You are on page 1of 8


, Malcolm, Vill-Real, Abad Santos, Vickers, Imperial,

1. PROSPECTIVE Butte, Goddard, Diaz, J.j.
 Article 366 of RPC - crimes are punished under laws in force at time of their
commission Ratio:
 exceptions: l. Repeal was absolute nor any saving clause
 new law is favorable to accused, unless new law is expressly made m. Legislative intent of municipal council for repeal is that act is no longer deemed
inapplicable to accused, criminal thus illogical to try for an offense that no longer exists.
 when offender is habitual criminal
 Effects of repeal
 if repeal makes penalty light, new law shall be applied except when  Article 14 of Civil Code: Penal laws and those of public security and safety shall be
habitiual criminal or new law is expressly made not applicable obligatory upon all who live or sojourn in the Philippine territory, subject to the principles
of public international law and to treaty stipulations. (8a)
 if repeal imposes heavier penalty, old law at time of commission shall be
applied  binding on all persons who live or sojourn in PH territory
Ccivil court jurisdiction not affected by military character of accused (US v
 if totally repeals old law such that act is no longer considered criminal, the Sweet)
crime is obliterated
 When the repeal is absolute, the offense ceases to be criminal.  Civil courts have concurrent jurisdiction
 When the new law and the old law penalize the same offense, the offender can be tried  Articles of War apply in military courts
under the old law. (US vs CUNA)  Jurisdiction of military courts – service-connected

People of the Philippine Islands (Plaintiff-Appellee) vs Crisanto Tamayo Exceptions:

(Defendant-Appellant) / March 19 1935  Treaty stipulations (see Reyes p. 10-11)
 Appeal from judgment of Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur. Rivera, J.  Laws of preferential application (RA No. 75)
Laws: o Sovereigns and chiefs of state
 Municipal Ordinance No. 5 series of 1932 o Ambassadors, ministers and their servants
Facts: o consuls not entitled unless otherwise provided (Schneckenburger v
 Appellant was convicted in Magsingal, Ilocos Sur of a violation of section 2, Moran)
municipal ordinance No.5 series of 1932
 Appellant moved for dismissal of action on account of repeal of section 2 US vs SWEET / September 20, 1901
 Leading cases (Repeal of criminal act by its reenactment does not destroy US, complainant-appellee vs Philip K. Sweet defendant-appellant
criminal liability):  Appeal from judgment of Court of First Instance of the City of Manila
i. UNITED STATES VS CUNA / December 15, 1908 Laws:
1. The SC said that no retroactive effect of the law shall take effect  Art. 418 of Penal Code
except when the punishment will be more favorable to the accused.
Being that the new law penalized the same act in the repealed law,
 Act No. 136 of the US Philippine commission, section 56 - Courts of First
Instance are given original jurisdiction
there is no retroactivity. The old law should still be prescribed
 Assault was committed by an employee of the US military against a prisoner of
i. If repeal of section 2 destroys criminal liability
 Offense is punishable by Arresto Mayor (1 mo. and 1 day to 6 mos) and fine of
325 to 3250 pesetas (article 418)
 Act No. 136 of US Phil Commission section 56 - courst of first instance are given
Decision: original jurisdiction in all criminal cases in w/c a penalty of more than 6 months
j. Repeal was absolute (not a reenactment or repeal by implication) thus imprisonment or a fine exceeding 100 dollars may be imposed
proceedings against appellant is dismissed
 Complaint was entered by order of commanding general of the Division of 2. Should forge or counterfeit any coin or currency note of the Philippine Islands or
Philippines obligations and securities issued by the Government of the Philippine Islands;
chan robles virtual law library
3. Should be liable for acts connected with the introduction into these islands of the
obligations and securities mentioned in the presiding number;
 W/N military character of person is sufficient to deprive jurisdiction: 4. While being public officers or employees, should commit an offense in the
o Assault committed by a soldier or military employee against a prisoner of exercise of their functions; or
war is not an offense under the penal code 5. Should commit any of the crimes against national security and the law of nations,
