Case Ticklers: Criminal Law II

Criminal Law II Case Ticklers PART I Crimes Against National Security and the Law of Nations TREASON Laurel
vs. Misa That the accused claim that his allegiance as a Filipino citizen was suspended and that there was a change of sovereignty over the Phil Islands: A citizen or subject owes, not a qualified and temporary, but an absolute and permanent allegiance, which consists in the obligation of fidelity and obedience to his government of sovereign. The absolute and permanent allegiance of the inhabitants of a territory occupied by the enemy to their legitimate government or sovereign is not abrogated or severed by the enemy occupation, because the sovereignty of the government or sovereign de jure is not transferred thereby the occupier. Just as treason may be committed against the Federal as well as against the State Govt, in the same way treason may have been committed during the Japanese occupation against the sovereignty of the US as weel as against the sovereignty of the Phil Commonwealth; and that the change of our gorm of govt from commonwealth to republic does not affect the prosecution of those charged with the crime of treason committed during the commonwealth, bec it is an offense against the same govt and the same sovereign people. People vs. Perez That the women were brought by the accused to the Japanese soldiers for sexual purposes: Commandeering of women to satisfy the lust of Japanese officers or men or to enliven the entertainments held in their honor was not reason even though the women and the entertainments helpted to make life more pleasant for the enemies and boost their spirit.
Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 1

The law of treason does not prescribe all kinds of social, business and political intercourse bet the belligerent occupants of the invaded country and it inhabitants. Adherence, unlike overt act, need not be proved by the oaths of two witnesses. Makapili as an overt act: the membership must be established by the deposition of two witnesses. It is necessary to produce two direct witnesses to the whole overt act. It may be possible to piece bits together of the overt act, but if so, each bit must have the support of two oaths.
People vs. Prieto That the accused help in torturing guerillas with Japanese soldiers: two-witness rule: It is necessary that the two witnesses corroborate each other not only on the whole overt act but on any part of it. Torture and atrocities as aggravating circumstances the use hereof instead of the usual and less painful method of execution will be taken into account to increase the penalty under art. 14(21). Plea of guilty to some counts: considered mitigating circumstance.
ESPIONAGE CA 616 PIRACY People vs.Lol-lo and Saraw That the accused are claiming that they do not belong to the Phil territory: Piracy is robbery or forcible depredation on the high seas, without lawful authority and done animo furandi (with intent to steal) and in the spirit and intention of universal hostility. Piracy is a crime not against any particular State byt against all mankind. It may be punished in the competent tribunal or any country where the offender may be found or into which he may be carried. The jurisdiction of piracy unlike all other crimes had not territorial limits.
People vs. Manayao That the accused with a band, massacred a barangay and two 10-year old girls witnessed the crime: Makapili is not part of the Japanese Army but just an org of Filipino traitors, pure and simple. Defense of State: constitutional duty of citizen cannot be cast off in time of war. The citizen has a constitutional duty to defend the State and cannot be cast off when his country is at war by the siple expedient of subscribing to an oath of allegiance to support the constitution or laws of a foreign country, and an enemy country at that, or be accepting a commission in the military, naval or air service of such country or by desserting from the Phil Army, Navy or Air Corp.
People vs. Rodriguez PD 532 (Anti-Piracy Law) amended 134 and its effect was to create the crime of qualified piracy where rape, murder or homicide is committed. No mitigating circumstance shall be appreciated regardless of plea of guilt. Recall: crew members of the vessel committed crime
People vs. Adriano That the accused is a member of the Makapili and wore uniforms and that the two witnesses refer to different acts on different days: Makapili direct evidence of adherence and giving aid and comfort to enemy. Unless forced upon one against his will, membership in the makapili org imports treasonable intent, considering the purpose for which the organization was created, the members would shed blood and sacrifice their lives.
People vs. Siyoh That the accused committed with triple murder and frustrated murder in piracy: Recall: There was a lone survivor Antonio De Guzman who was shot in the waters but was not killed.
Number of persons killed on the occasion of piracy, not material; Piracy, a special complex crime punishable by deathbut the number of persons killed on the occasion of piracy is not material. PD 532 considers qualified piracy as a special complex crime punishable by death. (not anymore-RP)
HIJACKING RA 6235 Crime Against the Fundamental Laws of the State ARBITRARY DETENTION Rule 112, sec 6 Rule 113, sec 5 Umil vs. Ramos Case of 8 habeas corpus. Arrest without a warrant is justified when the person arrested is caught in flagranti delicto. An arrest without a warrant of arrest under sec. 5 par a and b of Rule 113 of the Rules of Court, as amended, is justified when the person arrested is caught in flagranti delicto, viz in the act of committing an offensel or when an offense has just been committed and the person making the arrest has personal knowledge of the facts indicating that the person arrested has committed it. Habeas Corpus; Subversion; The crimes of rebellion, subversion, conspiracy or proposal to commit such crimes and offenses committed in furtherance thereof of in connection therewith constitute direct assaults against the State are in the nature continuing crimes. Rolando Dural was arrested for being a member of the NPA, an outlawed subversive organization. Subversion being a continuing offense, the arrest of Rolando Dural without warrant is justified as it can be said that he was committing an offense when arrested. The crimes, and crimes or offenses committed in furtherance thereof or in connection therewith constitute direct assaults against the State and are in the nature of continuing crimes.
The case where the firearm was left to be buried to the ground and the wife pointed where the firearm was. Warrant of arrest; personal knowledge required of an officer arresting a person who has just committed is committing or is about to commit an offense-udner sec6(a) of Rule 113, the officer arresting a person who has committed, is committing, or is about to commit an offense must have personal knowledge of that fact. The offense must also be committed in his presence. For arrests without warrant to be lawful, it is required that a crime must in fact or actually have been committed first. In arrests without warrant under Sec 6(b) it is not enough that there is reasonable ground to believe that the person to be arrested has committed a crime. A crime must in fact or actually have been committed first. That a crime has actually been committed is an essential precondition. It is not enough to suspect that a crime may have been committee. The fact of the commission of the offense must be undisputed. The test of reasonable ground applies only to the identity of the perpetrator.
Rule 126
Stonehill vs. Diokno Several judges issued 42 search warrants to seize all docs and papers showing all business transactions of petitioners. Requisites for issuing search warrantsConstitution provides that no warrant shall issue but upon probable cause, to be determined by the judge, and that the warrant shall particularly describe the things to be seized. Search warrants authorizing the seizure of books of accounts and records showing all the business transactions of certain person, regardless of whether the transactions were legal or illegal, contravene the explicit command of the Bill of Rights that the things to be seized should be particularly described and defeat its major objective of eliminating general warrants.
Burgos vs. Chief of Staff 2 search warrants against Metropolitan Mail and We Forum newspapers premises. Probable cause for search: as such facts and circumstances which would lead a reasonably discreet and prudent man to believe that an offense has been committed and that the objects sought in connection with the offense are in the place sought to be searched. A search warrant against a publisher must particularize the alleged criminal or subversive material to be seized. The application and/or its supporting affidavits must contain a specification, stating with particularity the alleged subversive material he has published or intending to publish.
Milo vs. Salanga The barrio captain who detained a person for 11 hours. His contention was that he is not a public officer. Arbitrary detention is committed by a public officer who, without legal grounds, detains a person. The officer liable for Arbitrary detention must be vested with authority to detain or order the detention of persons accused of a crime. PD 299 was signed into law, barrio captains or barangay captain were recognized as persons in authority.
DELAY IN DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSON EO 272 Rule 112, sec 7 RA 7438
OFFENDING RELIGIOUS FEELINGS People vs. Mandoriao The case where the microphone was allegedly grabbed (but there was no sound when the accused spoke). A religious meeting is an assemblage of people met for the purpose of performing acts of adoration to the Supreme Being or to perform religious services in recognition of God as an object or worship, love and
People vs Burgos
SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED
obedience, it matters not the faith with respect to the Deity entertained by the persons so assembled. Mere saying of prayers and singing of hymns would render such place as place devoted to religious worship. Notoriously offensive- must be direct against a dogma or ritual or upon an object of veneration. Mere grabbing of mic might be punishable as public disturbance under 153.
notoriously offensive to the feelings of religious persons, provided there was no intent to mock, scoff at or to desecrate any religious act or object venerated by people of a particular religion. People vs. Nanoy Drunk got inside a Church and grab the song leader. The accused is only guilty of unjust vexation penalized by 287 (2). He did not perform acts notoriously offensive to the feelings of the faithful. Neither did he cause such serious disturbance as to interrupt or disturb the services of the congregation.
Enrile vs. Amin

