PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. JOMER BUTIAL G.R. No. 192785, 192785, Febr!r" #, 2$15 SE%ON& &I'ISION, &EL %ASTILLO Pro(e)*+o -er *e -!/ero( &r/( A)* o0 2$$2 Accused was caught selling illegal drugs during a buy-bust operation. Thus he was charged for violation of the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. However there was failure to observe the procedures in preserving the shabu. !ill the accused be convicted" #o. $n the prosecution for the illegal sale of drugs the identities of the buyer, seller, object, and the consideration; considerat ion; and also the deli very of the thing sold sol d and the payment therefor the refor must be shown. shown. %urther the evidence of corpus of corpus delicti must be established beyond doubt where its identity and integrity integrit y be definitely defini tely shown to t o have been preserved prese rved.. The prosecution failed to show that the identity and integrity of the corpus delicti were preserved. The confiscated sachets weren&t mar'ed nor were there photographs of the shabu confiscated. The lac' of certainty on a crucial element of the crim cr ime e such su ch as the ident i dentity ity of the corpus corp us delict del icti, i, warrants ac(uittal.
Peoe o0 *e P+++e( v( &!*e &e! Pe3! !- &e+( &e+4! G.R. No. 2$765, Febr!r" 18, 2$15 T+r- &+v+(+o, '+!r!4!, Jr. Pro(e)*+o -er *e -!/ero( &r/( A)* o0 2$$2 The accused were were caught caught in a buy bust operation operation and were were charged charged with illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs. drugs. They argue that their guilt was not established. !hat are the elements of illegal sale and illegal possession of illegal drugs and the primary consideration in their prosecution" The elements for the prosecution of illegal sale of dangerous drugs are) *+, the identities of the buyer and seller the obect and consideration and *2, delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor. %or illegal possession *a, the accused is in possession of a prohibited or dangerous drug *b, such possession is not authori/ed by law and *c, the accused freely and consciously possessed the drug. The primary consideration is to ensure that the identity and integrity of the sei/ed drugs have been preserved preserved from the time they were confiscated from the accused until their presentation in court.
G.R. No. 171222, 171222, Febr!r" Febr!r" 18, 2$15 PEOPLE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES PHILIPPINES Petitioner v. LTSG. &OMINA&OR BAABOS, BAABOS, LTJG. MANN G. FERRER, LTJG. RONAL& G. MAGSINO, LTJG. GERR P. &O%T &O%TOR OR,, ENS. ENS. &OMI &OMINA NA&O &OR R B. OPER OPERIO IO,, JR., JR., AN& AN& THE THE HON. HON. SAN& SAN&IG IGAN ANBA BAA AN N Respondents.
G.R. No. 17#78: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES Petitioner v. RA&M 'IRGINIO R. ARIS, LTJG. ;RU
Alvare/ et. Al were charged for the crime of ha/ing in the TC. Criminal charges were then filed with the 1andiganbay 1andiganbayan an against the school school authorities authorities as acco accomplic mplices es to the aforesaid aforesaid crime. crime. They presented an rder of 3ntry of 4udgment of the dismissal of the charges against Alvare/ et al. There being no more principals should the case against them be dismissed also" #. Those charged c harged as accomplices a ccomplices are not ipso ips o fact fa cto o dismissed in the dismissal of the case against the principals. As long as the commission of the crime can be proven the trial against the accomplices can proceed independently. The school authorities merely presented the rder of 3ntry of 4udgment. The order does not mention that the case was dismissed against the alleged principals because no crime had been committed
%HERR ANN M. BENABAE, 5etitioner vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, espondent. G.R. No. 2$6# Febr!r" 25, 2$15 F+r(* &+v+(+o Per!(>Ber!be, J Pro(e)*+o 0or E(*!0! 5etitioner was the 6oans 7oo''eeper of 1iam 7an' $nc. 1he was authori/ed to collect and accept loan payments of 1iam 7an'8s clients issue provisional receipts therefor and remit such payments to her supervisor. The funds were allegedly misappropriated. Did the alleged misappropriation amount to 3stafa" #o. 3stafa&s first element is wanting. 9nder the first element when the money goods or any other personal property is received by the offender from the offended party *+, in trust or *2, on commission or *:, for administration he ac(uires both material and uridical possession of the thing received. 4uridical possession means a possession giving the transferee a right over the thing which the transferee may set up even against the owner. 7enabaye&s possession was only material. As a collector of loan payments from the clients the money merely passes into her hands where she ta'es custody thereof only for the ban'ing day.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Aeee, v(. %HI %HAN LIU !.?.!. %HAN @UE !- HUI LAO %HUNG !.?.!. LEOFE SENGLAO, Ae!*(. G.R. No. 189272, J!!r" 21, 2$15 T+r- &+v+(+o, Per!*!, J.
