DWELLING

PEOPLE V RODIL
- Floro Rodil was found guilty of murder for the death of Lt. Guillermo Masana of the Phil
Constabulary. That on April 24, 1971 Rodil stabbed Masana on the different parts of his
body.
- About 1 in the afternoon of April 24 Masana with his group were having lunch when
they saw Rodil blowing whistle outside the restaurant. Masana and Fidel went out of the
restaurant and asked Rodil if his gun have a license. Fidel took the gun and gave it to
Masana. They went back inside the restaurant together with Rodil. When Masana
placed the gun in a bond paper and signed it, he asked Rodil to countersign it but
appellant refused and suddenly stabbed Masana on the chest and stomach.
- The accused claims that when he refused to give his id to Masana he was hit by
Masana’s gun. The deceased was unarmed during the incident because he aas on leave.
- The injury in Rodil’s head was on the right side and the deceased was right handed.
- Issue is whether homicide or murder; the fact that they were face to face with each
other when the stabbing took place, it is not treachery.
- WHEREFORE, HAVING BEEN FOUND GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT OF
HOMICIDE AGGRAVATED BY CONTEMPT FOR OR INSULT TO A PUBLIC AUTHORITY
OR DISREGARD OF THE RESPECT DUE THE OFFENDED PARTY ON ACCOUNT OF
HIS RANK, APPELLANT FLORO RODIL IS HEREBY SENTENCED TO SUFFER AN
INDETERMINATE TERM OF IMPRISONMENT RANGING FROM 12 YEARS OF
RECLUSION TEMPORAL AS MAXIMUM.

People V. Amado Daniel aka Amado Ato

- Amado Ato was charged with rape by 13 year old Margarita Paleng
- About September 20, 1965 in Baguio City
- The victim was a frehman highscool student from mountain province and about 3 pm of
September 20 she arrived at baguio city and upn arriving the accused went iniside the bus
and started molesting her. She got out of the bus and rode a jeep where the accused
followed him. And when she entered her boarding house the accused rushed in and took
out an eight inch long knife. She passed out and when she woke up the accused was gone.
- The following morning, her faher came to visit and confided to him the incident.
- The appellant claimed that they have known each other since 1962 and they already had
intercourse prior to the incident.
- PREMISES CONSIDERED, We affirm the judgment of conviction of Amado Daniel for the
crime of rape as charged, and We sentence him to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua and order him to indemnify Margarita Paleng by way of moral damages in the
amount of Twelve Thousand Pesos (P12,000.00) and pay the costs.

People V. WILFREDO BAÑEZ

- In the evening of August 14, 1994 accused sisters Elvira and Emelinda went into
Bernardo Banez house to discuss the plan of transferring Willy to another house because
he was creating trouble when drunk.
- The accused learned of the plan and attacked his father with 2 kitchen knives
- The victim suffered 10 stab wounds
 - A plea of insanity was made by the defense. The accused was admitted to mental health
for 20 days on September 3, 1994
- The accused ws addicted to gasoline
- WHEREFORE, the decision of the Regional Trial Court is AFFIRMED with the
MODIFICATION that accused-appellant is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua. No costs. 1âwphi1.nêt