Enrile was charged with rebellion complexed with murder and a violation under PD 1829 Sec. 1(c) obstruction of justice bec he gave food and comfort to Honasan. Being in conspiracy with Honasan, petitioners alleged act of harboring or concealing was fo no other purpose but in furtherance of the crime of rebellion thus constituting a component thereof. It was motivated by the single intent or resolution to commit the crime of rebellion. The decisive factor is the intent or motive. All crimes whether punishable under a special law or general law which are mere components or ingredients or committed in furtherance thereof, become absorbed in the crime of rebellion and cannot be isolated and charged as separate crimes in themselves. So whether punishable by RPC or a special law, the Hernandez case still is the ruling that these common crimes are absorbed in rebellion.
People vs. Baes The case where the funeral passed thru the Catholic churchyard. The court held that WON the act complained of is offensive to the religious feelings of the Catholics, is a question of fact which must be judged only according to the feelings of the Catholics and not those of other faithful ones, for it is possible that certain acts may offend the feelings of those who profess a certain religion, while not otherwise offensive to the feelings of those professing another faith. Laurel Dissenting: Offense to religious feelings should not be made to depend upon the more or less broad or narrow conception of any given particular religion but should be gauged having in view the nature of the acts committed and after scrutiny of all the facts and circumstances which should be viewed through the mirror of an unbiased judicial criterion. Otherwise, the gravity of leniency of the offense would hinge in the subjective characterization of the act from the point of view of a given religious denomination or sect and in such a case, the application of the law would be partial and arbitrary, withal, dangerous, especially in a country said to once the scene of religious intolerance and prosecution.
Crimes Against Public Order REBELLION, INSURRECTION, COUP DETAT RA 6968 Enrile vs. Salazar Honasan charged with rebellion with murder and multiple frustrated murder. Hernandez doctrine prohibits complexing of rebellion with any other offense. The rejection of both options shapes and determines the primary ruling of the Court, which is that Hernandez remains binding doctrine operating to prohibit the complexing of rebellion with any other offense committed on the occasion thereof, either as a means necessary to its commission or as an unintended effect of an activity that constitutes rebellion. Gutierrez Jr Concurring: Rebellion consists of many acts; the crime of rebellion consists of many acts. The dropping of one bomb cannot be isolated as a separate crime. of rebellion. Neither should the dropping of one hundred bombs or the firing of thousands of machine gun bullets be broken up into a hundred or thousands of separate offenses. The killing of civilians during a rebel attack on military facilities furthers the rebellion and is part of the rebellion.
People vs Dasig Case where the accused shot a police during a gun battle with other traffic enforcers. Appellant is liable for the crime of rebellion, not murder, not murder with direct assault upon a person in authority. Rebellion is committed by taking up arms against the government, among other means. In this case, appellant not only confessed voluntarily his membership with the sparrow unit but his killing of the officer. The sparrow unit is the liquidation squad of the NPA with the objective of overthrowing the duly constituted govt. The ISLAW is not applicable to persons convicted of rebellion. Crime of rebellion is penalized by prison mayor and fine not exceeding 20K. (But this is now changed by RA 6968 as shown in 135).
People vs. Tengson Burial rights performed inside a Roman Catholic Cemetery. For an act to be notoriously offensive to religious feelings it must be directed against a religious practice or dogma or tiutal ofr the purpose of ridicule. The act of performing burial rites inside a Roman Cathoilic Cemetery, in accordance with the rules of practices of the sect Christ is the Answer by reading passages from the bible, etc is not
People vs. Lovedioro A policeman was walking and he was killed by the accused. In deciding if the crime committed is rebellion not murder, it becomes imperative for the courts to ascertain won the act was done in furtherance of a political end. The political
Umil vs. Ramos, supra As a continuing crime.
motive of the act should be conclusively demonstrated. It is not enough that the overt acts of rebellion are duly proven. From the foregoing, it is plainly obvous that it is not enough that the overt acts of rebellion are duly proven. Both purpose and overt acts are essential components of the crime. With either of these elements wanting, the crime of rebellion legally does not exist. If no political motive is established and proved, the accused should be convicted of the common crime and not of rebellion. In cases of rebellion, motive relates to the act, and mere membership in an organization dedicated to the furtherance of rebellion would not, by and of itself, suffice.

a. b. c. d. e. f. g. Theatrical work which was alleged to be seditious. 7 modes of committing the offense: uttering seditious words or speeches writing, publishing, or ciculating of scurrilous libels against the govt. writing, publishing or circulating of scurrilous libels which tend to disturb or obstruct any lawful officer in executing his office or which tend to instigate others to cabal or meet together for unlawful purposes which suggest or incite rebellious consipiracies which tend to stir up people against lawful authorires or to disturb the peace of the community, safety and order of the govt knowlingly concealing such evil practices Sec 15, Art VI of the Constitution makes it clear that parliamentary immunity from arrest does not cover any prosecution for treason, felony, and breach of the peace. American law: Bu common parliamentary law, the members of the legislature are privileged from arrest on civil process during the session of that body, and for a reasonable time before and after, to enable them to go to and return from the same. A prosecution for a criminal offense is thus excluded from this grant of community.
ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF FIREARMS RA 8294 People vs. Quijada Case where a dance was held in a basketball court and Quijada kept on pestering Iroys sister and Quijada killed the brother. He was convicted of two separate offenses of murder and illegal use of firearm aggravated with illegal use of firearm. The unequivocal intent of the second par of section 1. of PD 1866 is to respect and preserve homicide or murder as a distinct offense penalized under the RPC and to increasae the penalty for illegal possession of firearm where such a firearm is used in killing a person. Its clear language yields no intention of the lawmaker to repeal or modify, pro tanto, Articles 248 and 249 of the RPC in such a way that if an unlicensed fiream is used in the commission of homicide or murder, either of these crimes, as the case may be, would only serve to aggravate the offense of illegal possession of firearm and would not anymore be separately punished. The words of the subject provision are palpably clear to exclude any suggestion that either of the crimes of homicide and murder, as crimes mala in se under the RPC is obliterated as such and reduced as a mere aggravating circumstance in illegal possession of firearm whenever the unlicensed firearm is used in killing a person. The only purpose of the provision is to increase the penalty prescribed in 1st par of sec 1reclusion temporal in its max to reclusion perpetua to death.
SEDITION People. Cabrera Phil Constabulary vs. the Manila police where the PC vowed revenge. Sedition in its more general sense is the raising of commotions or disturbances in the State. The Phil Law on the subject makes all persons guilty of sedition who rise publicly and tumultously in order to obtain by force or outside of legal methods any one of five objects, including that of inflicting any act of hate or revenge upon the person or property of any official or agent of the Insular Govt or of a provincial or municipal govt. It is not necessary that the offender should be a private citizen and the offended party a public functionary. Conspiracies are generally proved by a number of indefinite acts, conditions and circumstances which vary according to the purposes to be accomplished. IF it be proved that the defendants pursued by their acts the same object, one performing one part and another part of the same so as to complete it with a view to the attainment of that same object one will be justified in the conclusion that they were engaged in a conspiracy to effect that object.
Espuelas vs. People Suicide note that he was not pleased with Roxas administration. A published writing which calls our govt one of corroks and dishonest persons infested with Nazis and Fascists i.e. dictators and which reveals a tendency to produce dissatisfaction or a feeling incompatible with the disposition to remain loyal to the govt is a scurrilous libel against the govt. Criticism of govt how it may legally be doneany citizen may criticize his govt and govt officials and submit his criticism to the free trade of ideas. However such criticicim should be specific and therefore constructive specifying particular objectionable actuations of the govt. it must be reasoned or tempered and not a contemptuous condemnation of the entire govt set up.
Umil vs. Ramos, supra Sedition as a continuing act.
VIOLATION OF PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITY Martinez vs. Morfe Martinez and Bautista were members of the Constitutional Convention. They were arrested for falsification of docs-birthday and distribution of free food, drinks and cigs at 2 public meetings
INCITING TO SEDITION US vs Tolentino
People vs. Feloteo Accused played with an armalite and shot Sotto who was playing with friends after their drink. Under RA 8294, the offeses of murder and illegal use or possession of firearm are integrated into a single offense. In the recent case of People vs. Molino, gave retroactive application to RA No. 8294 considering that under the new law, the offenses of murder and illegal use or possession of firearm are integrated into a single offense. With the amendments introduced by RA 8294 to PD 1866, the use of unlicensed firearm in killing the victim is no longer considered as a separate offense, instead, it is considered as an aggravating circumstance. Liable for murder and the use of firearm is only an aggravating circumstance.
official duties to maintain peace and order in the community. People vs. Dollantes The case where the accused brandished a knife challenging anyone to fight with him when the brgy. Captain was giving a speech. Barangay captain was killed while in the performance of his duties. The records showed that the barangay captain was in the act of trying to pacify the accused who was making trouble in the dance hall when he was stabbed to death.

The accused was sentenced with destierro (100M from Manila) One who, sentenced to destierro by virtue of final judgment, and prohibited from entering the City of Manila, enters said city within the period of his sentence is guilty of evasion of sentence under article 157, RPC.
VIOLATION OF CONDITIONAL PARDON Torres vs. Gonzales The accused was convicted of estafa but then he was granted a conditional pardon provided he would not violate any penal laws. He was charged 20 counts of estafa but he was not yet convicted of final judgment. A convict granted conditional pardon who is recommitted must of course be convicted by final judgment of a court of the subsequent crime or crimes with which he was charged before the criminal penalty for such subsequent offense can be imposed upon. The parolee or convict who is regarded as having violated the provisions thereof must be charged, prosecuted and convicted by final judgment before he can be made to suffer the penalty under 159.
DELIVERY OF PRISONERS FROM JAIL Alberto vs. De la Cruz Case where the accused was summoned at the house of the governor to fix the fence. In order to be guilty under 223 (connivance) and 224 (negligence), it is necessary that the public officer had consented to, or connived in, the escape of a prisoner on the part of the person in charge is an essential condition in the commission of the crime of faithfulness in the custody of the prisoner. If the public officer charged with the duty of guarding him does not connive with the fugitive, then he has not violated the law and is not guilty of the crime. Negligence in the custody of a prisoner under 224 of the RPC punishable if it is definitely and deliberately committed.
People. Vs. Narvasa There was a report of missing carabaos, pigs, and goats. Police chanced upon the gang of appellants. There was a volley of gunfire and a policeman was killed. The trial court convicted the accused illegal use of firearm in its aggravated form. The second element of illegal possession of firearms can be proven by the testimony or the certification of a representative of the PNP Firearms and Explosives Unit that the accused was not a license of the firearm in question.As to proof that appellants had no license or permit to possess the firearm in question, we have held that the second element of illegal possession of firearms can be proven by the testitmony or the certification of a representative of the PNP Firearm and Explosives Unit that the accused was not a licensee of the firearm in question.
QUASI-RECIDIVISM People vs. Dionisio The Happy Go Lucky gang vs. Batang Mindanao case. The accused are quasi-recidivists, having committed the crime charged while serving sentence for a prior offense. The maximum penalty prescrived by law for the new felony (murder) is death, regardless of the presence or absence of any mitigating or aggravating circumstance or the complete absence thereof. But for lack of requisite votes, reclusion perpetua is imposed.
EVASION OF SERVICE OF SENTENCE Tanega vs. Masakayan Accused was convicted with slander but she didnt serve her sentence. The elements are that the offender is a convict by final judgment; he is serving the sentence of deprivation of liberty and he evades the service of sentence by escaping during the term of his sentence. The prescription commence from date when culprit should evade the service of his sentence.
DIRECT ASSAULT People vs. Beltran Battle in the Puzons compound. Shooting at the mayor and a policeman on duty is attempted murder with assault. The Maypr was a person in authority and Tolentino was a policeman who at the time was in uniform. They were performing their
Crimes Against Public Interest COUNTERFEITING People vs. Kong Leon The Spanish Penal Code from which the law punishing the fabrication and uttering of counterfeit coins is evidently derived, the
People vs. Abilong
fabrication of a local coin withdrawn from circulation is punishable, it stands to reason that the counterfeiting of foreign coin, even if withdrawn from circulation in the foreign country of its origin, should also be punishable, because the reason for punishing the fabrication of a local coin withdrawn from circulation is not alone the harm caused to the public by the fact that it may go into circulation, but the danger that a counterfeiter produces by his stay in the country, and the possibility that he may later apply his trade to making of coins in actually circulation. The law of the US on its currency became a part of the general law which our courts of justice are bound to apply and enforce.
involving originally true and genuine documents which have been withdrawn or demonetized, or have outlived their usefulness. The case under consideration could not come within the second paragraph of the aforesaid article (By erasing, substituting , counterfeiting or altering by any means the figures, letters, words or signs contained therein) because no figure, letter, word, or sign contained in Exhibit A has been erased, substituted, counterfeited or altered. The forgery consists in the addition of a word in an effort to give to the present document the appearance of the true and genuine certificate that it used to have before it was withdrawn or has outlived its usefulness. FALSIFICATION