Pro(e)*+o 0or Ie/! I4or*!*+o The police forces of ;indoro went to the shore of Ambil $sland where men were suspiciously transferring bags of suspected illegal drugs from one boat to another. $n the boat bags full of white crystalline substance were found. The accused who were in the boat were detained and charged with $mportation of $llegal Drugs. They didn&t respond to (uestions by the police. $nstead they 'ept on telling the police that ternal source. $f the article merely came from the same territory there cannot be any importation of the same. The mere fact that the accused were from China does not establish beyond reasonable doubt that the origin of the illegal drugs were from outside 5hilippine territory.
G!r" F!*!(*+)o !- Ro!-o '+!ev! v(. E+-+o M!+)(e Sr. !- *e Peoe o0 *e P+++e( GR No. 19$912, J!!r" 12, 2$15, T+r- &+v+(+o, Per!*!. Ee4e*( o0 A A**e4*e- Feo"%r+4e The accused were charged for the Attempted ;urder where the victim was unarmed and drun' while his attac'ers were all armed. However it was averred that the inclusion of the phrase ?not necessarily mortal? in the information means that there is an absence of intent to 'ill on their part negating the attempt to murder. Are they correct"
No. Intent to kill is a state of mind that can be discerned only through eternal manifestations. The elements of an attempted felony are *+, The offender commences the commission of the felony directly by overt acts *2, He didn&t perform all the acts of e>ecution which should produce the felony *:, The offender8s act be not stopped by his own spontaneous desistance *@, The non-performance was due to cause or accident other than his spontaneous desistance. !hat&s important is that all the elements of attempted murder are alleged and proven to be present.
Re!*o M. &!v+- v. E-+*! A. A/b!" !- Peoe o0 *e P+++e( GR No. 199116, 18 M!r) 2$15, T+r- &+v+(+o '+!r!4!, Jr., Re*ro!)*+ve e00e)*( o0 Pe! !=( enato is a former %ilipino citi/en who migrated to Canada and became a Canadian citi/en by naturali/ation in +B@. !hen he returned to the 5hilippines he filed a ;iscellaneous 6ease Application with the D3# wherein he stated that he was a %ilipino citi/en. A criminal case was filed against him for falsification of public documents under Art. +B2 of the 5C. Can Renato be indicted under Art. 172 of the RPC if he subsequently re-acquires his Filipino citizenship by virtue of RA 22!"
e(. Although after filing the application he re-ac(uired his %ilipino citi/enship under paragraph + 1ection : of A 22 the falsification was already a consummated act the said provision having no retroactive effect insofar as his citi/enship status is concerned. %urther under paragraph + Article +B2 of the 5C it is not necessary that the idea of gain or intent to inure a third person be present.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES '. ALFRE&O REES " SANTOS, G.R. NO. 19#$, FEBRUAR 18, 2$15, Se)o- &+v+(+o, &e %!(*+o. Pro(e)*+o -er *e -!/ero( &r/( A)* o0 2$$2 Alfredo was charged with illegal sale of dangerous drugs under A + because of a buy-bust operation. However they argue that there was failure to establish the elements of the illegal sale in proving that payment was given in consideration thereof in fact there was an absence of a mar'ed money in the buy bust operation. $s he correct" Ees. The crime of illegal sale of dangerous drugs such as shabu has the following elements) *+, identity of the buyer and seller obect and consideration *2, the delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor. The delivery of the illicit drug to the poseur-buyer and the receipt by the seller of the mar'ed money successfully consummate the buy-bust transaction. Here the second element is wanting as 15+ Acosta said that there was no need to give the money as payment during the sale.
ABS>%BN %ORPORATION Petitioner v. FELIPE GOREES, JOHN OLI'ER T. MANALASTAS, JOHN &OES AN& JANE &OES Respondents. G.R. No. 19595, M!r) 11, 2$15 SE%ON& &I'ISION, Leoe, J. A71-C7# conducted a live coverage of %ilipino hostage victim&s arrival at the #A$A and a press conference. A71-C7# allowed euters to air the footages under a special embargo agreement. F;A-B received a live video feed of the coverage from euters and immediately carried the live newsfeed in its program. F;A-B was not aware that euters was airing footages of A71-C7#. ;ay criminal prosecution for such infringement be negated by good faith" #o. Acts punished under a special law are malum prohibitum where malice is immaterial. The mere act of rebroadcasting without authority creates probable cause to find that F;AB violated A G2:. They 'new that there&d be conse(uences in carrying out the footage as they immediately cut the feed upon seeing A71-C7#&s logo. To admit a different treatment for broadcasts would mean abandonment of a
broadcasting organi/ation8s minimum rights. $t is the act of infringement not intent which causes damage.