o If this is an offense, the military character of the person charged with defined in Title One of Book Two of this Code.chanrobles virtual law library
offense at time of commission exempts him from ordinary jurisdiction of  strictly construed against gov’t/ in favor of accused; presumption of innocence
civil courts  Criminal statutes are strictly construed - no person should be brought within their
Decision: terms who is not clearly within them, nor should any act be pronounced criminal
 Order of court is affirmed with costs to appellant which is not clearly made so
 First proposition:
o Under Spanish Code of Military Justice (no longer in force and never UNITED STATES VS ABAD SANTOS / FEB 10, 1917
applied to US Army): United States, plaintiff-appellee vs Antonio Abad Santos, defendant-appellant
 Military tribunals have exclusive cognizance of offenses done by
military persons Laws:
 It is not less of an offense under the article of the Penal code nor  Section 185 of Act No. 2339 (now section 2727 of the Administrative Code) Internal
any language in the article indicates it does not apply to all persons Revenue Law
wtithin territorial jursidiction of law o Circular No. 467 3rd section on Printers, publishers, contractors, common
 Under arts 4 and 5, military person only incurred criminal carriers
responsibility amenable to military jurisdiction; however, criminal  Laws must be strictly construed
responsibility arose from infraction of general penal laws
 Courts will not hold one criminally responsible for the acts of another committed
 Second proposition: without his knowledge or constent, unless there is a statute requiring it so plain in its
o No provision in legislation (congress, local) which limits jurisdiction of terms that there is no doubt of the intention of the legislature
courts of first instance; therefore general principle that jurisdiction of civil Facts:
tribunal (unaffected by military character of person on trail) must prevail
 Appellant (owner of printing establishment "The Excelsior") is accused of violating
o Claim that acts were performed in execution of orders of his superior may Internal Revenue Law for failure to make an entry for January 5, 1915 and sentenced
be used as defense but cannot affect jurisdiction to fine of 10 pesos
 No actual conflict between two jursidictions as military tribunal did not claim  Internal Revenue Law violated
Concur: Arellano, C.J., Torres, Willard, Mapa, JJ.
 Should accused be held responsible for acts and ommissions of bookkeeper
Cooper, J. : Offense charged against a military officer as a result of obedience
to superior's orders and is done in good faith is not withing jursidiction of civil
tribunal, unless illegality is shown on its face. However, civil courts may examine Decision:
the evidence to determine if acts were done in performance of duty.  Judgment is reversed and accused is acquitted

Art. 2. Application of its provisions. — Except as provided in the treaties and laws of  Undisputed that owner employed a bookkeeper who was in charge of the entry thus
preferential application, the provisions of this Code shall be enforced not only within the failure to make an entry was due to bookkeeper's negligence which apellant did not
Philippine Archipelago, including its atmosphere, its interior waters and maritime zone, order nor knew nothing about
but also outside of its jurisdiction, against those who:  Person should not be held criminally liable for acts of another done without his
1. Should commit an offense while on a Philippine ship or airship knowledge or consent, unless there is a statute requiring it so plain in its terms
 Statute nor circular did not expressly state otherwise
Dissent: Carson and Trent, J.J  Did RTC (Branch 5) have the jurisdiction
 Was writ of Habeas Corpus proper remedy
SUSAN GO and the PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioners, vs. FERNANDO L.  Whether SC-AC 12-2000 is applicable and can be given retrocative application
DIMAGIBA, respondent / JUNE 21, 2005
 Fine of 100,000 when SC-AC 12-2000 reiterated guidance on imposition of fine
 Petition for Review under Rule 45 of Rules of Court of Oct 10, 2001 order of RTC
(Branch 5) Baguio City which ordered release of Dimagiba from confinement and fine
of 100,000
 Petition granted, assailed orders nullified
Laws applied:  Petition for writ of Habeas corpus denied
 Batasang Pambansa 22 (Bouncing Checks Law)  Case be remanded to MTCC and re-arrest of Dimagiba for completion of his