Luague vs. CA Case where the wife signed the payroll warrant after her husband died. Absence of criminal intent by petitioner wife when she signed her husbands name as payee. Absence of damage an element to be considered to determine presence of criminal intent. Govt did not sustain financial loss due to encashment of checks by the wife. While it is not meant to imply that if there is no damage there can be no falsification, but that the absence of damage is an element to be considered to determine whether or not there is criminal intent. (Damage is not necessary in falsification but is intent necessary?)
MUTILATION OF COINS PD 247 FORGERY Del Rosario vs. People Erasure and alteration of figures in genuine treasury notes-The possession of genuine treasury notes of the Philippines any of the figures, letters, words or signs contained in which had been erased and/or altered, with knowledge of such erasure and alteration, and with the intent to use such notes in enticing another to advance funds for the avowed purpose of financing the manufacture of counterfeit treasury notes of the Philippines, is punishable.
People vs. Romualdez Case of Bar Exam where the scores of a certain Mabunay were changed. The contention that the papers which defendant ER altered were not public or official documents is untenable because the examination of candidates for admission to the bar is a judicial function. The alterations made in such papers, under the circumstances proven in this case, of the grades given to them by the correctors, constitute the crime of falsification of public documents.
Cabigas vs. People Case of lost treasury bills and that on the Securities Delivery Receipt, he crossed out with a red ink the said doc and notated for adjustment. There is no falsification if the correction was made to speak the truth. It is a settled doctrine that in falsification byu an employee under par no 4 of Art 171 which reads by making untruthful statements in the narration of facts, the ff elements must concur: offender makes in a doc untruthful satatments in a narration of facts that he has a legal obligation to disclose the truth of the facts narrated by him the facts narrated by the offender are absolutely false that the perversion of truth in the narration of facts was made with the wrongful intent of injuring a third person In the absence of a legal obligation to disclose or reveal the truth, accused cannot be convicted of falsification. The practice was for his own convenience and also for reference purposes.
a. b. c. d.
Beradio vs. CA The accused was the Chief of Office, Office of Election registrar who was accused as having falsified her daily time record. Where non-faithful statement of daily hours of work in time record has not caused damages to the Govt, no crime of falsification can accrue. While it is true that a time record is an official document, it is not criminally falsified if it does not pervert its avowed purpose as when it does not cause damage to the government. It may be different in the case of a public document with continuing interest affecting the public welfare which is naturally damaged if that document is falsified where the truth is necessary for the safeguard and protection of that general interest.
People vs. Galano Balut case and the Victory note payment The forgery here committed comes under the first paragraph of Article 169 or the Code (By giving to a treasury or bank note or any instrument payable to bearer or to order mentioned therein, the appearance of a true and genuine document). This provision does not only contemplate situations where a spurious, false or fake document or instrument is given the appearance of a true and genuine document, but also to situations
People cs. Sandaydiego Case where Samson made vouchers for the alleged construction of a bridge but there wasnt really any construction. The vouchers were encashed at Sandaydiegos office and not at the Cashiers.
A person in possession of falsified document and made us of it is presumed to be material author of falsification. If falsification was resorted to hide malversation, falsification and malversation are separate offenses, not complex crimes. Each falsification of a voucher constitutes one crime and falsification of each voucher constitutes one offense. It is settled that if the falsification was resorted to for the purpose of hiding the malversation, the falsication and maversation are separate offenses. The falsification of six vouchers constitutes six separate or distinct offenses and each misappropriation as evidenced by a provincial voucher constitutes a separate offense. The six misappropriations evidenced by the six vouchers constitute six distinct offenses. ( As compared to Villalon, Dava and Cortez case?)
after the document was registered with the Register of Deeds. USE OF FALSIFIED DOCUMENTS People vs. Dava Case where Dava acquired a falsified drivers license after his previous license was confiscated due to a felony he committed. Drivers license a public document. The drivers license being a public document, proof of the fourth element of damage caused to another person or at least an intent to cause such damage has become immaterial. In falsification of public or official documents, the principal thing being punished is the violation of the public faith and the destruction of the truth proclaimed therein.

lawfully entitled to do so. (Usurpation of official functions) Accused was previously a member of the said organization however it was not proven by the prosecution that he was dismissed from the org and that he no longer possesses such authority. However the SOLGEN argued that in makes no difference whether the accused was suspended or dismissed from the service for both imply the absence of power to represent oneself as vested with authority to perform acts pertaining to an office to which he knowingly was deprived of. He should have been charged of usurpation of official functions and not of usurpation of authority, thus, he was acquitted.
USING FICITITIOUS NAME CA 142 Legamia vs. IAC Case where a woman used the name Corazon Reyes instead of Corazon Legamia y Rivera bec she has been living with Emilio Reyes for 20 years but not married. She assumed the role as his wife and used his name without any sinister purpose or personal material gain in mind. She applied for benefits upon his death not for herself but for their son. (You may have your own Corazon statement of the Court).
Syquian vs. People Mayor appointed one woman as clerk but there were no funds available and no special ordinance creating said position. The existence of a wrongful intent to injure a third person is not necessary when the falsified document is a public document.
USURPATION People vs. Cortez Case where the accused pretended to be a BIR agent and that he presented an ID card with other BIR papers. The crime was usurpation of authority thru falsification of a public document by a private person. The falsification was the means employed by the defendant to perpetrate the crime of usurpation.
People vs. Villalon Case where a document of mortgage was falsified by the accused alleging that he has obtained the signatures of the De Guzman brothers. The falsification of a public document may be a means of committing estafa because before the falsified document is actually utilized to defraud another, the crime of falsification has already been consummated, damage or intent to cause damage not being an element of the crime of falsification of public, official or commercial documents. The damage to another is caused by the commission of estafa, not by falsification of the document, hence, the falsification of the public, official or commercial document is only a necessary means to commit the estafa. In the crime of falsification of a public document, the prescriptive period commences from the time the offended party had constructive notice of the alleged forgery
Gigantoni vs. People Case where accused claimed that he was an agent of CIS of the Phil Constabulary and went to Pal to conduct verification of same travel by the Black Mountain officials and presented an ID. Usurpation of authority and usurpation of official functions- Art 177 of the RPC on usurpation of authority or official functionsany person: who knowingly and falsely represent himself to be an officer, agent and representative of any department or agency of the Phil Goct or of any foreign govt (Usurpation of authority) under pretense of official position, performs any act pertaining to any person in authority or public officer of the Phil Govt or any forein govt or any agency thereof, without being
ILLEGAL USE OF UNIFORMS OR INSIGNIA RA 75 RA 493 PERJURY Diaz vs. People Case where the accused made it appear that he was a 4th yr student with Bachelor of Arts at the Cosmopolitan and Harvardian Colleges and this was a requirement for his reappointment as School Administrative Asst. As defined, perjury is the willful and corrupt assertion of falsehood under oath of
a.
b.
a. b. c. d.
affirmation administered by authority of law on a material matter. All elements present: that the accused made a statement under oath or executed an affidavit upon a material matter. That the statement or affidavit was made before a competent officer, authorized to receive and administer oath That in that statement or affidavit, the accused made a willful and deliberate assertion of a falsehood That the sworn statement or affidavit containing the falsity is required by law or made for legal purpose.