A/e+*! %rC Be+*o v(. Peoe o0 *e P+++e( G.R. No. 2$###, Febr!r" 11, 2$15, Se)o- &+v+(+o, Leoe. %o(+r!)" Abadilla and Agbulos entered into several transactions for the sale of ewelry. $n all these transactions 7enito accompanied Agbulos. Agbulos misappropriated the ewelry belonging to Abadilla. !as there a conspiracy between 7enito and Agbulos in committing 3stafa"
#o. Conspiracy e>ists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it. 1o long as the evidence show a ?common design or purpose= to commit the crime all the accused shall be held e(ually liable as co-principals even if one or more of them didn&t participate in all the details of the e>ecution of the crime. There&s no proof of 7enito8s direct participation in the commission of the crime. #either is there proof beyond reasonable doubt of her conspiracy with Agbulos. The fact that 7enito accompanied Agbulos in going to Abadilla8s residence doesn&t prove that 7enito received any ewelry from Abadilla.
ROGELIO J. GONBERNABE. I4o(+*+o o0 Pe!*+e( 0or %o4eD %r+4e( Dionesio was driving his motorcycle together with his children. !hile ascending the curving road a car driven by ogelio collided with the motorcycle. The children suffered inuries while Dionesio died. The lower courts found ogelio guilty of ec'less $mprudence esulting to Homicide with Double 1erious 5hysical $nuries and Damage to 5roperty and sentenced him a higher indeterminate penalty of *@, years *2, months of prision correccional ma>imum as minimum to *G, years and *+, day of prision mayor medium as ma>imum. $s the penalty based from most serious crime reasonable" Ees. The 5C provides that when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies or when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other the penalty for the most serious crime in this case ec'less $mprudence esulting to Homicide shall be imposed in its ma>imum period.
Ar0o A.;.A. Aro- J!)!b! !. Peoe o0 *e P+++e(, G.R. No. 18#655, M!r) 26, 2$15 T+r- &+v+(+o Per!*!, #. Pro(e)*+o 0or Ie/! Po((e((+o o0 F+re!r4( !- A44+*+o Accused was prosecuted for illegal possession of firearms and ammunitions pursuant to a search warrant. The team found a calibre .@ placed in the ceiling of his residence. Accused who was at the living room that time rushed to the room and grappled with 152 Abellana but failed to get hold of the gun. $s the accused guilty" Ees. The essential elements for illegal possession of firearms and ammunitions are) *+, e>istence of subect firearm *2, the accused who possessed or owned the same doesn&t have the corresponding license for it. O=er(+ +(* ! e((e*+! ee4e* *e )r+4e. !hat&s re(uired is mere possession actual and constructive or the subection of the thing to one&s control and management. His act of immediately rushing to where 152 Abellana found the gun and grappling with the latter for the possession of the gun proved that such was under his control and management.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, 5laintiff-Appellee vs. &OMINGO GALLANO " JARANILLA, Accused-Appellant. G.R. No. 18#72, Febr!r" 25, 2$15, F+r(* &+v+(+o, Ber(!4+ Pro(e)*+o 0or @!+0+e- R!e Accused is being charged of (ualified rape. The aggravating circumstance of minority and relationship are present the victim being +2 years old and the accused being her relative within the third civil degree. However during the trial the age of the child has not been duly proven by the prosecution there being inconsistent statements by the witnesses. $s the accused guilty of (ualified rape" #o. To be convicted of (ualified rape minority and relationship between the victim and the accused must concur and be established with absolute certainty . Hence the victim8s minority must be averred and established ?with e(ual certainty and clearness as the crime itself.? Thus failure to do so such as in this case where the prosecution&s witnesses produced inconsistent evidences on the victim&s age would result in the conviction of the accused of simple rape and not of (ualified rape.
G.R. No. 2$7988, M!r) 11, 2$15 THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES Plaintiff"#ppellee v. BRIAN MER%A&O $ SARMIENTO #ccused" #ppellant . F+r(* &+v+(+o, PereC Pro(e)*+o -er *e -!/ero( &r/( A)* o0 2$$2 Accused was arrested for selling and delivering a sachet of shabu during a buy-bust operation. However it was averred that there were lapses in the safe'eeping of the suspected drugs that could affect their integrity value. !as the accused guilty" Ees. %ailure to strictly comply with the procedures in the inventory of sei/ed drugs does not render an arrest illegal or the items inadmissible. The elements of illegal sale of drugs under .A. #o. + are *+, identity of the buyer and seller obect and consideration *2, delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor. $t must be established beyond reasonable doubt that the accused sold and delivered a prohibited drug to another and that the former 'new that what he had sold and delivered to the latter was a prohibited drug. !hat is material is the proof that the transaction actually too' place plus the presentation in court of corpus delicti .
