 #(held s#ch view in (revio#s cases (Peo(le v1 <a+anson% Peo(le v1 Cercano% Peo(le v1 2arcia Ca6arse% 'acana3 v1 Peo(le) Monteale+re was correctl3 convicted of the co)(le- cri)e of )#rder% ,#alified 63 treacher3% wK assa#lt #(on a (erson of a#thorit31 o

/EO/LE v. DO;LE [117 SCRA 131 (1&$2)] Nature: A#to)atic review of the decision of C*4 Ri/al1 1&$2 FACTS: <ate in the ni+ht of "#ne 13% 1&66% 10 )en% al)ost all heavil3 ar)ed wK (istols% car6ines and tho)(sons% left the shores of Manila in a )otor 6anca E (roceeded to ?avotas%Ri/al to ro6 the 6each=6an. Pr#dential Gan. E r#st Co1 Said 6an. wad an #n#s#al 6an.in+ ho#rs% o(en fro) )idni+ht till $AM1 !nce doc.ed in ?avotas and ta.in+ advanta+e of the dar.ness of the ni+ht% $ )en dise)6ar.ed fro) the 6anca and (roceeded to their )ission1 !nce inside% the3 started firin+ at the 6an.Fs ceilin+% walls E door of the va#lt1 he $ )en then ret#rned to the waitin+ )otor 6anca wK a6o#t P1018R E s(ed awa31 As a res#lt of the shootin+% )an3 (eo(le +ot .illed E inC#red1 A)on+ those who +ot .illed were a+ents of the law1 !nl3 8 of the 10 )en were 6ro#+ht to trial% the rest still re)ain at lar+e1 2 of the 8 acc#sed were ac,#itted1 4t is onl3 Cresencio 'o6le% Si)eon 'o6le and Antonio Ro)a,#in a((ealin+ in the char+e of 6an. ro66er3 co))itted in 6and% wK )#lti(le ho)icide% )#lti(le fr#strated ho)icide and assa#lt #(on a+ents of (ersons in a#thorit31 8ELD: *irst% as to a((ellant Si)eon% evidence shows that the )alefactors )et in his ho#se to disc#ss the (lan to ro6 the 6an.1 his circ#)stance alone doesnFt concl#de his +#ilt 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1 he facts do not show that he (erfor)ed an3 act tendin+ to the (er(etration of the ro66er3% nor that he too. a direct (art therein or ind#ced other (ersons to co))it% or that he coo(erated in its cons#))ation 63 so)e act wKo wKc it wo#ld not have 6een co))itted1 At )ost% his act a)o#nted to Coinin+ in a cons(irac3 wKc is not (#nisha6le1 Si)eon then was not a (rinci(al 6oth 63 a+ree)ent and enco#ra+e)ent for his non=(artici(ation in the co))ission of the cri)e1 ?or was it clearl3 (roven that he had received an3 (artKfr#its of the looted )one3 as to )a.e hi) an accessor31 As reco))ended 63 Sol2en% Si)eon 'o6le is entitled to ac,#ittal wK no s#fficient evidence to esta6lish his +#ilt 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t1 ?e-t% as re+ards Ro)a,#in E 'o6le% the )alefactors who waited in the 6anca% 6oth contend that their e-tra=C#dicial state)ents #(on wKc their conviction was (rinci(all3 )ade to rest% are inad)issi6le for havin+ 6een alle+edl3 o6tained 63 force and inti)idation% tort#re and )altreat)ent% and in violation of 6asic constiFl rts to co#nsel and a+ainst self=incri)ination1 :owever% it )#st 6e noted that the3 didnFt (resent an3 )edical cert to attest to the inC#ries alle+edl3 inflicted1 More so that their testi)onies )atch each otherFs1 And it sho#ld also 6e noted that Celso A,#inoFs testi)on3% as one of the acc#sed% ad)itted that no violence was inflicted on hi) to (roc#re his state)ent1 his is evidence eno#+h that the a((ellants co#ld not have 6een dealt wK differentl3 as their co=acc#sed A,#ino who was allowed to +ive his state)ent freel31 he e-tra=C#dicial state)ents of the a((ellants are convincin+ to show that their lia6ilit3 is less than that of a co=(rinci(al 63 cons(irac3 or 63 act#al (artici(ation1 Cresencio was )erel3 in= char+e of the 6anca and had no .nowled+e of the concrete (lan and