People vs. Kottinger WON the pictures portraying the inhabitants of the bountry in native dress are obscene/indecent. The word obscene and the term obscenity may be defined as meaning something offensibve to chastity, decency or delicacy. Indecency is an act against good behaviour and a just delicacy. Test of Obscenity: The test ordinarily followed by the courts in determining whether ea particular publication or other thing is obscene within the meaning of the statutes, is whether the tendency of the matter charged as obscene is to deprave or corrupt those whose minds are open to such immoral influences and into whose hands a publication or tother article charged as being obscene may fall. Another test of obscenity is that which shocks the ordinary and common sense of men as an indecency. Test: What is the judgment of the aggregate sense of the community reached by the publication or other matter? What is the probably reasonable effect on the sense of decency, purity, and chastity of society extending to the family? was indecent or immoral. The test in the Kottinger applies.
People vs. Padan The Toro case. But an actual exhibition of the sexual act, preceded by acts of lasciviousness, can have no redeeming features. In it there is no room for art. One can see nothing in it but clear and unmitigated obscenity, indecency and an offense to public morals, inspiring and causing as it does, nothing but lust and lewdness and exerting a corrupting influence exp on the youth of the land.
MACHINATIONS IN PUBLIC AUCTIONS Ouano vs. CA Case where auction was manipulated. Causing another bidder to stay away from the auction in order to cause reduction of the price of the property auctioned. These acts constitute a crime where Ouano and Eschavez had promised to share in the property in question as a consideration for Ouanos refraining from taking part in the public auction, and they had attempted to cause and in fact succeeded in causing another bidder to stay away from the auction in order to cause reduction of the price of the property auctioned. Property forfeited in favor of the govt.
VAGRANCY PD 1563 Perez vs. Navarro-Domingo Vagrancy law declared unconstitutional by the MTC. There cannot be malice by mere loitering or tramping or wandering about without visible means of support because the only person affected thereby or prejudiced or injured by such circumstances would be the person himself and not other third parties. There is nothing to protect society from these acts and it is this precisely which is repugnant because it impinges on the individuals right of freedom of expression and freedom of locomotion, as guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Lack of visible means of support should be punishable unless it affects other persons or prejudices them. Poverty cannot be a criminal act. (Attacking the social status of the person).
People vs. Aparici Case where the woman danced wearing furry white girdle with a middle piece punctuating attend on the things she was supposed to hide. Test of Obscenity: It may be conceded that nudity itself is not inherently indecent obscene. Mere nudity in painting and sculpture is not obscenity as they may be considered pieces of art. But the artistic, the aesthetic and the pulchritude in the nude body of a living woman may readily be transformed into an indecent and obscene object, by postures and movements of such body which produce perceptible and discernable reaction in the public or audience witnessing the same. The object of the law is to protect the morals of the public. The reaction of the public, therefore, during the performance of the dance by the appellant should the gauge in the determination whether appellants danicing or exhibition
Crimes Relative to Opium and Other Prohibited Drugs RA 9165 Crimes Against Public Morals GAMBLING PD 1602 LOI 816 IMMORAL DOCTRINES, OBSCENE PUBLICATIONS AND EXHIBITIONS PD 960 as amended by PD 969
RA 9208 Crimes Committed by Public Officers BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS Manipon vs. Sandiganbayan Case where the deputy sheriff said that he can remedy the withdrawal of the garnished
1) 2) 3)
4)
amount so that they can have something for New Year. Direct bribery: The crime of direct bribery as defined in 210 in RPC consists of the ff elements: that the accused is a public officer that he received directly or through another some gift or present, offer or promise that such gift, present or promise has been given ion consideration of his commission of some crime, or any act not constitutiong a crime, or to refrain from doing something which it is his official duty to do and that the crime or act relates to the exercise of his functions as public officer The promise of a public officer to perform an act or to refrain from doing it may be express or implied.

If the proceeding does not involve the conviction of the wrongdoer for the offense charged the proceeding is of a civil nature and under the statutes which specifically so provide, where the act or omission for which the forfeiture is imposed is not also a misdemeanor, such forfeiture may be sued for and recovered in a civil action. The proceeding in Anti-Graft Law is not a criminal proceeding bec it does not terminate in the imposition of a penalty but merely in the forfeiture of the properties illegally acquired in favor of the State and bec the procedure outlined therein leading to forfeiture is that provided in a civil action. and liabilities filed by the resp. The statute affords the resp every opportunity to explain to the satisfaction of the court how he had acquired the property in question.
RA 3019 Morfe vs Mutuc Case where the constitutionality of RA 3019 was challenged bec it infringes liberty. To declare a law unconstitutional, the infringement of constitutional rights must be clear, categorical, and undeniable. While in the attainment of public good, no infringement of clear, categorical, and undeniable, that what the Constitution condemns, the statue allows. In other words, to declare a law unconstitutional, such constitutional violation must be clear and categorical.
Cabal vs. Kapunan Case where the AFP chief of staff was charged with graft and corruption and his defense was his rights against selfincrimination. Proceedings for forfeiture of peoperty are deemed criminal or penal and hence, the exemption of defendants in criminal cases from the obligation to be witness against themselves are applicable thereto. Distinguished from Almeda v.s Perez, wherein an amendment in the information was allowed bec it is only civil in nature however this doctrine refers to the purely procedural aspect of the said proceeding and has no bearing on the substantial rights of the respondents therein particularly their constitutional right against self-incrimination.
Dacumas vs. Sandiganbayan The settlement of tax liability which reduced the tax of the Revilla Interiors. Pulling out assessment papers and the like was not part of his official duties, thus elements for direct bribery were not all met. Besides the promised act was not impossible to carry out given his 29 years in service, he surely knows his way around. (expanded meaning of official duties)
Jaravata vs. Sandiganbayan Case where the teacher received payments from other teachers for the release of their salary differentials. There is no law which invests the petitioner with the power to intervene in the payment of the salary differentials of the complainants or anyone for that matter. Far from exercising any power, the petitioner plated the humble role of a supplicant whose mission was to expedite payment of the salary differentials. In his official capacity as assistant principal, he is not required by law to intervene in the payment of the salary differentials. Accordingly, he cannot be said to have violated the law aforecited although he exerted efforts to facilitate the payment of the salary differentials. Sec 3 (b) of RA 3019 refers to a public officer whose official intervention is required by law in a contract or transaction. (in his pofficial capacity has to intervene under the law).
PD 46 PD 749 GRAFT AND CORRUPTION RA 1379 Almeda vs. Perez Case where the accused is an NBI director and was charged with violation of the AntiGraft Law bec his salary was out of prop with his present acquisition of cash and properties. Test to determine whether a proceeding is cibvil or criminal: forfeiture proceedings may either be civil or criminal in nature and may be in rem or in personam.
Republic vs. CA Case where the Staff Engr of the Reg Office of the Bureau of Public Highways in Cebu was charged with graft and corruption but was later able to justify the acquired properties and wealth. Law creates a presumption against the public officer or employee who acquires property grossly disproportionate to his income i.e. that the property was unlawfully acquired. This presumption is juris tantum. It may be rebutted by the public officer or employee by showing to the satisfaction of the court that his acquisition of the property was lawful. In determining whether of not there is unexplained wealth under RA 1379 the courts are not bound by the statements of assets
Trieste vs. Sandiganbayan Case where the Mayor has signed vouchers where he has granted the bidding to Trigen where he is also the President and a major stockholder. What the Anti-Graft Law prohibits is the actual interevention by a public official in the
transaction in which he has a financial interest. What is contemplated in section 3(h) of the law is the actual intervention in the transaction in which one has financial or pecuniary interest in order that liability may attach. The official need not dispose his shares in the corporation as long as he dons not do anything for the firm in its contract with the office. For the law iams to prevent dominant use of influecen, atuhoroty and power.

Case of the pregnant cashier and collecting officer who filed for an LOA but still went to the office to collect tuition fees and other fees for the uniform of the basketball team of the school. Malversation consists not inly in misappropriation or converting public funds or property to ones personal use but also knowingly allowing others to make use or of misappropriate them. constituting such person a public officer by reason of such requirement. The BIRs power authorizing a private indiv to act as depositary cannot be stretched to include the power to appoint him as a public officer. Consideration of ART. 222 private indiv as public officer. SC ruled that a private indiv who has in his charge any of the public funds or prop enumerated and commits any of the acts defined should likewise be penelized with the same penalty meted to erring public officers. Nowhere in the said provision is it expressed or implied that a private indiv be deemed a public officer. Azarcon and Ancla, his co-accused, are both private indivs.
Mejorada vs. Sandiganbayan Case of the Engr who has negotiated with the house and lot owners for the construction of a road and the complainants alleged that they were divested of a large proportion of their claims and receiving payment in an amount even lower that the actual damage they incurred. Section 3 cited above enumerates in eleven subsections the corrupot practices of any public officer declared unlawful. Its reference to any public officer is without distinction or qualification and it specifies the acts declared unlawful. The last sentence of the par (e) is intended to make clear the inclusion of officers and employees of offices or govt corp which under the ordinary concept of public officers may not come within the term. It is a strained construction of the provision to read it as applying exclusively to public officers charged with the duty of granting licenses and permits or other concessions.
Estepa vs. Sandiganbayan Paymaster case. In crime of malversation, all that is necessary for conviction is proof that accountable officer had received the public funds and that he did not have them in his possession when demand therefore was made and he could not satisfactorily explain his failure so to account. An accountable officer may be convicted for malversation even if there is not direct evidence of personal misappropriation where he has not been able to explain satisfactorily the absence of the funds involved. Under 217 there is prima facie evidence of malverdation where the accountable public officer fails to have duly forthcoming any public funds with which he is chargeable upon demand by duly authorized officer.
INFIDELITY IN THE CUSTODY OF PRISONERS Rodillas vs. Sandiganbayan Case where the police allowed the woman to go to the CR without inspecting first if there was a way for her to escape. It was improper for pet to allow pris to have lunch with family when he was supposed to bring the pris back to jail which is 1K away from the sala of the judge. It is his duty to take necessary precautions to assure the absence of any means of escape. A failure to undertake these precautions will make his act one of definite laxity of negligence amounting to deliberate non-performance of duty.
Ilogon vs. Sandiganbayan Vales case. The fact that petitioner did not personally use the missing funds is not a valid defense and will not exculpate him from his criminal liability. And as aptly found by respondent Sandiganbayan, the fact the immediate superiors of the accused have acquiesced to the practice of giving out case advances for convenience did not legalize the disbursements.
Crimes Against Persons PARRICIDE People vs. Jumawan Presentacion should have been accused of parricide but her relationship with deceased is not alleged in the information, she, like the others, can be convicted of murder only qualified by abuse of superior strength. Although not alleged in the information, relationship is an aggravating circumstance aand should be assigned against appellants. Relationship is inherent in parricide but she stands convicted of murder. As to the others, the relationships of father-in-law and brotherin-law aggravate the crime. Penalty for murder with aggravating circ is death but
PLUNDER RA 7080 Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan
Azarcon vs. Sandiganbayan MALVERSATION Labatagos vs. Sandiganbayan Case where Azarcon was requested by the Director of the BIR to distraint the goods, chattels or other props of Ancla bec a delinquent taxpayer. Although sec 206 of the NIRC authorizes the BIR to effect a constructive distraint by requiring any person to preserve distrained prop there is no provision in the NIRC
there is a lack of the necessary votes therefore, reclusion perpetua. People vs. Tomotorgo Art. 49 not apply to cases where more serious consequences not intended by the offender result from his felonious act bec under art. 4, par 1 of the same Code, he is liable for all the direct and natural consequences of his unlawful act. His lact of intention to commit so grave a wrong is, at best, mitigating. People vs. Alburquerque: Art 49 applies only to cases where the crime committed is different from that intended and where the felony committed befalls a different person. People vs. Laureano et. Al.: Art 246 of the RPC punishes parricide with the penalty of reclusion perptua to death, which are two indivisible penalties. As the commission of the act was attended by mitigating circ with no aggrav, the lesser penalty, which is rec perpetua should be imposed. SC held that the fact that appellant intended to maltreat the victim only or inflict physical injuries does not exempt him from liability for the resulting more serious crime.
MURDER AND HOMICIDE People vs. Buensuceso Case where the policeman was trying to get the knife from Tayag and eventually led to a chase and killed Tayag. Where several assailants inflicted wounds on a victim but it cannot be determined who inflicted which wound, all the assailants are liable for victims death.