 SC-AC No. 12-2000 - rule of preference in imposing BP 22 penalties
o When act done in good faith, fine may be considered as preferred penalty  No pronouncement as to costs
 Writ of Habeas Corpus - applies to cases of illegal detention or confinement; intended
to test circumstances under which a person is detained; remedy to unlawful restraint Ratio:
o Post-conviction remedy only when: 1. Jurisdiction
1. deprivation of constitutional right resulting to restraint of person
o determination of penalty belongs to court rendering decision against accused
since decision is subject only to appeal on grounds of errors of fact or law,
2. court had no jurisdiction to impose sentence grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction
3. penalty has been excessive o RTC branch 5 did not have jurisdiction to modify judgment in guise of granting
Facts: writ
 Dimagiba issued 13 dishonored/bounced checks to Susan Go for the reason account 2. Habeas Corpus
was closed o May not be availed of when person is under a judicial process or by virtue of a
 Dimagiba was prosecuted and convicted on July 16, 1999 by MTCC (Branch 4) for valid judgment
13 counts of violation of BP 22 filed with Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC) in o Respondent's previous motions, citing same arguments in petition for writ, had
Baguio City- sentenced to 3 months imprisonment and fine of 1,295,000 pesos been denied, thus remedy should have been to appeal of the MTCC order
 Dimagiba appeal and case was raffled to Branch 4 of RTC denying his motions; petition looked like he was forum shopping (finding a
o May 23, 2000 denied appeal and sustained conviction and issued on Feb 1, favorable court)
2001 a Certificate of Finality of the Decision 3. SC-AC 12-2000
o Feb 14, 2001 - MTCC order issued for arrest o Only established a rule of preference and did not delete penalty of
 Feb 27, 2001 - Dimagiba filed Motion for Reconsideration of order to MTCC imprisonment
o Recall of arrest o SC-AC is not a penal law and thus only applies to cases pending
o Modification of final decision to penalty of fine only not imprisonment 4. Modification of Final Judgment
 August 22, 2001 - MTCC denied Motion and directed issuance of Warrant of Arrest o No extraordinary supervening event
and arrested on Sept 28 o Unhealthy physical condition cited by RTC lacks substantial proof and
respondent did not make allegation on health in his Petition for writ,
 October 9, 2001 - Filed a petition for Writ of Habeas corpus with RTC of Baguio –
given to Branch 5 Memorandum and Comment submitted to court
o October 20, 2001 ordered release and 100,000 fine instead of imprisonment
o Justification:
5. Alleged settlement of civil liability
 First time offender and employer of 200 workers
o Civil liability was satisfied through levy and sale of properties only afte
 Civil liability had already been satisfied thru levy of his properties conviction - early settlement could have indicated good faith
 October 22, 2001 - Go filed a Motion for Reconsideration and denied January 18,
2002 thus current petition is filed on questions of law
o Punishment was due to criminal liability not civil liability (not failure to pay o Sixteen wounds: five fatal as they penetrated the internal organs
obligation but act of issuance of dishonored checks) - offense against the o Multiple puncture, stab, incision, and lacerated wounds
community/public order
 Feb 23 - Augusto voluntarily surrendered to Police Corporal Ben Sazon for
having been involved in the killing
DEFINITION OF FELONY  August 26- information was filed by the Provincial Fiscal of Iloilo against the
1. PEOPLE VS GONZALES / MARCH 19, 1990 spouses:
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appelle, vs. Fausta Gonzales, Augusto o Gonzales spouses along with four other unknown companions conspired
Gonzales, Custodio Gonzales Sr., Nerio Gonzales, and Rogelio Lanida, accused; with deliberate intent and decided purpose to kill
Custodio Gonzales Sr., accused-appellant
 September 16- arraignment; both pleaded ‘not guilty.’
 October 6 - Jose Huntoria presented himself to the wife of the deceased, Nanie
Laws: Penacerrada and claims to be a witness. A reinvestigation of the case was
 Article 3 of RPC. Definitions called, in which several more were filed as accused, including the appellant. All
o Acts and omissions punishable by law are felonies (delitos). except for Fausta pleaded not guilty.
