This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
[G.R. No. 117472. June 25, 1996] PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiffappellee, vs. LEO ECHEGARAY y PILO, accused-appellant.
"C O M P L A I N T The undersigned accuses LEO ECHEGARAY Y PILO of the crime of RAPE, committed as follows: That on or about the month of April 1994, in Quezon City, Philippines, the above-named accused, by means of force and intimidation, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously have carnal knowledge of the undersigned complainant his daughter, a minor, 10 years of age, all against her will and without her consent, to her damage and prejudice. DECISION PER CURIAM: Amidst the endless debates on whether or not the reimposition of the death penalty is indeed a deterrent as far as the commission of heinous crimes is concerned and while the attendant details pertaining to the execution of a death sentence remain as yet another burning issue, we are tasked with providing a clear-cut resolution of whether or not the herein accused-appellant deserves to forfeit his place in human society for the infliction of the primitive and bestial act of incestuous lust on his own blood. Before us for automatic review is the judgment of conviction, dated September 7, 1994, for the crime of Rape, rendered after marathon hearing by the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 104, the dispositive portion of which reads: "WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered finding accused LEO ECHEGARAY Y PILO guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of RAPE as charged in the complaint, aggravated by the fact that the same was committed by the accused who is the father/stepfather of the complainant, he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of DEATH, as provided for under RA. No. 7659; to pay the complainant Rodessa Echegaray the sum of P50,000.00 as damages, plus all the accessory penalties provided by law, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay the costs."
P14.00 as temperate damages.00 as civil indemnity. .000. the dispositive portion of which RTC decision reads: WHEREFORE. 2001 in Sangbay. judgment is hereby rendered finding ISAIAS DIZON GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of Murder for which he should suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay the heirs of JETO SANTOS P75. assault and use personal violence upon the person of JETO SANTOS by hitting thrice the latter in the head with the use of stones.000. Quirino. J. Nagtipunan. As eyewitness accounts pointed to Rodel Dizon (Rodel). the Court of Appeals affirmed in toto the January 10.00 as moral damages.CASE #2 CARPIO MORALES. and P5. convicting Isaias Dizon (appellant) of Murder. thereby inflicting upon the latter mortal wounds which were the direct and immediate cause of his death thereafter.000. 2002. P50. and Virgilio Pascua (Pascua) as the last persons seen with the victim. the three were immediately arrested and charged before the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor. the lifeless body of Jeto Santos (the victim) was found floating in a creek in Sangbay. Nagtipunan.000. Quirino. the Provincial Prosecutor found probable cause to hale only appellant into court. 2006. Thus appellant was charged for Murder in an Information the accusatory portion of which reads: That on or about 10:00 o’clock to 11:00 o’ clock in the evening of December 24. unlawfully and feloniously attack. 2001. premises considered. herein appellant Isaias Dizon. By Decision of October 31. Quirino. 2005 decision of Branch 38 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Maddela.00 as actual expenses. case On December 25. the said accused with intent to kill and with treachery did then and there willfully. Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. By Resolution of January 29.
an informant arrived at their Station Anti-Illegal Drugs (SAID) with the report that drugs would be sold on P.00 bill with SAID on top of its serial number. On June 2. PO2 Ibañez handed it to him.m. The prosecution presented PO2 Nestor Lehetemas. After the informant introduced PO2 Ibañez as an interested buyer. They stood 10 to 20 steps away beside a red scooter. using the marked P500. When Pallaya asked for the money.A.) 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. They testified that on June 1. Then Pajarin gave one plastic sachet containing the . 2005 the buy-bust team went to the site of the operation on board a Tamaraw FX which they parked near Dominga Street. 29 of the Revised Penal Code. PO2 Ibañez marked a P500. member of the buy-bust team and PO2 James Nolan Ibañez. Luis Pajarin and Efren Pallaya. As the poseur-buyer. the poseur-buyer. of Article II of Republic Act (R. the police officer bought shabu from the two. Pajarin opened the compartment of the red scooter and took from it one heat-sealed transparent plastic sachet containing a white crystalline substance.However.. respectively. CASE #3 This case is about the need for the prosecution and all law enforcement agencies involved in illegal drugs operations to ensure proper observance of the rules governing entrapment of peddlers of prohibited substances.00 bill. The Facts and the Case The City Prosecutor of Manila charged the accused Luis Pajarin and Efren Pallaya before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila in Criminal Cases 05-237756 and 05-237757 with violation of Section 5 in relation to Sections 26 and 11 (3) in relation to Section 13. his preventive imprisonment shall be fully credited to him in the service of his sentence pursuant to Art. PO2 Ibañez and the informant approached them. The informant pointed to the two accused. Ocampo and Dominga Streets the next day at around 5:00 pm. 2005 at around 10:00 p. as amended.