People V. Cristoto Lapaz, Johnson Barleso and Paulino Lapaz

- In the evening of April 14, 1984 EULALIA CABUNAG a 70 year old woman was beaten
to death by three men at Carmen, Bohol.
- JOHNSON BARLESO’s common law wife was the niece of the victim. He stayed in her
house but resented when he was accused of being a thief.
- CRISTOTO LAPAZ fetched his nephew Paulino Lapaz and went to Barcelo where they
planned killing the victim.
- Cristoto drank kulafu wine.
- Cristoto carried a rounded piece of wood 1 which was given to him by Barleso, while Barleso also carried another
piece of wood 2 and a bolo.
- They entered ftom the kitchen
- PAULINO stayed in the kitchen while CRISTOTO and BARLESO went into the kitchen
and beat EULALIA
- Barleso ordered Paulino to get the bolo which he left beneath the house. When Paulino
handed the bolo to Barleso, the victim suddenly shouted for helPeven as she was already
lying on the floor. Frightened, the three panicked and jumped one after the other through the
same opening through which they entered the house, leaving behind the two pieces of wood
which Barleso and Cristoto used. Paulino and Barleso proceeded to the latter's house while
Cristoto proceeded to the house of Paulino's parents.
- The fiscal filed a motion to discharge the accused Paulino as a state witness with the
conformity of the said accused
- Barleso guilty of the crime of murder, with three aggravating circumstances, namely: (a)
disregard of sex and age of the victim; (b) committed at the dwelling place of the victim; and
(c) committed at nighttime and by gaining access to the victim's dwelling through an opening
not intended for egress
- The guilt of both appellants Johnson Barleso and Cristoto Lapaz is sufficiently established.
Accordingly, this Court affirms the judgment of conviction rendered by the trial court.
However, considering that the 1987 Constitution does not allow the imposition of the death
penalty, the penalty which should be and is hereby imposed on the appellants is reclusion
perpetua, and the indemnity that each of them should be required to pay to the heirs of the
deceased is set at P30,000.00.

People V. Edralin Taboga

- FRANCISCA TUBON, a widowed septuagenarian, was robbed, stabbed and burned
beyond recognition when her house built of strong materials was set on fire.
- Taboga was charged with Robbery with homicide and Arson
- On April 1, 1998 she entered the house of Tubon attacked the victim and stole 3 finger
rings, a necklace, a vial of perfume, and 4 gantas of rice.
- Contrary to law and aggravated by the circumstances that the crime was
committed in disregard of the respect due the offended party on account of her
age and sex, that the crime was committed in the dwelling of the offended party
and that the crime was committed after an unlawful entry.
 - The items were found near the scene
- Accused admitted the crime but later on said that he was forced and threatened to admit
the crime
- His defense was, at the time of the crime he was asleep with his live-in partner LIZA
ALMAZAN
- I
-
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN ADMITTING IN EVIDENCE THE
EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION MADE BY THE ACCUSED TO A RADIO
REPORTER FOR THE LATTER WAS ACTING AS AN AGENT FOR THE
PROSECUTION AND HENCE THE PROCEDURAL SAFEGUARDS
ENSHRINED IN THE CONSTITUTION SHOULD HAVE BEEN OBSERVED.

- II
-
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED GUILTY BEYOND
REASONABLE DOUBT OF THE CRIME OF ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE FOR
THE ROBBERY OR THEFT WAS NOT PROVEN WITHOUT THE SAID
EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION AND HENCE ONLY THE CRIME OF
HOMICIDE EXISTS.
- The rules on evidence[22] and case law sustain the conviction of the accused through
circumstantial evidence when the following requisites concur: (1) there must be more
than one circumstance; (2) the facts from which the inferences are derived are proven;
and (3) the combination of all circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt of the guilt of the accused.[23]
- Moreover, it appears that accused-appellant had a criminal record for theft.
- The elements of the complex crime of Robbery with Homicide are: (1) the taking of
personal property with the use of violence or intimidation against a person; (2) the
property thus taken belongs to another; (3) the taking is characterized by intent to gain or
animus lucrandi; and (4) on occasion of the robbery or by reason thereof, the crime of
homicide, which is used in a generic sense, was committed.
- MODIFIED. Accused-appellant Edralin Taboga is found guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of the crime of Homicide and is sentenced to suffer an indeterminate
penalty of ten (10) years and