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v(. ARNAL&O BOSITO " %HA'ENIA G.R. No. 2$96#, J!!r" 12, 2$15 Se)o- &+v+(+o, %!r+o
Ee4e*( o0 Se0>&e0e(e !hile watching a game 7osito hac'ed 7onaobra with a bolo. The blow to 7onaobra&s head caused him to slump to the ground and while escaping 7osito repeatedly stabbed 7onaobra. 7osito invo'ed selfdefense as he was allegedly ganged up by 7onaobra&s group. !as there self-defense"
#o. 7y invo'ing self-defense 7osito had the burden to prove that the 'illing was ustified. The elements of self-defense are) *+, unlawful aggression on the part of the victim *2, reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it and *:, lac' of sufficient provocation on the part of the person claiming self-defense. Aside from 7osito&s self-serving testimony they didn&t present other witnesses to corroborate his testimonies. The means employed to prevent or repel the supposed unlawful aggression was beyond what&s reasonably necessary. The number nature and gravity of the wounds sustained by 7onaobra reveal a determined effort to 'ill negating self-defense.
5eople of the 5hilippines and AAA v. Court of Appeals 2+st Division ;indanao 1tation et al. F #o. +G:2 2 %ebruary 20+ Third Division 5eralta
Pro(e)*+o 0or R!e After their drin'ing spree to celebrate their graduation AAA was raped by the : accused. The CA ac(uitted the accused as there was consensual se> from the fact that AAA did not resist nor did she cry for help. !as there rape" Ees. AAA was heavily into>icated at the time of the assault. The elements of rape are) *+, the offender had carnal 'nowledge of the victim *2, such act was accomplished through force or intimidation or when the victim is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious or when the victim is under twelve years of age. Here evidence shows that they intentionally made AAA consume hard li(uor more than she could handle. They forced her to drin' even when she was already obviously inebriated. AAA was clearly deprived of reason or unconscious at the time the private respondents ravished her negating the claim of consensual se>. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs SAN&ER &A%UMA LUNSO& G.R. No. 2$5889 Febr!r" #, 2$15 F+r(* &+v+(+o, PereC
Pro(e)*+o -er *e -!/ero( &r/( A)* o0 2$$2 A buy-bust operation was conducted to entrap Dacuma. He was then charged with illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs. $n defense they raised the issue on the non-compliance with the procedure on custody and safe'eeping of sei/ed dangerous drugs. 1hould he be ac(uitted" Ees. The re(uisites for illegal sale of dangerous drugs) *+, identity of the buyer and the seller the obect and consideration of the sale and *2, the delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor. !hat&s essential is to prove that the sale actually too' place coupled with the presentation in court of evidence of the corpus delicti . The sale is perfected the moment the buyer receives the drug from the seller. The prosecution failed to prove that the shabu eventually presented in court were the same ones confiscated by the officers due to its non-mar'ing at the place where the buy-bust operation was committed.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. MERA JO ELEUTERIO NIELLES, MERA NIELLES &ELOS REES G.R. No. 2$$6$8, Febr!r" 26, 2$15 Pro(e)*+o 0or @!+0+e- Te0* Ee4e*( ;era 4oy as cashier collected 5@0::.G from the sub-guarantors. However she didn&t remit the amount to her employer %lores nor deposit such in her account. $nstead she issued + personal chec's totaling 5@0::.G and deposited them to %lores& account. All chec's were dishonored upon presentment due to
Peoe o0 *e P+++e( v. Ger!r-o E4er!be " &e '+!, GR No. 2$7996, 21 J!!r" 2$15, Se)o- &+v+(+o, %!r+o. Pro(e)*+o -er *e -!/ero( &r/( A)* o0 2$$2 !hat is the effect when the prosecution fails to sufficiently establish who had custody of the illegal drug from the moment it was allegedly transmitted from the 7atangas 5rovincial Crime 6aboratory until it was allegedly delivered to TC" The accused will be ac(uitted notwithstanding that he has been convicted both by the TC and the CA. !hen the identity of the dangerous drug recovered from the accused is not the same dangerous drug presented to the forensic chemist for review and e>amination nor the same dangerous drug presented to the court the identity of the dangerous drug is not preserved due to the bro'en chain of custody. !ith this an element in the criminal cases for illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs the corpus delicti is not proven and the accused must then be ac(uitted based on reasonable doubt.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES '. 'IRGILIO LARGO PERON&O, G.R. NO. 196855, FEBRUAR 18, 2$15, Se)o- &+v+(+o, &e %!(*+o. Pro(e)*+o -er *e -!/ero( &r/( A)* o0 2$$2 +. 2. +.
2.