Abortion. It has not been established that there was intent to cause abortion.
HAZING RA 8049
RAPE RA 8353
People vs. Pugay There is nothing in the records that shows that there was a precious conspiracy or unity of criminal purpose and intention bet the two accused immediately before the crime. There was no animosity and their meeting at the scene of the crime was accidental. They only want to make fun of the deceased. There is an absence of intent to kill and that his act was just part of their fun-making that evening. Treachery-deliberate attack and employing means to insure its execution removing any form of defense from the offended party. His act however doesnt relieve him of crim resp. Burning the clothes of victim would cause at the very least some kind of physical injury. ART 4, criminal liability shall be incurred by any person committing a felony although the wrongful act done be different from what is intended. Pugay was convicted of Homicide thru reckless imprudence and Samson was convicted of Homicide.
People vs. Orita 16-year old nirape sa boarding house. Babae tumakas nang nakahubo. Perfect penetration is not essential for the consummation of rapeclearly in the crime of rape, from the moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his victim he actually attains his purpose and from that moment also all the essential elements of the offense have been accomplished. Nothing more is left to be done by the offender because he has performed the last act necessary to produce the crime. Thus, the felony is consummated. Uniform has been set that for the consummation of rape, perfect penetration is not essential. Any penetration of the female organ by the male organ is sufficient. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ, without rupture of the hymen or laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction. Necessarily, rape is attempted if there is no penetration of the female organ bec not all acts of execution was performed. The offender merely commenced the commission of a felony directly by overt acts.
DEATH OR PHYSICAL INJURIES INFLICTED UNDER EXCEPTIONAL CIRCUMSTANCES People vs. Abarca Elements of Art. 247: a. legally married surprises spouse in the act of sex with another person b. that he kills any or both of them in the act or immediately after. These elements present in the case. Although an hour has passed bet the sex act and the shooting of Koh, the shooting must be understtod to be the continuation of the pursuit of the victim by the accused. Art only requires that the death caused be the proximate result of the outrage overwhelming the accused after chancing upon his spouse in the basest act of infidelity. But the killing should have been actually motivated by the same blind impulse and must not have been influenced by external factors.
UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION People vs. Salufrania Parricide with unintentional abortion. No evidence to show that accused had the intention to cause an abortion. Appellant alleges that, assuming he indeed killed his wife, there is no evidence to show that he had the intention to cause an abortion. In this contention, appellant is correct. He should not be held guilty of the complex crime of Parricide with Intentional Abortion but of the complex crime of Parricide with Unintentioanl
People vs. Mangalino 6-year old, Grade I pupil, nirape ni Lolo. Binigyan ng P2.00. In Statutory rape, proof of intimidation or force used on the victim or lack of it is immaterial. Carnal knowledge with a woman below 12 years of age is statutory rape. Full penetration is not required. It is enough that there is proof of entrance of the male organ within the labia or pudendum of the
female organ. Slightest penetration enough to consummate the crime. People vs. Balbuena Tomboy na nirape. Absence of injury on victim and absence of torn dresses and underwear does not negate truth of rape complaint and credibility of victims testimony. Description of a typical Filipina. That a Filipina could not easily decide to come out in the open and be subjected to public contempt and ridicule.
People vs. Castro Si Kuya pinatayo si Diana sa inodoro at doon minolestiya. Diana 6 years old. Entry, to the least extent, of the labia or lips of the female organ is sufficient.
People vs. Atento Rape with a 17-year old retardate who claims that sex was masarap. Intellect of a 9-12 year-old kid. If sexual intercourse with a victim under twelve years of age is rape, the it should follow that carnal knowledge with a 17-year old whose mental capacity is that of a 7-year old would constitute rape. This is even so even if the circumstances of force and intidmidation or of the victim being deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious are absent.
attackers penis merely touched the external portions of the female genitalia were made in the context of the presence or existence of an erect penis capable of full penetration. Where the accused failed to achieve an erection, had a limp or flaccid penis or an oversized penis which could not fit into the victims vagina, the Court nonetheless held that rape was consummated on the basis of the vicitms testimony that the accused repeatedly tried but in vain to insert his penis into her vagina and in all likelihood reached the labia of her pudendum as the victim felt his organ on the lips of her vulva, or that the penis of the accused touched the middle part of her vagina. And the labias, which are required to be touched by the penis, are by their natural situs or location beneath the mons pubis or the vaginal surface, to touch them with the penis is to attain some degree of penetration beneath the surface, hence, the conclusion that touching the labia majora or the labia minors of the pudendum constitutes consummated rape.
People vs. Berana

Brother-in-law raped the 14-year old sister of his wife with consent of the young child. Guy claims he was seduced. Proof of external injuries inflicted on the complainant is not indispensable in a prosecution for rape committed with force or violence. Affinity is defined as the rlation which one spouse bec of marriage has to blood relatives of the other. The connection existing, in consequence of marriage bet each othe married persons and the kindred of the other. To effectively prosecute accused-aplealng for the crim of rape committed by a relative by affinity within the third civil degree, it must be established that a) he is legally married to the complainants sister and b) complainant and accused-appellants wife are full or half blood siblings.
RA 9262
People vs. Gallo Accused wanted to apply retroactivity of doctrine in subsequent cases to make his penalty reclusion perpetua instead of death. The additional attendant circumstances introduced by RA 7659 should be considered as special qualifying circumstances distinctly aaplicable to the crime of rape and if not pleaded as such could only be appreciated as generic aggravating circumstances. The Court in the case of People vs. Garcia ratiocinated that the additiona lattnedant circumstances introduced by RA 7659 should be considered as special qualifying circumstances distinctly applicable to the crime of rape and if not pleaded as such could only be appreciated as generic aggravating circumstances. Accused-appellants relationship to the victim although proven but not alleged in the information, cannot be considered to be qualifying circumstancethe bove indictment has not specifically alleged that the accusedappellant is the victims father; accordingly, accused-appellants relationship to the victim although proven during the trial cannot be considered to be a qualifying circumstance. PART II Crimes Against Personal Liberty and Security KIDNAPPING AND ILLEGAL DETENTION People vs. Tomio Japanese guy was tricked by his countrymen. Even granting for the sake of argument that, in effect, there was created a simple loan contract bet appellants and Mr. Nagao, as asserted by the appellant, the deprivation of the formers liberty until the amount shall have been fully paid to them, is still kidnapping or illegal detention for ransom. In People vs. Akiran-If the kidnapping were to compel the victim to fulfill his promise defraying the hospital expenses of a brother of one of the accused, there is still kidnapping for ransom, since if that were indeed the purpose, the accused need not kidnap the victim. People vs. Mercado
People vs. Campuhan Nahuli ni nanay si houseboy na pinagtangkaang rape-in ang 4-year old na anak. Touching when applied to rape cases does not simply mean mere epidermal contact, stroking or grazing of organs, aslight brush or scrape of the penis on the external layer of the victims vagina, or the mons pubisthere must be sufficient and convincing proof that the penis indeed touched the labias or slid into the female organ and not merely stroked the external surface thereof, for an accused to be convicted of consummated rape. In People vs. De la Pena we clarified that the decisions finding a case for rape even if the
Sister of the wife was dragged and kept in a store until she tells the accused where her sister is. Where the victim was actually restrained or deprived of her freedom by the accused to force her to produce her sister, the commonlaw wife of the accused, the rim is not grave coercion but illegal detention. Mitigating circ of obfuscation must arise from lawful sentiments.
People vs. Del Socorro Accused allegedly found a girl and claimd that the little girl voluntary went with her. Gave her to a physician in Rizal. Obiter: The court here commented- to cut down on the illicit traffic of children, the Court urges the prosecution of persons to whom children are sold or given away for a valuable consideration. Oftentimes, it is only the abductor or kidnapper who is prosecuted. Yet the person to whom the kidnapped child is given and who may have wittingly or unwittingly given the motivation for the abduction, goes scot-free, even as the intention of this person is to keep and raise the child as his own. By keeping the child, under these circumstances, is he not guilty of serious illegal detention?
purpose to kill, the crime is only murder, and this is true even if, before the killing but for the purposes thereof, the victim was taken from one place to anther. Thus, where the evident purpose of taking the victims was to kill them, and from the acts of the accused it cannot be inferred that the latters purpose was actually to detain or deprive the victims of their liberty, the subsequent killing of the victims constitutes the crime of murder, hence the crime of kidnapping does not exist and cannot be considered as a component felony to produce a complex crime of kidnapping with murder. In Masilang case, although the accused had planned to kidnap the victim for ransom but they first killed him and it was only later that they demanded and obtained the money, such demand for ransom did not convert the crime into kidnapping since no detention or deprivation of liberty was involved, hence he crime committed was only murder. People vs. Ramos Si Ninang kinidnap at hiningan ng pera pambayad dahil asawa manganganak. The essence of the crime of kidnapping as defined and penalized is actual deprivation of the victims liberty coupled with an indubitable proof of intent on the part of the malefactor to effect such restraint on the offended partys liberty. The term actual deprivation of liberty consists not only of placing a person in an enclosure but also of detaining a person or depriving him in any manner of his liberty. For kidnapping to exist, it is not necessary that the offended party be kept within an enclosure to restrict her freedom of locomotion. It is not enough that, as in the instant case, she was in any manner deprived of her liberty, unable to moveand get out as she pleased.