e-ec#tion of the cri)e1 he )aster)ind o6vio#sl3 did not e-tend confidence in hi) as he was onl3 as.ed to (rovide a 6anca C#st a few ho#rs 6efore the co))ission of the cri)e1 ?or was Ro)a,#in considered a (rinci(le )alefactor as there was a +#n (ointed at hi) 63 Cresencio to (revent hi) fro) fleein+ awa3 fro) the scene% evident to show that he never Coined in the cri)inal (#r(ose and that his acts were not vol#ntar31 An acc#.!&"ce is one who% not 6ein+ (rinci(al as defined in Art 1H RPC% coo(erates in the e-ec#tion of the offense 63 (revio#s or si)#ltaneo#s acts1 here )#st 6e a co))#nit3 of #nlawf#l (#r(ose 6etween the (rinci(al and acco)(lice and assistance .nowin+l3 and intentionall3 +iven to s#((l3 )aterial and )oral aid in the cons#))ation of the offense1 4n this case% the a((ellantsF coo(eration is li.e that of a driver of a car #sed for a6d#ction wKc )a.es the driver a )ere acco)(lice1 G#t it isnFt esta6lished 63 evidence that in the )t+ held in the ho#se of Si)eon that the3 all a+reed to .ill and not C#st ro61 he findin+ that a((ellants are lia6le as )ere acco)(lices )a3 a((ear too lenient 6#t evidence fails to esta6lish their cons(irac3 wK the real )alefactors who act#all3 ro66ed the 6an. and .illed several (eo(le1 Jherefore% 'o6le E Ro)a,#in are +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t as acco)(lices for the cri)e of ro66er3 in 6and1 he (enalt3 i)(osa6le #(on a((ellants is (rision )a3or )in1 he co))ission of the cri)e was a++r 63 ni+htti)e E the #se of a )otori/ed 6anca1 here 6ein+ no MC% 6oth a((ellants sho#ld 6e sentenced to an indeter)inate (enalt3 of (rision correccional fro) 8 3rs% 7 )os% 21 da3s to $ 3rs of (rision )a3or as )a-i)#)1



R C fo#nd 9dwin 'e >era E Roderic. 2arcia +#ilt3 6e3ond reasona6le do#6t of )#rder E sentencin+ the) to rec1 (er(et#a1

/EO/LE v. ELIJORDE [306 SCRA 1$$ (1&&&)] Fact : 9liCorde and P#n/alan char+ed with )#rder of 9ric :ierro1 Altercation 6e+an when :ierro told Meneses not to to#ch hi) ca#se his clothes will +et dirt31 *ist fi+ht occ#rred1 :ierro hid1 After 30 )ins he went o#t to +o ho)e 6#t was attac.ed a+ain E sta66ed to death1 I ue: J!? P#n/alan is lia6le as cons(iratorS N#. P#n/alan ac,#itted1 9liCorde +#ilt31 4n Peo(le v1 <#+=aw% cons(irac3 sho#ld 6e (roven thro#+h clear and convincin+ evidence1 4n Peo(le v1 'e Ro-as% it is esta6lished that it )#st 6e (roven that he (erfor)ed overt act to (#rs#e co)(letel31 >is6al testified that onl3 9liCorde chased :ierro1 P#n/alanFs onl3 (artici(ation was .ic.in+ which does not (rove that he )i+ht have .nown 9liCordeFs evil desi+n or intent to .ill1 4n Peo(le v1 A+a(ina3% there was no (roof that the acc#sed .new a6o#t the deadl3 wea(on and that it was to 6e #sed to sta6 victi)1 4n the case at 6ar% P#n/alan desisted fro) acts of a++ression and did nothin+ to assist 9liCorde in co))ittin+ )#rder1