$s the presentation of the poseur-buyer as witness indispensable in a prosecution for violation of 1ection Article $$ of .A. +" $s the non-participation of the 5D3A fatal to a buy-bust operation" #o. As long as all the elements of $llegal sale of drugs were proved beyond reasonable doubt and the police officers presented as witnesses were all part of the buy-bust operation as direct witnesses to the actual sale of the 1habu the Accused&s arrest immediately thereafter and the recovery from the poseur-buyer of the mar'ed money the testimony of the poseur-buyer is merely corroborative. #o the coordination with the 5D3A is not a crucial re(uisite of a proper buy-bust operation it is not invalidated by mere non-coordination with the 5D3A.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, P!+*+00>Aeee, v(. ALFRE&O MORALES LAM, A))(e-> Ae!*. G.R. No. 2$862, J!!r" 21, 2$15 F+r(* &+v+(+o, PereC, J. E00e)* o0 &e!* o0 *e !))(e- e-+/ !e! o0 *e %!(e Alfredo ;orales after trial was found guilty by the egional Trial Court and Court of Appeals of illegal sale and possession of dangerous drugs thereby violating A +. He appealed the case to the 1upreme Court. However pending appeal he died. !hat happens to the case" The case is dismissed. The death of accused-appellant ;orales pending appeal of his conviction e>tinguishes his civil and criminal liabilities pursuant to Art. G*+, of the evised 5enal Code. However there e>ists no civil liability in violations of A +. Thus there is no civil liability to e>tinguish.
Peoe o0 *e P+++e( v( Ro!- N+)! " A4+!r+o G.R. No. 21$#6$, Febr!r" 18, 2$15 T+r- &+v+(+o, Re"e(.
Pro(e)*+o 0or R!e Pre(e)e o0 P"(+)! Ir+e( o *e '+)*+4 %or the prosecution of rape the physician testified that he found no signs of any inury se>ual abuse lacerations lesions and bleeding in the private parts of the victim whose hymen he noted was no longer intact. He clarified that the victim could have had prior se>ual intercourse months or years earlier although his medical findings do not e>clude the possibility that she was raped or se>ually abused by the accused a few days earlier. Does the absence of physical inuries or lacerations negate the crime of rape" #o. $t is settled that the !b(e)e o0 "(+)! +r+e( or 0re( !)er!*+o( does not negate rape. Although medical results may not indicate physical abuse or hymenal lacerations rape can still be established by other evidences. $n fact medical findings or proof of inuries are not among the essential elements in the prosecution for rape.
Peoe o0 *e P+++e( v( M!r)e+o Oover+o G.R. No. 211159, M!r) 18, 2$15, Se)o- &+v+(+o, Leoe. Pro(e)*+o 0or Mr-er KPre(e)e o0 P!((+o !- Ob0()!*+o loverio was charged with the crime of murder for allegedly stabbing Fulane treacherously. $n his defense loverio alleged that at the time and day of the incident Fulane had been accusing him of having an incestuous relationship with his mother and continued moc'ing him in a loud voice despite repeated re(uests by the former for the latter to go home. loverio admitted that he stabbed Fulane because he could no longer bear the insulting remar's against him. $s he entitled to the mitigating circumstance of passion and obfuscation" Ees. 5assion and obfuscation as a mitigating circumstance need not be felt only in the seconds before the commission of the crime. $t may build up and strengthen over time until it can no longer be repressed and will ultimately motivate the commission of the crime.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v( MANOLITO OPIANA TANAEL, G.R. No. 2$$797, J!!r" 12, 2$15 Se)o- &+v+(+o, &e %!(*+o Pro(e)*+o -er *e -!/ero( &r/( A)* o0 2$$2 KEe4e*( !hat are the elements of illegal sale and illegal possession of Dangerous Drugs in violation of the Dangerous Drugs Acts of 2002"
%or the sale of illegal drugs the prosecution must satisfactorily establish the following elements) *+, the identity of the buyer and the seller the obect and the consideration and *2, the delivery of the thing sold and the payment therefor. !hat is is the proof that the transaction or sale actually too' place coupled with the presentat ion in court of the corpus delicti or the illicit drug in evidence. The elements of illegal possession of Dangerous Drugs under A + are to wit) *+, appellant was shown to have been in possession of shabu a prohibited drug *2, his possession was not authori/ed by law and *:, he freely and consciously possessed the said illegal drug.
Peoe o0 *e P+++e( v( %!r+e Oro()o G.R. No. 2$9227, M!r) 25, 2$15 T+r&+v+(+o, '+!r!4!, Jr. %o(+r!)" Apellant along with 2 other 4ohn Does were charged of obbery with Homicide. %rom the lone testimony of the eyewitness it was averred that appellant however was not the one who stabbed the victim the former was only holding the hands of the victim while the stabbing happened on occasion of robbery. $s he guilty of robbery with homicide" r will it only be obbery" He is guilty of obbery with homicide. !hen there is showing that the perpetrators acted in a concerted manner in attaining the obective of the crime there is beyond reasonable doubt the presence of conspiracy. $n conspiracy it does not matter who stabbed the victim because the act of one is the act of all. The participation of accused in holding the hands of the victim to restrain her from moving is sufficient to ma'e him liable for the death of the victim.