minor but what is actually punishable is not the kidnapping of the minor but rather the deliberate failure or refusal of the custodian of the minor to restore the latter to his parents or guardians. the essential element herein is that the offender is entrusted with the custody of the minor but what is actually punishable is not the kidnapping of the minor, as the title of the article seems to indicate, but rather the deliberate failure or refusal of the custodian of minor to restore the latter to his parents or guardians. Said failure or refusal, however, must not only be deliberate but must also be persistent as to oblige the parents or the guardians of the child to seek the aid of the courts in order to obtain custody. The key word therefore of this element is deliberate.
RA 7610
ABANDONMENT OF ONES VICTIM Lamera vs. CA Accused was charged with reckless imprudence resulting in damage to property with multiple physical injuries and abandonment of ones victim. He files against double jeopardy. The articles 365 and 275 are two different and distinct offenses. Quasi-offense under 365 are committed by means of culpa. Crimes against Security are committed by means of dolo. In 365, failure to lend help to ones victim is neither an offense by itself nor an element of the offense therein penalized. The identity of offenses that must be shown need not be absolute identity: the first and second offenses may be regarded as the same offense where the second offense necessarily includes the first offense or is necessarily included in such first offense or where the second offense is an attempt to commit the first or a frustration thereof. For the constitutional plea of double jeopardy to be available, no all the technical elements constituting the first offense need be present in the technical definition of the second offense.
People vs. Lim There is no kidnapping when the fact of detention which is an essential element of the crime charged, was not clearly established. There is no kidnapping in this case. The two minors voluntarily entered the appellants residence. The fact of detention which is an essential element in the crime charged was not clearly established. There was no showing that there was actual confinement or restriction of the person of the offended party. There was no indication that Aida was locked up, physically restrained of her liberty or unable to communicate with anyone.
KIDNAPPING AND FAILURE TO RETURN A MINOR People vs. Ty Kidnapping and failure to return a Minor. The essential element of the crime is that the offender is entrusted with the custody of the
People vs. Padica Crime committed was murder, not kidnapping for ransom with murder. Purpose of taking the victim was to kill him. Where the taking of the victim was incidental to the basic
GRAVE THREATS People vs. Timbol The husband was asked by the accused if he can be alone with the accuseds wife and there he molested the wife. Acts of lasciviousness: pardon which was not given by the offended party herself, but by her husband and that the same was granted by the latter after the filing of the complain cannot extinguish the criminal resp of the accused for even a pardon givben after the presentation of the complaint will not operate in favor of the accused and exonerate him. The aggravating circ of craft and dwelling are present in the commission. The threats that were not made by the accused to the offended party but to his wife while said accused was abusing her, which form part of the element of intimidation that the accused employed to succeed in his lewd designs, cannot be considered separate and independent from the crime of abuse of chastity to constitute another crime of threats.
a.
b.
c.
Reyes vs. People a. b. c. Agustin, putang ina mo case. 282 elements: that the offender threatened another person with the infliction upon his person of a wrong that such wrong amounted to a crime that the threat was not subject to a condition The demonstration led by petitioner against the complainant in front of the main gate with placards with threatening statements with the deliberate purpose of creating in the mind of the person threatened with the belief that the threat would be carried into effect. Where the expression putang ina mo is not considered slanderousthe is a common expression in the dialect that is often employed not really to slander but rather to express anger or displeasure. It is seldom, if ever, taken in its literal sense by the hearer, that is a reflection on the virtue of a mother.
Mayor fenced public nuisance. Abatement of public nuisance without judicial proceedings, municipal mayor not criminally liable when he acted in good faith in authorizing the fencing of a barbershop for being a public nuisance bec it occupied a portion of the sidewalk. Art 699 authorizes the abatement of a public nuisance without judicial proceedings. Grave coercion is committed when a person who without authority of law, shall by means of iolence, prevent another from doing something not prohibited by law or compel to do something against his will either it be right or wrong. Elements: that any person be prevented by another from doing something not prohibited by law, or compelled to do something against his will, be it right or wrong. That the prevention or compulsion be effected by violence, either by material force or such display of it as would produce intimidation and control the will of the offended party That the person who restrained the will and liberty of another had no right to do so, or, in other words, that the restraint was not made under authority of law or in the exercise of a lawful right.
UNJUST VEXATION People vs. Reyes
Accused fenced a land which they alleged belong to them since the Church which stood on the land they have donated was destroyed (11 pm while pabasa was being held). The construction of a fence, even though irritating and vexatious under the circumstances to those present is not such an act as can be designated as notiously offensive to the faithful as normally such an act would be a matter of complete indifference to those not present, no matter how religious a turn of mind they might be. The accused here were just convicted of unjust vexation.
People vs. Anonuevo The accused grabbed the breasts of the complainant from behind while a religious ceremony was being held inside the church. Unjust vexation if no lustful designs present. Considering the religious atmosphere prevailing at the time the accused kissed and embraced the offended girl and the presence of many people it would be error in the absece of clear proof as to the motive, to ascribe the conduct of the appellant to lustful designs or purposes. The accused should be declared guilty of unjust vexation, with the aggravating circumstance of having committed it in a place dedicated to religious worship.
Lee vs. CA Check which was forged by the complainant. She charged the bank manager of grave coercion. There is nothing unlawful on the threat to sue. Petitioners demand that the private resp return the proceeds of the check accompanied by a threat to file criminal charges was not improper. There is nothing unlawful on the threat to sue. The force which is claimed to have compelled criminal conduct against the will of the actor must be immediate and continuous and threaten grave danger to his person during allof the time the act is being committed. That is, it must be a dangerous force threatened in praesenti. It must be a force threatening great bodily harm that remains constant in controlling the will of the unwilling participant while the act is being performed and from which he cannot withdraw in safety.
Crimes Against Property ROBBERY Napolis vs. CA Store vs. House caserobbery thru the store to the house. That where robbery, though committed in a inhabited house, is characterized by intimidation, this factor supplies the controlling qualification so that the law to apply is article 294 and not art 299 of the RPC. This is on the theory that robbery which is characterized by violence or intimidation against the person is evidently graver than ordinary robbery committed by force upon
GRAVE COERCION Timoner vs. People
things, because where violence or intimidation against the person is present there is greater disturbance of the order of society and the security of the indivual. Indeed, one who, by breaking a wall, enters, with a deadly weapon, an inhabited house and steals therefrom valuable effects, without violence against or intimidation upon persons is punishable under 299 RPC with reclusion temporal. Pursuant to the above view, adhered to in previous decisions, if, aside from performing said acts, the thief lays hand upon any person, without committing any of the crimes or inflicting any of the injuries mentioned in subparagraphs 1 to 4 of Art 294 of the same Code, the imposable penalty under par 5 shall be much lighter. This defies logic and reason accdg to the court. Violence or intimidation against the person is evidently grabber than ordinary robbery committed by force upon things. Art. 294 applies only where robbery with violence against or intimidation of person takes place without entering an inhabited house, under the conditions set forth in ART 299 of the RPC. Crime is a complex one under Art. 48. Doctrines of prev cases were abandoned.
Crime of robbery with homicide when may exist.In order to determine the existence of the crime of robbery with homicide, it sis enough that a homicide would result by reason or on the occasion of the robbery and it is immaterial that the death would supervene by mere accident provided that the homicide be produced by reason or on occasion of the robbery inasmuch as it only the result obtained, without reference or distinction as to the circumstances, causes, modes or persons intervening in the commission of the crime, that has to be taken into consideration. There is conspiracy and all of the persons who perpetuated the robbery are liable of the crime of robbery with homicide.
People vs. Tapales

Hinoldup yung mag-boyfriend sa taxi tapos nirape yung babae at pinatay yung lalaki. Robbery with homicide-where the crime charged is robbery with homicide and rape, the legal definition of the crime is robbery with homicide with rape considered as an aggravating circumstance. The Court has consistently held that the legal definition of the crime committed herein is Robbery with Homicide, with Rape being considered an aggravating circumstance. It is the uniform jurisprudence of the Supreme Court that where the crime charged is robbery with homicide and rape, the legal definition of the crime is robbery with homicide punishable under par 1, Art 294 of the RPC and the rape committed on the occasion of that the crime is considered an aggravating circumstance. Instead of ignominy, therefore, it is the rape itself that aggravates.
People vs. Calixto Robbed the bank and one of the robbers was accidentally hit and eventually died. No suspect as to who caused the death. Members of a group of robbers can be held criminally liable for robbery in band with homicide where in course of robbery they shot and killed one of their own group.
People vs. Quinones Robbed a car by putting sacks on the road and committed multiple murder. Special complex crime-there is no crime of robbery with multiple homicide under the RPC the number of persons killed is immaterial and does not increase the penalty under 294 of the said CodeThe Court finds that the accused were incorrectly sentenced by the trial court. The reason is that there is no crime robbery with multiple homicide under the RPC. The charge should have been for robbery with homicide only regardless of the fact that three persons were killed in the commission of the robbery. In this special complex crime, the number of persons killed is immaterial and does not increase the penalty in Art 294. Reclusion perpetua even when multiple killings were present. One penalty.
People vs. Biruar Accused pretended to be relatives and when they were allowed to come up the house, they robbed the house. They then burned a house also in the same neighborhood after they got the gun and some properties from the previous house and then to another. Accused were charged with 3 separate crimes of robbery in Band. Herein accused performed different acts with distinct purposes which resulted in juridically independent crimes. The burning of the house of George Kalitas was not the means in committing the robbery. The evidence shows that the accused gained entry into the house of Kalitas by breaking the door with an axe and not but burning the same.
People vs. Pecato The relatives of the victim were the ones who killed him and before they did so, they asked him if he recognizes them. Actual Participation in the Homicide is not necessary unless it clearly appeared that the accused endeavored to prevent the homicide As long as the homicide resulted during or because of, the robbery, even if the killing is by mere accident, robbery with homicide is committed; it is only the result obtained, without reference or distinction as to the circumstances, causes, modes, or persons intervening in the commission of the crime that has to be taken into consideration. Further, whenever a homicide has been committed as a consequence of or on the occasion of a robbery, all those who took part as principals in the commission of the crime are also guilty as principals in the special complex crime of robbery with homicide although they did not actually take part in the homicide unless it clearly appeared that they endeavored to prevent the homicide.
ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE People vs. Mangulabnan Case where the father hid himself inside the ceiling.
ROBBERY WITH RAPE People vs. Patola Accused were drinking beer in front of the store and when it was closing time already, raped the 2 salesgirls.
Robbery with rape with the use of a deadly weapon, a complex crime. Penalty for robbery with qualified rape under Art. 294(2) or 335. There used to be a controversy as to whether robbery with qualified rape should be penalized under Art. 294 (2) or under 335 which imposes a penalty of reclusion perpetua to death. That controversy was set at rest where it was held that robbery with qualified rape should be punished under Art. 294 (2). It should be stressed that in this case the accused were not charged with qualified rape alone, a crime against chastity, but with robbery with rape, a crime against property. The trial court applied in this case Art. 335. It regarded article 294(2) as having been amended by Art. 335. That is why it imposed the death penalty.
the RPC. But there are aggravating circ which have to be considered such as dwelling, nocturnity and the use of a motor vehicle. People vs. Balacanao A house was robbed and the wife was raped by the robbers. It was supposed to be the young girl but she was spared. All the conspirators-participants are liable as principals of the crime of robbery with rape. Every complaint or information should state not only the qualifying but also the aggravating circumstances.