00. instead of in the Catarman Weekly Tribune (of which complainant is the publisher). CASE #4 CARPIO MORALES. charges Judge Alma Consuelo Esidera (respondent). Albert Yruma (Atty. Furthermore. 2010 of Public Prosecutor Ruth Arlene Tan-Ching (Prosecutor Ching) who claimed to have witnessed the first incident.000. Presiding Judge of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Northern Samar. In Criminal Case 05-237757. 2008 the RTC found both accused guilty of the crime charged and imposed on them the penalty of life imprisonment and a fine of P500. Perfecto (complainant). without respondent issuing any receipt. purportedly to defray expenses for a religious celebration and barangay fiesta. Branch 20. In the same Affidavit. in a Complaint which was received at the Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) on March 5. complainant charges respondent with acts of impropriety ─ scolding her staff in open court and treating in an “inhuman and hostile” manner practitioners “who are not her friends. Yruma). the only accredited newspaper in the province. the RTC sentenced Pajarin to suffer 12 years and 1 day to 17 years and 4 months of imprisonment and to pay a fine ofP300.” He adds that respondent .000. Complainant also questions the conduct of respondent in Special Proceedings No.00 in Criminal Case 05-237756.000. and the same amount from Public Prosecutor Rosario Diaz (Prosecutor Diaz). complainant attached the Affidavit dated February 16. J. On March 31. To prove her charge. Prosecutor Ching added that she “heard” that respondent also solicited the same amount from Prosecutor Diaz. 2010 at the Prosecutor’s Office the amount of One Thousand (P1. PO2 Ibañez grabbed Pallaya. Pajarin tried to escape but PO2 Lehetemas got hold of him. who raised his right hand as a pre-arranged signal. C-360. 2010 Order directing the therein petitioner to publish said Order in a newspaper of general circulation.00) from practitioner Atty. 2010.: Eladio D. The RTC absolved Pallaya of this second offense.suspected shabu to the officer.” in which she issued a January 5. “for Cancellation of Birth Registration of Alpha Acibar. of soliciting and receiving on January 6. PO2 Ibañez’s companions immediately rushed to the group.
The Facts An Information charged Sobangee as follows: That on or about the 21st day of November. No. The RTC found accused Evangeline Sobangee y Edaño (Sobangee) guilty of violating Section 5. unlawfully and feloniously sell. Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court. CR-H. the above-named accused. J. (RA) 9165 or the Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs Act of 2002. deliver and give away P150. in the City of Makati.00 worth of Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride (Shabu) weighing eighty . 01904 entitled People of the Philippines v.R. Article II of Republic Act No. Metro Manila. did then and there willfully. which affirmed the October 12. citing instances of this charge in his complaint.: This is an appeal from the February 29.. 2008 Decision of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G. 02-3445 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC).C. without the necessary license or prescription and without being authorized by law.000. CASE #5 VELASCO. for selling methylamphetamine hydrochloride. JR. Evangeline Sobangee y Edaño. 2002. 2005 Decision in Criminal Case No. Branch 65 in Makati City.even arrogantly treats public prosecutors assigned to her sala.
SPO2 Wilmer Antonio (SPO2 Antonio). Yamyamin noticed this and sent Jose Luis back to his .seven point nineteen (87. SPO4 Arsenio Mangulabnan (SPO4 Mangulabnan).: This case is about the private school’s liability for the outside catechist’s act of shoving a student and kicking him on the legs when he disobeyed her instruction to remain in his seat and not move around the classroom.76) grams. while Yamyamin was writing on the blackboard. Gural (P/Insp. At the trial. Senior Police Officer 1 Marvin Fajilan (SPO1 Fajilan). During her arraignment. Jose Luis left his assigned seat and went over to a classmate to play a joke of surprising him. a religion teacher who began teaching at that school only in June of that year. taught Jose Luis’ grade three religion class. On July 14. a dangerous drug.19) grams and forty eight point seventy six (48. The Facts and the Case In 1998 respondent Jose Luis Inton (Jose Luis) was a grade three student at Aquinas School (Aquinas). Respondent Sister Margarita Yamyamin (Yamyamin). the prosecution presented the following witnesses: Police Inspector Lourdeliza M. Sobangee was the only witness for the defense. 5 CASES PERTAIN IN SCHOOL: CASE #1 ABAD. SPO1 Antonio Fulleros (SPO1 Fulleros). Sobangee pleaded not guilty. J. and Police Officer 3 Reynaldo Juan (PO3 Juan). Gural). 1998.