Peoe o0 *e P+++e( v. &o4+/o &+! P!!r, GR No. 2$$666, 21 J!!r" 2$15, Se)o- &+v+(+o, &e %!(*+o. A=!r- o0 &!4!/e( 0or %r+4+! %!(e( ;ay the 1upreme Court in a criminal case *murder, validly grant temperate damages in lieu of actual damages notwithstanding that the amount of the actual damages is less than the grant of the temperate damages" Ees. !hen actual damages proven by receipts during the trial amount to less than 52000.00 as in this case *as the actual damages with receipt only amount to +000, the award of temperate damages of 52000.00 is ustified in lieu of actual damages of a lesser amount. However in the dispositive portion the decision the grant of actual damages is D363T3D and replaced with temperate damages to the amount aforestated.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. OS%AR SE'ILLANO RETANAL G.R. No. 2$$8$$, Febr!r" $9, 2$15 F+r(* &+v+(+o, PereC Pro(e)*+o 0or Mr-er KTre!)er" !( @!+0"+/ %+)4(*!)e 5ablo and the witnesses were seated on a bench at a vacant lot when they saw scar. scar who appeared to be drun' wal'ed toward them. !ithout warning scar pulled out a 'nife and stabbed 5ablo on the chest. $s scar guilty of murder" E31. The accused is guilty of murder. The prosecution witnesses positively identified the accused as the person who stabbed the victim which eventually caused the latter&s death. There&s treachery as a (ualifying circumstance. The attac' on the unsuspecting victim who was merely seated on a bench and tal'ing with his friends was very sudden depriving the victim of any chance to defend himself or to repel the aggression thus insuring its commission without ris' to the aggressor and without any provocation on the part of the victim.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. MI%HAEL JOSON " ROGAN&O, G.R. No. 2$696. 21 J!!r", 2$15, FIRST &I'ISION, PERE<. Pro(e)*+o 0or R!e KNee-e- &e/ree o0 For)e !- I*+4+-!*+o o *e '+)*+4
Appellant was accused with raping his fourteen year old sister when they were left alone at home. Appellant argues that there can be no rape because AAA did not allege that she was threatened by appellant with the use of any firearm or any bladed weapon nor did appellant say anything to threaten or intimidate her. %urthermore there was even no showing of any resistance on the part of AAA to his alleged se>ual advances. $s the appellant correct" #o. $t has been held that the force or violence that is re(uired in rape cases is relative when applied it need not be overpowering or irresistible. That it enables the offender to consummate his purpose is enough. 7esides physical resistance is not the sole test to determine whether a woman voluntarily succumbed to the lust of an accused. After all resistance is not an element of rape
Peoe o0 *e P+++e( v(. J! H+o !.?.!. I-!" ;!b!/ K!* !r/e, R+)!r- P!4! " '!r)!( !.?.!. +-!" A*e*, Rv+)o Se+-o " H!4!"b!" !.?.!. Rb" !- E-/!r Pe-ro(o P!!(o !.?.!. L+b!* G.R. No. 212151 ,Febr!r" 18, 2$15SE%ON& &I'ISION, &EL %ASTILLO, #. Pro(e)*+o 0or Robber" =+* Ho4+)+-e The accused were all armed with 'nives when they bro'e into the house of spouses Clavel too' certain personal properties and in the course thereof stabbed %reddie resulting to his death. This is supported by the testimony of the state witness Dumagat who presented a detailed consistent and credible narrative of the incident and positively identified accused-appellants as perpetrators of the crime. Are they guilty of obbery with Homicide" Ees. $n robbery with homicide robbery must be the main purpose the 'illing is merely incidental to the robbery. The intent to rob must precede the 'illing but the 'illing may occur before during or after the robbery. 1uch were present here as shown by the fact that they only 'illed %reddie when he wo'e up to go to the bathroom after they have already gained entry by destroying the 'nob of the 'itchen door and too' the 1pouses& personal properties.
Peoe o0 *e P+++e( v(. Jer+) P!v+! " P!+C! Jer+) !- J! Be-+! " &eo( Re"e( Je G.R. No. 2$287 J!!r" 1#, 2$15 F+r(* &+v+(+o, PereC, J. Pro(e)*+o -er *e &!/ero( &r/( A)* o0 2$$2 A confidential informant reported to the police that a pot session was ta'ing place in a house in 6aguna. The police proceeded to the area where they saw @ people having a pot session in the living room. They were charged with violation of the Comprehensive Drugs Act of 2002. !hat are the elements for 5ossession of Dangerous Drugs During 5arties 1ocial Fatherings or ;eetings under A +" The elements under 1ec. +: of A + are to wit) *+, possession by the accused of an item or obect identified to be a prohibited or dangerous drug *2, such possession is not authori/ed by law *:, the free and conscious possession of the drug by the accused and lastly *@, the accused possessed the prohibited or dangerous drug during a social gathering or meeting or in the company of at least two persons.