o Felonies are committed not only be means of deceit (dolo) but also by  Trial witnesses - Dr. Jesus Rojas, Paja, Patrolman Salvador Centeno, Corporal
means of fault (culpa). Ben Sazon,Sgt Nicolas Belicanao, Sgt. Reynaldo Palomo, Jose Huntoria, Nanie
o There is deceit when the act is performed with deliberate intent and there Penacerrada
is fault when the wrongful act results from imprudence, negligence, lack of o Huntoria’s alleged testified on July 27, 1982
foresight, or lack of skill.  At 5 pm on Feb. 21, 1981, he left work and passed at the vicinity of
 Article 4. Criminal liability. - Criminal liability shall be incurred: the Gonzales spouses’ home at 8:00 pm and heard cries for help
By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done and approached the place
be different from that which he intended.  15-20 m away from the scene saw all the accused ganging upon
By any person performing an act which would be an offense against the deceased near a threshing platform
persons or property, were it not for the inherent impossibility of its  After stabbing and hacking the victim, the accused lifted his body
accomplishment or an account of the employment of inadequate or and carried it to the house. Huntoria then left home and related
ineffectual means. what he saw to his wife and mother
 Elements of felonies:  Eight months after the incident, due to conscience and the fact that
There must be an act or ommission his father was a tenant of the deceased, he came to the widow
Act or ommission must be punishable under RPC o Dr Rojas testimony:
Act is performed or ommission incurred by means of deceit or fault  Five of 16 were fatal wounds. Rojas admitted one of two
Facts:  Only one weapon might have caused all the wounds
 At around 9:00 p.m. of February 21, 1981, Bartolome Paja, barangay captain of  Multiple instruments were used due to the number and
Brgy. Tipacla, Ajuy, Iloilo, was awakened by spouses Augusto and Fausta and different characteristics
tolled latter killed their landlord, Lloyd Penacerrada, and would like to surrender o Appellant claimed he was asleep in his house one km away from scene
to authorities. Knife used in killing was seen, and blood was found smeared on and only came to know when his grandchildren went to his house that
Fausta’s dress. night
 Spouses were taken by the nephew to the police at the Municipal Hall in  Oct 31, 1984 - RTC of Iloilo, Branch 38 found all accused guilty of murder
Poblacon, Ajuy. (Article 248 in RPC)
 Patrolman Salvador Centeno, Paja, and Augusto went back to Augusto's  October 27, 1987 - Appeal to Court of Appeals of Custodio Gonzales Sr.:
residence at Sitio Nabitasan where the killing occurred, and found the body of o Found no merit on both errors (convicting him on basis of testimony of
the deceased - a rough sketch of the area was made by patrolman. witness and rejecting his defense of alibi)
 Feb 22- patrolman, accompanied by a photographer, went back to the scene for o Reclusion perpetua instead of temporal as there was no aggravating
further investigations. circumstance
 Feb 22 - Autopsy at 11:20 am, Municipal Hall of Ajuy; report shows the following: o 30,000 as indemnification
The case is now brought upon certification by the Court of Appeals, hence the appeal. On the lone witness:
 Delay of coming out puts doubt on his veracity (accuracy)
Issue(s): Whether or not the client, under the evidence presented, has committed the  Huntoria’s credibility as a witness is tarnished by two points:
felony of murder.
 Fear for his life lacked proof that he was being threatened and coming out
Decision: Decision of the CA is reversed and set aside. Appellant acquitted. Costs de still put his life in danger as accused were still free upon testifying
 Not a disinterested witness - tenant of the deceased, and stated this as
one of the reasons
 Witness also has financial troubles but was taken under uncle of
Court’s analysis of the evidence: landlord's protection, given employment, and shelter for family
 Investigation conducted left much to be desired.
o Centeno gave the date of commission as March 21, 1981.  It is improbable for the accused to bring their aging father as it was unlikely for
o The sketch did not effectively indicate the amount of blood stains in the the appellant to offer his services
scenes of crime - would have helped indicate which of two versions  Although alibi is a weak defense, in cases like this where the participation of the
(bedroom or near threshing plant) is credible appellant is not clear, it may be considered.
o Sazon failed to state clearly the reason for the surrender of Augusto
 may be possible that Augusto surrendered just so he could be safe Is UNLAWFUL ACT a CRIME
from the victim’s kin.  Unlawful acts are not always considered crimes but crimes are
 Sazon also admitted that Augusto never mentioned the considered unlawful acts
participation of other persons
 Rojas’ statement showed two possibilities for the killing thus Fausta’s admission Mala in Se - wrong in itself; inherently wrong by nature
that she was the only killer is plausible. Mala Prohibita - wrong because act violates a statute or law
 Huntoria first claimed that he clearly saw all accused taking turns in hacking and
stabbing. However, in the cross-examination, he admitted not knowing who did
what and what weapon by used by each.