000. SP No.  Jose Luis moved for partial reconsideration but this was denied. and attorney’s fees of P10. appealed directly to this Court from the CA decision through a petition for review on certiorari. Yamyamin approached Jose Luis and kicked him on the legs several times. Aquinas.000. She also pulled and shoved his head on the classmate’s seat. Finally.  CASE #2 ARPIO. Finding that an employer-employee relation existed between Aquinas and Yamyamin. M-008333-2005.R. Private respondent Teodora C.seat. as well as attorney’s fees.000. unable to tolerate the child’s behavior. After a while. she told the child to stay where he was on that spot of the room and finish copying the notes on the blackboard while seated on the floor. This time. for its part. Jose Luis got up again and went over to the same classmate. . Petitioner University of the Immaculate Conception is a private educational institution located in Davao City. The CA. Axalan is the elected president of the employees’ union. They asked the CA to increase the award of damages and hold Aquinas solidarily liable with Yamyamin. 00812 affirming the 15 August 2005 and the 24 October 2005 Resolutions of the National Labor Relations Commission in NLRC CA No. for the hurt that Jose Luis and his mother Victoria suffered. which sustained the 11 October 2004 Decision of the Labor Arbiter in RAB-11-12-01187-03 ordering petitioner to reinstate private respondent to her former position without loss of seniority rights and to pay her backwages. salary differentials. declined to increase the award of damages. This is a petition for review on certiorari of the 13 December 2007 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G. moral.00 plus the costs of suit. exemplary damages of P25. the Intons sought to recover actual. and exemplary damages. holding Yamyamin liable to him for moral damages of P25. The RTC dismissed Victoria’s personal claims but ruled in Jose Luis’ favor. the Intons elevated the case to the Court of Appeals (CA). J. Axalan is a regular faculty member in the university holding the position of Associate Professor II. Aside from being a regular faculty member.00. however. Not satisfied. and attorney’s fees. With regard to the action for damages.00. the CA found them solidarily liable to Jose Luis. damages.
Dean Celestial relayed to Axalan the message of the university president that no administrative charge would be filed if Axalan would admit having been absent without official leave and write a letter of apology seeking forgiveness.From 18 November to 22 November 2002. The dean asked Axalan to explain in writing why no disciplinary action should be taken against her. Axalan explained that before going to Baguio City for the seminar. Convinced that she could not be deemed absent since she held online classes. Maria Assumpta David. From 28 January to 3 February 2003. Axalan then received a memorandum from Dean Maria Rosa Celestial asking her to explain in writing why she should not be dismissed for having been absent without official leave. After conducting hearings and receiving evidence. the ad hoc grievance committee found Axalan to have incurred AWOL on both instances and recommended that Axalan be suspended without pay for six months on each AWOL charge. Axalan claimed that she held online classes while attending the seminar. who must approve the application. Axalan attended a seminar in Quezon City on website development. VP Sayson denied having approved Axalan’s application for official leave. In a letter. she sought the approval of Vice-President for Academics Alicia Sayson. She explained that she was under the impression that faculty members would not be marked absent even if they were not physically present in the classroom as long as they conducted online classes. In reply. Axalan opted not to write the letter of admission and contrition the university president requested. The Dean wrote Axalan that the university president had created an ad hoc grievance committee to investigate the AWOL charge. . The university president approved the committee’s recommendation. In her letter. Dean Celestial wrote Axalan informing her that her participation in the paralegal seminar in Baguio City was the subject of a second AWOL charge. In her letter. Axalan attended a seminar in Baguio City on advanced paralegal training. The VP stated in her letter that it was the university president.
He had been diagnosed to have been suffering from typhus. In denying the university’s motion to dismiss. reinstatement with backwages. upon the expiration of the one-year suspension. was a second year high school student at the Lagao National High School (LNHS). He was sent home after he fell ill and appeared pale. His . respectively. Axalan promptly resumed teaching at the university on 1 October 2004. The university moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground that the Labor Arbiter had no jurisdiction over the subject matter of the complaint. His parents took him back to the hospital but he died some days later. the Labor Arbiter held that there being no existing collective bargaining agreement between the parties. Axalan filed a complaint against the university for illegal suspension. and unfair labor practice with prayer for damages and attorney’s fees. Case #3 The Asian Human Rights Commission (AHRC) has been informed that a 14year-old boy who was recovering from typhus. has died after having been punished by his teacher for failing to do his homework. The boy and other pupils were forced to do continuous squats. The victim had just returned to school from hospital where he was admitted for typhus when he was punished together with other students. On 1 December 2003.The university president then wrote Axalan informing her that she incurred absences without official leave when she attended the seminars on website development in Quezon City and on advanced paralegal training in Baguio City on 18-22 November 2002 and on 28 January-3 February 2003. the university president informed Axalanthat the total penalty of one-year suspension without pay for both AWOL charges would be effective immediately. constructive dismissal. CASE DETAILS: Fourteen-year-old Jovan Samson Pascual. a public school in General Santos City. no grievance machinery was constituted. which barred resort to voluntary arbitration. Meanwhile. The university maintained that jurisdiction lay in the voluntary arbitrator. In the same letter.