Peoe o0 *e P+++e( v. Ne(*or S!reC " M!/*!/ob, G.R. No. 2$1151, 1# J!!r" 2$1, F+r(* &+v+(+o, PereC R!e K%o-)*( o0 *e R!e '+)*+4 Accused was indicted for raping his minor niece. The offender is a relative within the third civil degree by affinity and the victim is a minor under +G years. Apellant countered that based on AAA&s
testimony there appears to be no significant resistance AAA who did not shout when appellant was allegedly defiling her. $s the accused correct" #o. $t has been settled that in rape cases the law does not impose a burden on the rape victim to prove resistance because it is not an element of rape. #ot all victims react the same way. 1ome may appear to yield to the intrusion others may offer strong resistance. The failure of a rape victim to offer tenacious resistance does not ma'e her submission to accused8s criminal acts voluntary. !hat is necessary is that the force employed against her was sufficient to consummate the purpose which he has in mind.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, vPALM TIBAAN !- RI%O <. PUERTO, G.R. No(. 2$955$ J!!r" 1#, 2$15FIRST &I'ISION, PERLASBERNABE, J. Pro(e)*+o 0or S"-+)!*e- E(*!0! Tibayan and 5uerto were charged of 1yndicated 3stafa. They were engaged in a classic 5on/i scheme where they induced the public to invest by offering a very high monthly interest rate. However the company later on closed down without the private complainants having been paid. Are they guilty of syndicated estafa" Ees. All the elements of 1yndicated 3stafa through a 5on/i scheme are present) *a, the incorporatorsdirectors of TF$C$ comprising more than five *, people made false pretenses and representations to the investing public the private complainants for a lucrative investment opportunity with TF$C$ to solicit money from them *b, the said false pretenses and representations were made prior to or simultaneous with the commission of fraud *c, relying on the same private complainants invested their hard earned money and *d, the incorporatorsdirectors of TF$C$ ended up running away with the private complainants8 investments to the latter8s preudice.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. ARNEL BALUTE " 'ILLANUE'A, G.R. No. 212962, 21 J!!r" 2$15, FIRST &I'ISION, PERLAS>BERNABE. Pro(e)*+o 0or Robber" =+* Ho4+)+-e !hile 15+ ;anaois was on board his owner-type eepney with his wife and daughter during a heavy traffic 7alute after po'ing a gun at the side of 15+ ;anaois and saying $putang ina, ilabas mo%$ grabbed 15+ ;anaois8s mobile phone from his chest poc'et and shot him at the left side of his torso. 15+ ;anaois sustained mortal gunshot wound which was the direct and immediate cause of his death. $s the accused guilty of obbery with Homicide" Ees. To sustain a conviction for robbery with homicide the prosecution must prove the following elements) *+, the ta'ing of personal property belonging to another *2, with intent to gain *:, with the use of violence or intimidation against a person and *@, on the occasion or by reason of the robbery the crime of homicide as used in its generic sense was committed. All of these are present in the case. 7y po'ing a gun at ;anaois and eventually 'illing him after the ta'ing of the properties herein such consummated the crime.
G.R. No. 2$9588, Febr!r" 18, 2$15 PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v( ERI% ROSAURO BONG%AIL F+r(* &+v+(+o, PereC Pro(e)*+o -er *e &!/ero( A)* o0 2$$2 KE*r!4e* !- Te(*+4o" o0 *e I0or4!*
n the basis of reports that 3ric osauro was selling and distributing drugs the an entrapment operation was conducted. $n e>change for the *+, sachet of shabu given by osauro to the confidential
agent the latter gave him a mar'ed +00-peso bill. osauro averred that the operation was a decoy solicitation of persons see'ing to e>pose the criminal and the informant wasn& t presented in court. The solicitation of drugs from appellant by the informant utili/ed by the police merely furnishes evidence of a course of conduct. They duly acted on the information received by effecting a drug transaction with appellant. There was no showing the appellant was induced to sell drugs. As a rule informants are not presented in court for security reasons. nly when the testimony of the informant is considered absolutely essential in obtaining the conviction of the culprit should the need to protect his security be disregarded.