People V. Hernando De Mesa

- In the evening of Octiber 15, 1996 PATRICIO MOTAS, barangay chairman at San Pablo
City was shot dead while playing card games.
- Shoot Motas with a long firearm
- An arrest warrant was issued but De Mesa could not be located, he was later apprehended
in Calapan, Oriental Mindoro.
- Jose Umali at the time of incident, was playing card games at a nearby store. He needed
to use the bathroom and so as he leaves, chairman Motas took over his place. Umali then
heard a gunshot and he saw DE MESA along with two other men walking fast, carrying a
long firearm. He also heard the group conversing “sigurdo akong patay na”.
 - He positively identified the accused by his movement and that there was light coming
from a nearby house.
- EDNA MOTAS, the wife of the victim testified that the accused and the victim had
confrontations in the past.
- CHHONA the wife of the accused testified that at the day of the incident, they went to a
jackfruit farm to harvest fruits and crops. They went home at around 7pm and fell asleep.
- The accused appellant said that he only learned that he was a suspect in the killing not
until November 1996
- 1. The trial court gravely erred in convicting the accused of the
crime charged despite the manifest lack of evidence to warrant
conviction.
- 2. The trial court gravely erred in appreciating the aggravating
circumstance of treachery.
- Hence, treachery cannot be considered an aggravating
circumstance in the case at bar, there being no eyewitnesses
to the killing or evidence on the manner of its execution
- The Court finds accused-appellant GUILTY of the crime of
HOMICIDE 

People V. William Montinola

The core issue in this case is whether the use of an unlicensed
firearm in the killing perpetrated by reason or on the occasion of the
robbery may be treated as a separate offense or as an aggravating
circumstance in the crime of robbery with homicide.

Accused-appellant William Muyco Montinola (hereafter WILLIAM)

was charged before the Regional Trial Court of Iloilo City with
robbery with homicide and illegal possession of firearm
- On November 18, 1996 armed with .38 pistol shot to death JOSE EDUARDO
RETERACION and stole 67,500 pesos where 48,200 pesos was recovered.
- At noon of November 18, 1996 the appellant boarded a jeepney where the victim was
also a passenger. He suddenly took out an unlicensed firearm and threatened to shoot
RETERACION if he do not give his money.
- PO GARCIA heard the gunshot and met the appellant who ran away. MONTINOLA
threw some of the money away. Until PO HOLLERO caught him with his gun.
- IT WOULD BE AN ERROR TO IMPOSE THE DEATH PENALTY FOR
THE CRIME OF ILLEGAL POSSESSION OF FIREARM BECAUSE
OF THE ENACTMENT OF REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8294 WHICH
AMENDED PRESIDENTIAL DECREE NO. 1866.
- For this reason, he prays that the Court reconsider the
challenged decision of the trial court and order the dismissal of
the case for illegal possession of firearm.
 - of Section 1 of P.D. No. 1866, as amended by R.A. 8294, is
misplaced. The use of an unlicensed firearm shall be
considered as an aggravating circumstance in the crime of
murder or homicide only, which are classified as crimes against
persons, and not to robbery with homicide, which is classified
as a crime against property
- If homicide or murder is committed with the use of an
unlicensed firearm, the penalty of death shall be imposed.
- Fortunately for WILLIAM, on 6 July 1997 while his case was
still pending, R.A. No. 8294 amending P.D. No. 1866 took
effect. The third paragraph of Section 1 of P.D. No. 1866, as
amended by R.A. No. 8294, provides:
- If homicide or murder is committed with the use of an
unlicensed firearm, such use of an unlicensed firearm shall be
considered as an aggravating circumstance.
- To be entitled to such mitigating circumstance, the accused
must have voluntarily confessed his guilt before the court prior
to the presentation of the evidence for the prosecution. 36 The
following requirements must therefore concur: (1) the accused
spontaneously confessed his guilt; (2) the confession of guilt
was made in open court, that is, before a competent court
trying the case; and (3) the confession of guilt was made prior
to the presentation of evidence for the prosecution.
- 1. In Criminal Case No. 47169, accused-appellant WILLIAM
MONTINOLA is ACQUITTED of the crime of illegal possession of
firearm and therefore spared the penalty of death;
- 2. In Criminal Case No. 47168, where the penalty of reclusion
perpetua is imposed,