I ue : J!? de >era can 6e considered as an acco)(lice or as a cons(irator in the cri)e co))itted 63 *lorendo E CastroS  Acco)(lice1 RPC (rovides that a cons(irac3 e-ists when Ntwo or )ore (ersons co)e to an a+ree)ent concernin+ the co))ission of a felon3 and decide to co))it it1N o (rove cons(irac3% the (rosec#tion )#st esta6lish the followin+ three re,#isites5 N(1) that two or )ore (ersons ca)e to an a+ree)ent% (2) that the a+ree)ent concerned the co))ission of a cri)e% and (3) that the e-ec#tion of the felon3 [was] decided #(on1N9-ce(t in the case of the )aster)ind of a cri)e% it )#st also 6e shown that the acc#sed (erfor)ed an overt act in f#rtherance of the cons(irac31 he Co#rt has held that in )ost instances% direct (roof of a (revio#s a+ree)ent need not 6e esta6lished% for cons(irac3 )a3 6e ded#ced fro) the acts of the acc#sed (ointin+ to a Coint (#r(ose% concerted action E co))#nit3 of interest  Revised Penal Code defines acco)(lices as Nthose (ersons who% not 6ein+ incl#ded in Article 1H% coo(erate in the e-ec#tion of the offense 63 (revio#s or si)#ltaneo#s acts1N he Co#rt has held that an acco)(lice is None who .nows the cri)inal desi+n of the (rinci(al and coo(erates .nowin+l3 or intentionall3 therewith 63 an act which% even if not rendered% the cri)e wo#ld 6e co))itted C#st the sa)e1D o hold a (erson lia6le as an acco)(lice% two ele)ents )#st 6e (resent5 (1) the Nco))#nit3N of cri)inal desi+nL that is% .nowin+ the cri)inal desi+n of the (rinci(al 63 direct (artici(ation% he conc#rs with the latter in his (#r(oseLN and (2) the (erfor)ance of (revio#s or si)#ltaneo#s acts that are not indis(ensa6le to the co))ission of the cri)e  Cons(irators and acco)(lices have one thin+ in co))on5 the3 .now and a+ree with the cri)inal desi+n1 Cons(irators% however% .now the cri)inal intention 6eca#se the3 the)selves have decided #(on s#ch co#rse of action1 Acco)(lices co)e to .now a6o#t it after the (rinci(als have reached the decision% and onl3 then do the3 a+ree to coo(erate in its e-ec#tion1 Cons(irators decide that a cri)e sho#ld 6e co))ittedL acco)(lices )erel3 conc#r in it1 Acco)(lices do not decide whether the cri)e sho#ld 6e co))ittedL the3 )erel3 assent to the (lan and coo(erate in its acco)(lish)ent1 Cons(irators are the a#thors of a cri)eL acco)(lices are )erel3 their instr#)ents who (erfor) acts not essential to the (er(etration of the offense1

/EO/LE v. DE :ERA [312 SCRA 670 (1&&&)]  !n "#ne $% 1&&2 12500a) Renneth *lorendo (Renneth) to+ether with 9dwin 'e >era (9dwin)% Roderic. 2arcia ('eo) and 9l)er Castro (9l)er) drove to *ilivenvest VC to dro((ed 63 the ho#se of *rederic. Ca(#lon+ (*rederic.)1 Renneth E 9l)er went to see *rederic. while 'eo E 9dwin was left in the car1 <ater Renneth have a heated conversion with *rederic. and later Renneth shot *rederic. #sin+ a 132 cal1 Gernardino Cacao% a resident of 'enver <oo( Street in *ilinvest V#e/on was one of the witness in the )#rder of *rederic. Ca(#lon+ 63 Renneth *lorendo% Roderic. 2arcia% 9dwin 'e >era E 9l)er Castro1

  

Sponsor Documents

Or use your account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Forgot your password?

Or register your new account on DocShare.tips

Hide

Lost your password? Please enter your email address. You will receive a link to create a new password.

Back to log-in

Close