R+)!r- R+)!-e v(. Peoe o0 *e P+++e( G.R. No. 211$$2, J!!r" 21, 2$15, Se)o&+v+(+o, Leoe. '!r+!)e &o)*r+e !- *e Pe!*" I4o(!be =e *e '+)*+4 +( ! %+Appellant was charged with rape through se>ual assault. He inserted his penis in the anus of a +0year-old boy. He was found guilty. He averred that the variance doctrine should have been used in imposing his penalty. $s he correct" #o. !hen there&s a variance between the offense charged in the complaint and what&s proven and the offense charged is included in or necessarily includes the offense proved the accused shall be convicted of the offense proved which is included in the offense charged. Here no variance e>ists between what was charged and proven. The prosecution established all elements of the crime. The gravamen is the insertion of the penis into another&s mouth or anal orifice. However the penalty to be imposed is reclusion temporal in its medium period under A B+0 higher than the imposable penalty in the evised 5enal Code. A higher penalty is intended when the victim is a child.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v(. AM &ASIGAN " OLI'A,G.R. No. 2$229 FEBRUAR # 2$15, F+r(* &+v+(+o, PERE<,J. Pro(e)*+o -er *e &!/ero( &r/( A)* o0 2$$2 Amy was apprehended for selling illegal drugs in violation of the Dangerous Drugs Act during a buybust operation. There she delivered the shabu but she only saw the money and didn&t receive it. Are the elements of illegal sale of Dangerous present" #o hence she is not liable for sale of illegal drugs. $t is material in illegal sale of dangerous drugs that the sale actually too' place and what consummates the buy-bust transaction is the delivery of the drugs to the poseur-buyer and in turn the seller&s receipt of the mar'ed money. eceipt of the mar'ed money whether done before delivery of the drugs or after is re(uired.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. PA%ITO ESPEJON LEBIOS G.R. No. 199##5, Febr!r" $#, 2$15 F+r(* &+v(+o, PereC Pro(e)*+o 0or R!e K%o-)*( o0 *e R!e '+)*+4 AAA a +2-year old girl was raped by the accused on different occasions. Accused averred that the lower court failed in its appreciation of AAA&s testimony as it may have overloo'ed certain circumstances therein. He contends the act of the victim receiving 520.00 from him after each act of rape goes against the case of the victim. $s the accused correct"
#o. 1uch receipt 520.00 from the appellant is not preudicial to the accusations of rape. $t neither e>cuses appellant&s dastardly acts nor implies AAA&s consent thereto. The fact that the money was an unsolicited thing that was handed to AAA after the ruttish subection such act which is indignity upon insult. $t is incomprehensible that for an ordinary +2-year-old &ilipina girl would ust suddenly surrender herself to the se>ual desires of a married man almost four times her elder in e>change for money.
;"e A*o"
Pro(e)*+o 0or Te0*
Iyle was charged for theft. ;arlyn his girlfriend testified that she saw Iyle climb through andolph&s fence and enter his house. 1he later saw Iyle went out of the house with a big bulge in his poc'et. They went shopping for a cellphone later that day. $s Iyle guilty" #o. The corpus delicti for the crime of theft is not proven in this case. $n theft corpus delicti has two elements) *+, that the property was lost by the owner and *2, that it was lost by felonious ta'ing. !hile it was proven that the property was lost it cannot be proven that such was lost due to a felonious ta'ing and that it was the petitioner who committed the felonious ta'ing. ;arlyn8s testimony does not show that when Iyle left the house he had with him the money. 1he merely testified that there was a bulge in his poc'et.
Peoe o0 *e P+++e( v( Abo! B+o " P!!"!/! G.R. No. 19585$, Febr!r" 1, 2$15 Se)o- &+v+(+o, &e %!(*+o. Pro(e)*+o -er *e &!/ero( &r/( !)* o0 2$$2 A buy-bust operation was conducted against the accused wherein he sold to 52 1alonga one plastic sachet of 1habu and that an ensuing body search revealed that he possessed another plastic sachet containing the same illegal substance. !hat are the elements needed to convict an accused for illegal sale and illegal possession of dangerous drugs" To sustain a conviction under for illegal sale all that is needed for the prosecution to establish are *+, the +-e*+*" of the buyer seller obect and consideration and *2, the -e+ver" of the thing sold and the !"4e* therefor. $n illegal possession of dangerous drugs it is necessary to prove that) *+, the accused is in possession of an item or obect which is identified to be a prohibited drug *2, such possession is not authori/ed by law and *:, the accused freely and consciously possessed the drug.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v. &ANIEL MATIBAG &E 'ILLA &ANI OR &ANILO G.R. No. 2$681, M!r) 25, 2$15 FIRST &I'ISION, PERLAS>BERNABE,
Accused was charged with murder with Treachery as the (ualifying circumstance. The victim was wal'ing in their subdivision when Duhan confronted him. He delivered a fist blow to Duhan who teetered bac'wards. !hile Duhan remained in that position ;atibag shot him several times. $s the accused guilty" Ees. The 'illing of must be accompanied by a (ualifying circumstance such as treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person employing means methods or forms in the e>ecution thereof which tend directly and specially ensure its e>ecution without ris' to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might ma'e. The prosecution was able to prove that ;atibag was armed with a gun confronted Duhan and without any provocation punched and shot him on the chest. Although the attac' was frontal the sudden and une>pected manner by which it was made rendered it impossible for Duhan to defend himself adding too that he was unarmed.