295 provies that when the offenses dexcribed in subdivisions 3, 4, 5 of 295 are committed by a band, the proper penalties must be imposed in the maximum. The circumstances of band is therefore qualifying ony in robbery punished by sub 3, 4, 5 or 294. Consequently, art 295 is inapplicable with homicide, rape, intentional mutilation, and lesions graves resulting in insanity, imbecility, impotency or blindness. If the foregoing classes of robbery which are described in 294 1 and 2 are perpetrated by a band, they would not be punishable under 295 but then cuadrilla would be a generic aggravating circ under art. 14. There is no crime as robbery with homicide under 294(1) but the element of band, as stated above, would be appreciated as ordinary aggravating circ. With regard to their use of unlicensed firearm, in order for this to be appreciated as special aggravating circ to justify the imposition of the max period of the proper penalty, it is a condition sine qua non that the offense charged be robbery committed by a band within the contemplation of Art. 295. Since 295 does not apply to subdivisions 1 and 2 of 294 (the accused is charged under 294(1), then the special aggravating factor in question which is solely applicable to robbery in band under 295 cannot be considered in fixing the penalty even when the crime was committed by a band and the use of unlicensed firearm.
ROBBERY WITH PHYSICAL INJURIES People vs. Salvilla Robbery; from the moment the offender gained possession of the thing, even if the culprit had no opportunity to dispose of the same, the unlawful taking is complete. It is no defense either that appellant and his coaccused had no opportunity to dispose of the personal things taken. That fact does not affect the nature of the crime. From the moment the offender gained possession of the thing, even if the culprit had no opportunity to dispose of the same, the unlawful taking is complete. The crime of serious illegal detention was such a necessary means as it was selected by appellant and his co-accused to facilitate and carry out their evil design to stage a robbery. Under Art 48, a complex crime arises when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other. The term necessary means does not connote indispensable means for if did then the offense as a necessary means to commit another would be an indispensable element of the latter and would be an ingredient thereof. The phrase necessary means merely signifies that one crime is committed to facilitate and insure the commission of the other.
People vs. Dinola Case where a 34 laborer raped a 17-year old girl then robbed her watch after raping her. If the original design was to commit rape but the accused after committing rape also committed robbery bec the opportunity presented itself, the criminal acts should be viewed as two distinct offenses, The taking of the watch by the accused was more of an afterthought, even accidental. If the intention of the accused was to commit robbery but rape was also committed even before the robbery, the crime of robbery with rape is committed. However, if the original design was to commit rape but the accused after committing rape also committed robbery bec the opportunity presented itself, the criminal acts should be viewed as two distinct offenses.
ROBBERY BY THE USE OF FORCE UPON THINGS People vs. Jaranilla Taking of six roosters. One essential requisite of robbery with force upon things under 299 and 302 is that the malefactor should enter the building or dependency where the object to be taken is found. Art 299 and 302 clearly contemplate that the malefactor should enter the building. If the culprit did not enter the building, there would be no robbery with force upon things. Building-any structure not mentioned in 299 used for storage and safekeeping of personal property. It is not an indispensable element of theft that the thief carry, more or less far away, the thing taken by him from its owner.
People vs. Moreno The house was robbed and the maids were raped but the maids didnt testify as witness. They only executed affidavits. One who did not take part in rape but only in robbery is guilty only of robbery. Dwelling, nighttime and use of vehicle aggravating n rape. Accused Juan Moreno, who took no part in the rape is guilty of robbery only under 294 (5) of the RPC but as to the accused who raped the maid guilty of the special complex crime of robbery with rape under 294 (2) of
ROBBERY IN BAND People vs. Apduhan Robbery with homicide-interrelation among art 294, 295, 296 of the RPC.
CARNAPPING RA 6539 PD 532

travel from one place to another thereby disturbing the peace and tranquility of the nation and stunting the economic and social progress of the people. A conviction for highway robbery requires proof that the accused were organized for the purpose of committing robbery indiscriminately. There is no such proof in this case. Neither proof of indiscriminate robbery.
People vs. Dela Cruz Conspiracy need not be established by direct evidence of the acts charged, but may and generally must be proved by a number of indefinite acts, condition and circumstances which vary according to the purpose to be accomplished. The existence of conspiracy may be inferred from acts tending to show a community of design or purpose. Even if the sworn statements of appellants Beloso and Salvador are declared inadmissible for having been given without the presence of counsel, their culpability is borne out by evidence independent of the same. Their liability was proven by the physical evidence on record. Carnapping with homicide-carnapping defined as the taking, with intent to gain, of a motor vehicle belonging to another without the latters consent, or by means of violence against or intimidation of persons, or by using force upon things. There is a graduation of penalty for carnapping alone, carnapping with intimidation of persons and force upon things and carnapping with homicide.
People vs. Puno For kidnapping to exist, there must be indubitable proof that the actual intent of the malefactors was to deprive the offended party of her luberty and not where such restraint of her freedom of action was merly an incident in the commission of another offense primarirly intended by the offenders. Ransom is the money price or consideration paid or demanded for redemption of a captured person or persons, a payment that releases from captivity vs. cash and checks given at gunpoint voluntarily. PD 532 is not a modification of ART 267 of the RPC on kidnapping and serious illegal detention but of 306 and 307 on brigandage. The main objective of the Brigandage Law is to prevent the formation of a band by more than three armed persons for the purposes indicated in 306. On the other hand, if robbery is committed by a band, whose members were not primarily organized for the purpose of committing robbery or kidnapping etc the crime would not be brigandage but only robbery. The purpose of brigandage is, inter alia, indiscriminate highway robbery. If the purpose is only a particular robbery, the crime is only robbery, or robbery in band if there are at least four armed participants. PD 532 punishes as highway robbery or brigandage only acts of robbery perpetrated by outlaws indiscriminately against any person or persons on Phil highways as defined therein and not acts of robbery committed against only a predetermined or particular victim.
CATTLE RUSTLING PD 533
Taer vs. CA Yung kalabaw na pinaalaga kay Taer. Mere approval of an act without cooperation does not constitute conspiracy. Mere knowledge, acquiescence to, or approval of the act, without cooperation or agreement to cooperate, is not enough to constitute one a part to a conspiracy absent the intentional participation in the transaction with a view to the furtherance of the common design and purpose. A person who took care of stolen carabaos, a mere accessory. At most the facts establish Taers knowledge of the crime. At yet without having participated either as principal or as an accomplice, for he did not participate in the taking of the carabaos, he took part subsequent to the commission of the act of taking by profiting himself by its effects.
Izon vs. People Vehicles which use streets with or without the required license comes withing the protection of the law. Highways are always public, free for the use of every person. There is nothing in the law that requires a license to use a public highway to make the vehicle a motor vehicle within the definition given the anticarnapping law. Ex. Test runs of vehicles before being bought. Tricycle considered as motor vehicle. Any vehicle which is motorized using the streets which are public, not exclusively for private use, comes within the concept of motor vehicle. Tricycle is not included in the exceptions and is deemed to be that kind of motor vehicle defined.
Ordonio vs. CA Case where the calf went to its mom. Castle rustling as defined in Sec 2(C) of PD 533 is taking away by any means, methods or schemes, without the consent of the owner/raiser, of any of the abovementioned animals whether or not for profit or gain, or whether committed with or without violence against or intimidation of any person or force upon things .It includes the killing of large cattle, or taking its meat or hide without the consent of the owner/raiser.
People vs. Pulusan A conviction for highway robbery requires proof that he accused were organized for the purpose of committing robbery indiscriminately. As manifest in its preamble, the object of the decree is to deter and punish lawless elements who commit acts of depredation upon persons or properties of innocent and defenseless inhabitants who
HIGHWAY ROBBERY
THEFT
People vs. Gulinao Theft was committed, not robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of person; taking of ring of victim was merely an afterthought and the force employed in the killing has no bearing on the taking of the ring. Intent to gain is presumed from the unlawful taking of the car.
a.
Santos vs. People Case where the car was brought to a repair shop but it wasnt repaired and wasnt returned. Theft distinguished from estafa; if the accused was only entrusted with de facto possession of the thing, his misappropriation of the same constitutes theft. The principal distinction bet the two crimes is that in theft the thing is taken while in estafa the accused receives the property and converts it to his own use or benefit. There be theft even if the accused has possesstion of the property. If he was entrusted only with the material or physical (natural) or de facto possession of the thing, his misappropriation of the same constitutes theft, but if he has the juridical possession of the things, his conversion of the same constitutes embezzlement or estafa. b.
jurisdiction in which the search warrant must be sought and secured. The offense of illegal fishing is committed when a person catches, takes or gathers or causes to be caught, taken or gathered fish, fishery or aquatic products in Phil waters with the use of explosives, electricity, obnoxious or poisonous substances. The law creates a presumption that illegal fishing has been committed when: explosives, obnoxious or poisonous substances or equipment or device for electric fishing are found in a fishing boat or in the possiosion of a fisherman when fist caught or killed with the use of explosives, etc are found in a fishing boat. There is a presumption that the operator or the fishermen are engaged in illegal fishing under these circ.