United States, plaintiff- appellee vs Go Chico defendant - appellant
o Thus failing to pinpoint exactly what was contributed by appellant in the
o Nothing in findings indicate appellant as principal by direct participation Laws:
nor incriminating him bt inducement or indispensable cooperation  Section 1 of Act No. 1696 of the Philippine Commission. The Flag Law
On the criminal liability of the appellant:  Violated Flag Law - Section 1 of Act No. 1696 with punishment of fine 500 - 500
 There is nothing in the findings or the evidence that establishes the criminal 000 pesos or imprisonment of 3 mos to 5 years or both
liability of the appellant as a principal for direct participation under Art. 17, para.  Appellant was charged with violation and fined 500 pesos and pay costs of
1 of RPC, nor inculpate him by inducement, under paragraph 2 action and suffer imprisonment until fine is paid
 Based on the definition of felonies in Art. 3 of the Revised Penal Code, the  August 4, 1908 - appellant Go Chico displayed in one of the windows and one
prosecution’s evidence could not establish intent nor fault. Recall that the of the show cases of his store in No. 89 Calle Rosario, Manila, a number of
elements of felonies include: medallions, in the form of a small button, upon which were printed the miniature
 An act or omission faces of Emilio Aguinaldo and the flag or banner or device used during the late
insurrection in the Phil. Islands to designate and identify those in armed
 Act or omission must be punishable insurrection against the United States.
 Act is performed or omission incurred by deceit or fault  Previous day, the appellant had purchased the said medallion sold at a public
 Lack of proof as to what act was performed by appellant that inflicted harm to the sale under the authority of the sheriff of the city of Manila.
body of victim which led to death
 Appellant was arranging his stock of goods (including said medallion) for the
 Five stab wounds also indicate that only five out six accused could have dealt a purpose of displaying them to the public, and in doing so, he placed the
fatal wound (or even less) medallions in his showcase and on one of the windows of his store.
 The appellant was ignorant of any law against the display of such medallions o Search of moving vehicles
and had consequently no corrupt intention. i. Due to impracticability of securing a warrant
 2 propositions for acquittal: ii. Search and seizure may be made only upon probable cause
o No criminal intent  Odor of marijuana
o Prohibition of law is directed against the use of identical banners,  Informer identified accused that was acting suspiciously
devices or emblems ACTUALLY USED not duplicates  Accused fled
 Accused was riding a jeepney were stopped due to reports that
Issue: accused were transporting large amount of marijuana
 Whether or not criminal intent is necessary in crimes punishable by special  Moving vehicle stopped and searched based on intelligence
laws. reports
 Whether or not language of said law is applicable to duplicates o Seizure in plain view
Decision: o Customs searches
Ratio: o Waiver by the accused of right against unreasonable search and seizure
 The court ruled that the act alone, irrespective of its motive, constitutes the Facts:
crime.  Version of prosecution:
o Wording is plain such that act and intent are inseparable o PO3 Carlito P. Valenzuela and Angelito Camero were patroling area under
o Criminal intent is not necessary for criminal liability direct order from General Nazareno when at 2pm taxicab passed by patrol car
 The words “used during the late insurrection in the Philippine Islands to looking suspicious
designate or identify those in armed rebellion against the United States” mean o Appellant Marlon was seated at front while Noriel at the left back
not only the identical flags actually used in the insurrection, but any flag which o PO3 Valenzuela asked permission to search to which accused consented
is of that type. The description refers not to a particular flag, but to a type of flag
which evoked emotions.  Searched the luggages (knapsack and dark blue plastic grocery bag)
o when language of law is ambiguous, interpretation may be derived from  When asked what the plastic contained, Noriel answered vomit
intent or purpose of original lawmakers  PO3 Valenzuela then made a whole and smelled the marijuana and
thus opened to see dried marijuana leaves
PEOPLE VS LACERNA / SEPT 5 1997  Accused affirmed such contents when told
People of the Philippines, plaintiff -appellee vs Marlon Lacerna y Aranador accused-  Both said that the bag was from their uncle to be brought to Iloilo
appellant 18 blocks were counted and examined by NBI Forensic Chemist Aida A.