Jovan reported back to school after having been absent after being admitted to the hospital for 15 days. On 6 March 2008. when he was being taken home. for him to get the medical attention he needed. even in criminal cases. For the time being. After the incident. although the teacher had been told that Jovan was recovering from typhus she continued the punishment. While Jovan and his other classmates were doing the squats he began to feel ill and appeared pale. However. After arriving at the hospital. On being discharged. Prior to Jovan's death. . It is alleged that Jovan's death could have been a result of the teacher's punishment aggravating his medical condition. the government encourages the settlements of conflicts under the Barangay Justice System.physicians had advised his parents to avoid doing stressful activities and to take a rest at home. started asking her students to produce their homework. Soon after the teachers sent him home and he arrived there his parents immediately took him to the General Santos City Doctors Hospital (GSCDH). When his teacher. they were told that Jovan should be taken to a hospital in Davao City. It has already been reported that the teacher had frequently going to the boy's parent asking forgiveness and offering a settlement. The complainants and the respondents are given opportunity to settle their differences at the village level before pursuing them in court. In the letter which they had given her. he died in the vehicle. In the Philippines. which is about three hours travel from General Santos City. However. however. Jovan was amongst those several students who were unable to do so and he and several other students were then told to come forward in front of their classmates and ordered to do squats. His parents took him to Davao City where he was confined until about March 19. his teacher denied knowing her students' medical condition. they provided explanation of Jovan's health condition and why he had been absent from school. no criminal charges have been filed against the teacher. Leonarda Awayan. his parents had already properly informed his teacher of their son's illness. the boy's parents made a complaint before the Barangay (village) Council of San Isidro in General Santos City. after the incident.
it was reported that two teachers in Tacloban City had been ordered by the Ombudsman to be charged with criminal offenses for violating a law which protects the children from being abused. often do not make any complaints. . students losing interest in going to school out of fear and humiliation or students transferring to other schools--like private schools. Meanwhile. the conditions in public can be trying and teachers have the tendency to resort to using violence and punishments. For example. Unfortunately there are also some parents who tolerate or even consent to the use of punishment when their children are naughty.ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Although corporal punishment in public schools is prohibited. which can sometimes be violent. In the Philippines. Exploitation and Discrimination (RA 7610). because the students. there are teachers who continuously imposed punishments believing that it could be one of effective way in disciplining their pupils and students. who are mostly from poor families. which is an Act Providing for Stronger Deterrence and Special Protection Against Child Abuse. The two teachers were reported to have verbally and physically abused their students. The teachers have taken to using physical punishments. This often results either in death. the number of students in one room can be as high as fifty or over. in January 2007.
Some of them might not be aware but any form of physical violence and mental violence to the students is actually prohibited by our law. Some of them might have violated their rights that is why they will go in court in order for them to defend their selves at the same time it is . which is presented in the report. There are many cases where the teachers used violence for their punishments to their students. They may be hard to be controlled so the teachers must have patience in handling them. There are many cases where the students are really noisy and hard headed especially if they are on their young age or if they belong to grade school level. This only shows that there are a lot of drug sellers and users inside our country and our government needs to take an action regarding to that problem. rape case. the teacher must act professionally in this case by handling their classes the way they should be without showing any physical and mental violence to their students. Social case means that these are problems which addresses to the citizens of the Philippines. But still there are some cases which are not drug related such as the case #1. it seems that most of the violators pertain in school concerns on the teachers. The nature of child is that they are mostly hyper in most activities and has a short span of attention. No matter how hard headed the child might be or how noisy he/she is.INSIGHTS FOR THE 5 CASES PERTAIN IN SCHOOL: Based on our gathered reports. we have noticed that most of the cases or the most common case which is normally presented in the court are cases pertaining or connecting to drugs. This might be cases which refer to selling drugs to other people or the person might be one of the manufacturers of some illegal business here in the Philippines. INSIGHTS FOR THE 5 SOCIAL CASES: In our research regarding the different social cases.
.the task of the court to judge and to create the rightful decision for their corresponding actions.
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue listening from where you left off, or restart the preview.