On the contrary, this Court rules that such possession is penalized in the said section bec lumber is included in the term timber. Illegal Logging; Revised Forestry Code of the Phil; where a lumber-dealers license or permit has been suspended, he has absolutely no right to possess, sell, or otherwise dispose of lumber and the Secretary or Environment and Natural Resources or his authorized representative has the authority to seize the lumber.
FENCING PD 1612
ESTAFA A. THROUGH UNFAITHFULNESS OF ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE
QUALIFIED THEFT Empelis vs. IAC How qualified and simple theft of coconuts committed: Art 310 states that the crime of theft shall be punished by the next higher degree if the property stolen consists of coconut taken from the premises of a palantation. Stealing of coconuts when they are still in the tree of deposited on the ground within the premises is qualified theft. When the coconuts are stolen in any other place, it is simple theft.
Manahan vs. CA a. Elements of estafa: that personal property os received in trust, on commission, for administration or under any other cic involving the duty to make delivery of or to return the same, even though the obligation is guaranteed by a bond that there is conversion or diversion of such property by the person who has so recived it or a denial on his part that he received it that such conversion, diversion or denial is to the injury of another that there be a demand for the return of the property. Although a contract of lease is not fiduciary in nature, still the clause any other obligation involving the duty to make delivery of or return personal properry is borad enough to include a civil obligation. Equally essential before the offense of estafa under 315(b) of the RPC can be considered committed, is that the refusal or failure to deliver or return is, in turn, predicated on misappropriation or conversion by the accused of the subject of the obligation. But it was shown that accused did exert all efforts to recover and retrieve the dump truck from Gorospe. He was not convicted criminally but only liable civilly.
b. c. d.
THEFT OF ELECTRICITY; ILLEGAL WATER, ELECTRIC OR TELEPHONE CONNECTIONS PD 401; RA 7832; RA 8041
ILLEGAL LOGGING PD 330 PD 705, sec. 68
ILLEGAL FISHING RA 8550 sec. 86 et seq. Hizon vs. CA Search and seizure without search warrant of vessles and aircrafts for violations of customs laws have been the traditional exceptions to the constitutional requirement of a search warrant. It is rooted on the recognition that a vessel and an aircraft, like motor vehicles, can be quickly moved out of the locality or
Mustang Lumber, Inc. vs. CA The foregoing disquisitions should not, in any manner, be construed as an affirmance of the respondent Judges conclusion that lumber is excluded from the coverage of Sec 68 of PD 705 as amended, and thus possession thereof without the legal documents is not a crime.

Saddul vs. CA The words convert or misappropriate connote an act of using or disposing of anothers property as if it were ones onw, or of devoting it to a purpose or use different from that agreed upon. To misappropriate to ones own use includes, not only conversion to ones personal advantage, but also every attempt to dispose of the property of another without right. Conversion is an unauthorized assumption and exercise of the right of ownership over goods or personal chattels belonging to another, resulting in the alteration of their condition or the exclusion of the owners rights. It takes place when a person actually appropriates the property of another to his own benefit, use and enjoyment. TRUST RECEIPTS PD 115 Celino vs. CA Pinaniwalang may dwende at may kayamanan. Art 315, 2(a)Any person who shall defraud another by any of the means mentioned herinbelow shall be punished by: xxx2. By means of any of the ff false pretenses of fraudulent acts executed prior to or simultaneously with the commission of the fraud: (a) By using a fictitious name, or falsely pretending to possess power, influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business or imaginary trasactions; or by means of other similar deceits. offender would at least be guilty of attempted estafa. Appellant commenced the commission of the crime of estafa but he failed to perform all the acts of execution of execution which would produce the crime, not by reason of his own spontaneous desistance but bec of his apprehension by the authorities before he could obtain the amount. Since only the intent to cause damage and not the damage itself has been shown, resp court correctly convicted appellant of attempted estafa.
People vs. Ong Elements of estafa in general are:
Abejuela vs. People Estafa thru falsification of commercial documents; Although petitioner was unaware of the criminal workings in the mind of Balo, he nevertheless unwittingly contributed to their eventual consummation by recklessly entrusting his passbook to Balo and by signing the withdrawal slipsBanco Filipino suffered damages. Although Abejuela was unaware of the criminal workings in the mind of Balo, he nevertheless unwittingly contributed to their eventual consummation by recklessly entrusting his passbook to Balo and by signing the withdrawal slips. Abuejuela failed to exercise prudence and care.
Allied Banking Corp vs. Ordonez In trust receipts, there is an obligation to repay the entruster. Their terms are to be interpreted in accordance with the general riles on contracts, the law being alert in all cases to prevent fraud on the part of either party to the transaction. The entrustee binds himself to sell or otherwise dispose of the entrusted goods with the obligation to turn over to the entruster the proceeds if sold, or return the goods if unsold or not otherwise disposed of, in accordance with the terms and conditions specified in the trust receipt. A violation of this undertaking constitutes estafa under sec. 13, PD 115.
(1) that the accused defrauded another a. by abuse of confidence or b. by means of deceit (2) that damage of prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the offended party or third person; In crime of estafa by postdating or issuing a bad check, deceit and damage are essential elements of the offense and have to be established with satisfactory proof to warrant conviction. RA 4885 has eliminated the requirement under the old provision for the drawer to inform the payee that he had no funds in the bank of the funds deposited by him were not sufficient to cover the amount of the check. In this case, the prosecution failed to prove that accused-appellant had such knowledge with respect to the subject checks that he indorsed. BOUNCING CHECKS BP 22 Nierras vs. Dacuycuy People vs. Grospe BP 22 Circular Que vs. People People vs. Nitafan Lim Lao vs. CA Idos vs. CA OTHER DECEITS Villaflor vs. CA Veloso vs. Sandiganbayan SWINDLING BY SYNDICATE
Koh Tieck Heng vs. People The use of the spurious checks by itself fraud or deceit, one of the two essential requisites of the crime of estafabasically the two essential requisites of fraud or deceit and damage or injury must be established by sufficient and competent evidence in order that the crime of estafa may be established. Deceit is the false representation of a matter of fact (whether by words or conduct, by false or misleading allegations, or by concealment of that which should have been disclosed) which deceives or is intended to deceive another so that he shall act upon it to his legal injury. Although one of the essential elements of estafa is damage or prejudice to the offended party, in the absence of proof thereof the
Lee vs. Rodil Trust receipts Law; Violation of a trust receipt agreement constitutes the crime of estafa. PD 115 was not applied in the Cuevo and Sia cases bec the questioned acts were committed before its effectivity. THROUGH FALSE PRETENSES, FRAUDULENT ACTS OR MEANS
B.
PD 1689
Crimes Against Honor LIBEL
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF Caballes vs. DAR PD 1728
Crimes Against Chastity ACTS OF LASCIVIUOUSNESS People vs. Famularcano CHILD PROSTITUTION RA 7610, sec. 5 and 6
Malit vs. People Mercado vs. CFI Agbayani vs. Sayo Newsweek vs. IAC Lacsa vs. IAC Soriano vs. IAC Bulletin Publishing Corp vs. Noel Santos vs. CA Sazon vs. CA Vasquez vs. CA SLANDER SLANDER BY DEED INCRIMINATING AN INNOCENT PERSON WIRETAPPING RA 4200
Quasi-Offenses QUALIFIED SEDUCTION People vs. Fontanilla Babanto vs. Zosa Perez vs. CA ABDUCTION; FORCIBLE ABDUCTION WITH RAPE People People People People vs. vs. vs. vs. Sunpongco Jose Alburo Godines OF PRIVATE OFFENSES CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE People vs. Cano Ibabao vs. People Buerano vs. CA Gan vs. CA Carillo vs. People
PROSECTION
Pilapil vs. Ibay-Somera Crimes Against the Civil Status of Person SIMULATION OF BIRTHS People vs. Sangalang BIGAMY People vs. Aragon

Case Ticklers: Criminal Law II

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Ticklers: Criminal Law II

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Law II Case Ticklers PART I Crimes Against National Security and the Law of Nations TREASON Laurel

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 1

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 2

DELAY IN DELIVERY OF DETAINED PERSON EO 272 Rule 112, sec 7 RA 7438

SEARCH WARRANTS MALICIOUSLY OBTAINED

Enrile vs. Amin

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 3

Umil vs. Ramos, supra As a continuing crime.

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 4

Umil vs. Ramos, supra Sedition as a continuing act.

INCITING TO SEDITION US vs Tolentino

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 5

People vs. Abilong

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 6

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 7

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 8

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 9

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 10

PLUNDER RA 7080 Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 11

People vs. Berana

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 12

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 13

UNJUST VEXATION People vs. Reyes

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 14

GRAVE COERCION Timoner vs. People

People vs. Tapales

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 15

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 16

CARNAPPING RA 6539 PD 532

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 17

CATTLE RUSTLING PD 533

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 18

ESTAFA A. THROUGH UNFAITHFULNESS OF ABUSE OF CONFIDENCE

ILLEGAL LOGGING PD 330 PD 705, sec. 68

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 19

People vs. Ong Elements of estafa in general are:

Crimes Against Honor LIBEL

Duman \ I-E \ CRIM I \ Prof. Gutierrez \ Page 20

MALICIOUS MISCHIEF Caballes vs. DAR PD 1728

You might also like