Laws:  Version of defense:
 Dangerous Drugs Act One bag contained accused's belongings, the other their uncle Edwin's
o Section 4. Sale, Administration, Delivery, Distribution and Transportation of Both consented to searchdue to confidence they had done no wrong
Prohibited Drugs. …any person who, unless authorized by law, shall sell, First bag was examined in front of them, the other at the back of the car
administer, deliver, give away to another, distribute, dispatch in transit or They were brought in a cell to be maltreated by the Kabo to force admission
transport any prohibited drug, or shall act as a broker in any such transactions.
 Noriel was boxed on the chest, blindfolded, and plastic bag placed on
o Section 8. Possession or Use of Prohibited Drugs his neck and strangled
 Elements of Illegal Possession of Prohibited Drugs Both refused to sign Booking and Arrest report but impressed their fingerprint
o Accused is in possession of an item or object which is identified to be a on a white paper
prohibited drug They were brought to the Inquest Prosecutor at the City Hall and Melencio
o Such possession is not authorized by law threatened them to admit the charges, mentioning the vulva of their mother;
o Accused freely and consciously possessed the prohibited drug Afraid, both admitted charges
Facts prior:
 Exceptions to warrantless arrest
o Search is incidental to a lawful arrest  Marlon had met the uncle on Sept 11 and upon knowing his trip to iloilo
asked for the favor
 Both did not inspect contents as it was twisted and knotted on top o Prosecution must prove that possession of the prohibited drugs was done
 Marlon was going to Iloilo to get requirements for his application to freely and consciously (Section 8)
Marines while Noriel was in Manila to look for a job and was only asked i. Denial of knowledge of the contents was insufficient to overcome
by Marlon to come with him to Iloilo the day before presumption he is the owner of the bag.
 Ruling:
Marlon was charged before the RTC for “giving away” marijuana to another RAPE BY SEXUAL ASSAULT AND ACTS OF LASCIVIOUSNESS
violating Section 4
Noriel on the other hand was acquitted for insufficiency of evidence for People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee vs Heracleo Abello Y Fortada, accused-
showing “probinsyano” traits and was, thus, unlikely to have dealt in prohibited appellant
drugs. Laws Involved:
 RA 8353 Anti Rape Law of 1997
 Marlon appealed the RTC’s decision:  Second paragraph of Article 266-A of RPC
stating that the lower court erred in saying that the act of “giving away to o Elements of Sexual Assault:
another” does not require knowledge
1. Offender commits an act of sexual assault committed by any of
Credence was not given to statement that he was not aware of the contents of the ff:
the plastic bag
a. Inserting his penis into another person's mouth or anal
Erred in convicting despite failure of prosecturion to prove his guilt beyond orifice
reasonable doubt
2. Act is accomplished by:
a. By using force or intimidation; or
 W/N right against warrantless arrest/seizure violated b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or
 W/N conviction for appellant "giving away to another" the marijuana was correct otherwise unconscious;
 W/N appellant is guilty of illegal possession  RA 7610
 Children" refers to person below eighteen (18) years of age or those over
Decision: but are unable to fully take care of themselves or protect themselves
 Judgment Modified: appellant is convicted of illegal possession of prohibited drugs from abuse, neglect, cruelty, exploitation or discrimination because of a
physical or mental disability or condition
 Sentenced in accdance to Indeterminate Sentence Law (8 -12 yrs)
 Essential elements of acts of lasciviousness committed against a child:
 Fine of 12 000 pesos
Accused commits the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct
Act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse
The child is below 18 years of age
Warrantless search and seizure
The taxi was validly stopped at the police checkpoint.  Art. 336. Acts of lasciviousness. -
o Elements:
Probable cause was not evident but search was valid due to consent given by That the offender commits any act of lasciviousness;
That the offended party is another person of either sex; and
i. Marlon expressly said that he was consenting to the search as he
allegedly had nothing to hide and had done nothing wrong. That it is done under any of the following circumstances:
By using force or intimidation; or
 Give away means to transfer ownership, a disposition other than a sale which
involves no consideration When the offended party is deprived of reason or otherwise
