Case No. 34: PP vs.

Glino

The SC held in a way of conspiracy. It matters not who among the accused actually
killed Domingo because in conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all. Each of the
accused will considered equally guilty of the crime they committed. Also, proof that
accused acted in concert, each
of them doing his part to fulfill the common design to kill the victim will be enough to
support a conviction. It was Baloes who inflicted the fatal stab, accused-appellant
cannot escape culpability. Their obvious conspiracy is borne by the records. There is
conspiracy when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the
commission of a crime and decide to commit it. Proof of the agreement need not rest on
direct evidence. It may be inferred from the conduct of accused indicating a common
understanding among them with respect to the commission of the offense.
The accused-appellant argues that he should be made liable for homicide only. He
claims treachery did not attend the killing of Domingo but that treachery was present is
not able to chang. The essence of this qualifying circumstance is the sudden and
unexpected attack by the assailant on an unsuspecting victim, depriving the latter of any
real chance to defend himself. It is employed to ensure the commission of the crime
without the concomitant risk to the aggressor. The rule is well-settled in this jurisdiction
that treachery may still be appreciated even though the victim was forewarned of
danger to his person. What is decisive is that the attack was executed in a manner that
the victim was rendered defenseless and unable to retaliate.

Principles:
In Art. 248 RPC, as amended, penalizes murder in this wise:
Murder. – Any person who, not falling within the provision of Article 246, shall kill
another, shall be guilty of Murder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua to death
if committed with any of the following attendant circumstances:
-With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed men, or
employing means to weaken the defense, or of means or persons to insure or afford
impunity;

There being no averment of mitigating nor aggravating circumstance that attended the
killing of Domingo, the proper imposable penalty is reclusion perpetua, pursuant to
Article 63(2) of the RPC.

On the other hand, it is define and penalizes in Art. 265 of the RPC the less serious
physical injuries in the following manner:

Article 265. Less serious physical injuries. – Any person who shall inflict upon another
physical injuries not described in the preceding articles but which shall incapacitate the
offended party for labor for ten days or more, or shall require medical attendance for the
same period, shall be guilty of less serious physical injuries and shall suffer the penalty
arresto mayor.
Again, absent any appreciable mitigating or aggravating circumstance, the penalty of
arresto mayor (1 month and 1 day to 6 months) should be imposed in its medium period
(between 2 months and 1 day to 4 months). The Indeterminate Sentence Law finds no
application in both cases. The rule is well-entrenched in this jurisdiction that the law is
not applicable when the penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life
imprisonment.

Case No. 35: Andan vs. PP

The SC denied the petition and affirmed the decision CA. Because Potenciana who
draws the checks, however, it was Anicia who directly and personally negotiated the
same. It was she who signed the receipt evidencing the sale. It was she who handed
the checks to Elizabeth and endorsed them as payment for the ring. It is thus clear that
Anicia and Potenciana acted in concert for the purpose of inducing and defrauding
Elizabeth to part with her jewelry.

Principles:
It was defined and penalized by Article 315, paragraph 2(d) of the RPC as:
(1) postdating or issuance of a check in payment of an obligation contracted at the time
the check was issued;
(2) lack of or insufficiency of funds to cover the check; and
(3) the payee was not informed by the offender and the payee did not know that the
offender had no funds or insufficient funds.

Case No. 36: PP vs. Serrano

The SC hereby deny the petition. It is clarify that it no longer deal with the correctness of
the RTC and the CA’s appreciation of the victim’s identification of the petitioner as his
assailant. This is a question of fact that we cannot entertain in a Rule 45 review, save
for exceptional reasons that must be clearly and convincingly shown. As a rule, we
accord the greatest respect for the findings of the lower courts, especially the evaluation
by the trial judge who had the distinct opportunity to directly hear and observe the
witnesses and their testimonies. Since the victim did not die, the issue posed to us is
the stage of execution of the crime. The lower courts differed in their legal conclusions.
The RTC held that the crime committed reached the frustrated stage since the victim
was stabbed on the left side of his stomach and beaten until he fell into a creek. While
the CA ruled that the crime committed only reached the attempted stage as there was
lack of evidence that the stab wound inflicted was fatal to cause the victim’s death.The
CA observed that the attending physician did not testify in court. The CA also
considered that the Medical Certificate and the Discharge Summary issued by the East
Avenue Medical Center fell short of "specifying the nature or gravity of the wound.

Principles:
According to the Art. 6 of the RPC, the consummated felonies, as well as those which
are frustrated and attempted, are punishable. A felony is consummated when all the
elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present; and it is
frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the
felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of
causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. There is an attempt when the offender
commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all
the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or
accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.