unconscious; or
o Handing the plastic bag is nonsense as it can also be said of noriel or PO3
Valenzuela When the offended party is under 12 years of age or is
demented (for Acts against children)
 On illegal possession of prohibited drugs
o Criminal intent need not be proved - Mal Prohibita
o Intent to perpetrate the act must be shown by prosection, not intent to commit
the crime
 Appellant Heracleo Abello y Fortada (Abello) was convicted of one count of rape by  Mere denial of crime cannot take precedence over positive testimony of
sexual assault and two counts of sexual abuse under the Child Abuse Law committed an offended party
against his step daughter, AAA.  Abello admitted he passed by where AAA was sleeping thus showing
 The victim was a 21 year-old girl who contracted polio when she was just 7 months. he had the opportunity and means to commit the crime
 On June 30 at 4:00 am, AAA was sleeping with her sister-in-law and nephew was b. No, relationship has ever been an obstacle
awakened when Abello mashed her breast. c. Unlikely considering the public trial and experience she would have to go
 July 2 at 3:00 am, Abello again mashed the breast of AAA under the same situation through to make up a story and file charges against Abello.
while the latter was sleeping. – recognized Abello due to light from outside
 July 8, 1998, at 2:00am - Abello placed his soft penis inside the mouth of AAA and 2. NO, variance in the mode of commission of the offense is not fatal to conviction and
accidentally kneeled on her right hand awakening the victim and forcing him to enter is binding upon the accused if he fails to object to variance
his room. The victim on the same date reported the incident to her sisterinlaw and a. The Information alleges “force and intimidation” as the mode of commission.
mother. b. However, AAA testified during the trial that she was asleep at the time it
 The CA affirmed Abello’s conviction on appeal and increased the penalties imposed happened and only awoke to find Abello’s male organ inside her mouth.
(reclusion perpetua). c. In the present case, Abello did not object to the variance
 Abello now appeals his conviction for rape:
o He could not have committed the crime considering he is the stepfather 3. NO, appellant cannot be held guilty under the RA 7610 Child Abuse Law but he can
o Victim admitted she was asleep and thus could have dreamt only be held for Article 336 Acts of Lasciviousness
Issue: a. AAA cannot be considered a child under Section 3(a) of R.A. No. 7610
 On appeals of Abello i. 21 year old
o WoN the defense's testimony of Abello is credible ii. Prosecution must show that victim belongs to "those not able to fully
o WoN relationship insulates him from crimes charged take care or protect themselves" through evaluation of a qualified
o WoN AAA could have dreamed the situation
b. He is still liable for acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC. “The
character of the crime is not determined by the caption or preamble of the
 WoN the appellant shall be acquitted due to the difference between the modes of information or from the specification of the provision of law alleged to have
commission provided for in the Information for rape and that proven at the trial. been violated; the crime committed is determined by the recital of the ultimate
 WoN appellant is guilty of sexual abuse under the Child Abuse Law. If he’s not, if he facts and circumstances in the complaint or information”
can be liable for an offense other than that stated in the information. 0. NO, the relationship should not be considered as an aggravating circumstance.
 WoN the alternative circumstance of stepfather-stepdaughter relationship should be a. The prosecution failed to present the marriage contract between Abello and
considered as an aggravating circumstance. AAA’s mother.
 WoN aggravating circumstances not mentioned in the Information can be considered b. It was only via an admission by Abello of his marriage to AAA’s mother. This
to increase the penalty. admission is inconclusive. The court is strict on considering relationship as an
aggravating circumstance because it increases the imposable penalty, and
hence must be proven by competent evidence.
Therefore, appellant is found guilty of rape by sexual assault (Article 226-A of RA 8353) and  Examplary charges were imposed due to dwelling and knowledge of disability cannot
be considered. - based from Article 266-B of RPC
acts of lasciviousness (Article 336 of RPC).

1. On appeals of Abello:
a. No, AAA's testimony was positive, direct, and categorical while accused's was
too strained to be believed.
 No reason was given by defendant for victim to accuse him