People V. Alexander Taño

That on or about the 6th day of November, 1997 in Kalookan City, Metro Manila, Philippines and
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with intent to gain and by
means fo force and intimidation employed upon the person of one AMY DE GUZMAN Y
MAQUINANA, did there and then wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously take, rob and carry away the
following articles, to wit:

Cash money P5,000.00

Three (3) bracelets 3,500.00

Two (2) rings 5,000.00

One (1) pair of earrings 2,000.00

One (1) Alba wristwatch 1,500.00

—————

TOTAL P16,000.00

- Version of the prosecutor, on November 6, 1997 around 730 pm while AMY DE

GUZMAN was tending a video rental of her cousin ANA when ALEXANDER TAÑO
arrived (he was a relative of ANA’S husband GERRY). He attacked AMY by chocking
her and poking a knife in her neck. He started raping the girl but a customer knock so he
ordered AMY to go upstairs. Afterwards, he attacked her again and punched her, banged
her head against the wall. The girl lost consciousness and was seen by ANA when she
arrived at the shop around 9 in the evening.
- The defense said that he did not raped AMY, instead she just robbed her. There was a
commotion because AMY refused to follow his instructions to accompany him in
GERRY’S room to steal money. He mulled her in the bathroom due to fright.
-
- The lower court erred in not taking into consideration the testimonies of Dr. Godofredo
Balderosa and Dr. Maria Redencion Bukid-Abella which negate the rape [charge] imputed
against the accused.
- II
- The lower court erred in finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
robbery with rape despite the prosecution's insufficiency of evidence.
-
- In rape-  during the examination I found out that [the victim's] hymen is that of elastic type
and so it is disten[s]ible and it could accommodate the penis without producing any genital
injuries

Appellant may well be convicted of the separate offenses of rape and robbery notwithstanding the
fact that the offense charged in the Information is only "Robbery with Rape." In a similar
case, People v. Barrientos,  this Court held:
39 

the video rental outlet was open to the public. As such, it is not attributed the sanctity of privacy that
jurisprudence accords to residential abodes. Hence, dwelling cannot be appreciated as an
aggravating circumstance in the crime of rape.

MODIFIED. Accused-Appellant Alexander Taño y Caballero is found guilty of two separate offenses:
rape and robbery.
People V. Angel Rios

That on or about the 7th day of February 1996, in the municipality of San Jose del
Monte, province of Bulacan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable
Court, the above-named accused, armed with bladed instrument and with intent to kill
one Ambrocio Benedicto, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, with
evident premeditation, abuse of superior strength and treachery, attack, assault and
stab with the said bladed instrument the said Ambrocio Benedicto, hitting the latter on
his body, thereby causing him serious physical injuries which directly caused his death.

Ambrocio and Anacita Benedicto owned a sari-sari store in their house in Marigold Subdivision,
San Jose del Monte, Bulacan. According to Anacita, at around 6:30 in the evening of February 7,
1996, appellant Angel Rios, a neighbor, hurled stones at their house. A few minutes later, and
while the Benedicto spouses were tending their store, appellant bought cigarettes. Ambrocio
confronted appellant about the stoning incident and an altercation ensued between them

Barangay tanods went by and ordered them to stop. Few minutes later RIOS went back and
ANACITA saw her husband AMBROCIO stabbed in the stomach by the appellant. ANACITA
shouted and RIOS fled.
Mesa and his companions arrested appellant in his brother's house thirty (30) minutes after the
crime happened

THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN CONSIDERING DWELLING AS A

GENERIC AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCE.
Provocation in the aggravating circumstance of dwelling must be: (a) given by the offended
party, (b) sufficient, and (c) immediate to the commission of the crime.[33]

Under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty for the crime of homicide is reclusion
temporal. In view of the presence of the aggravating circumstance of dwelling or morada, the
Law, the imposable penalty shall be twelve (12) years of prision mayor maximum to twenty (20)
years of reclusion temporal maximum.

Abuse of confidence and obvious ungratefulness

People V. Martin Mandolado and Julian Ortillano

-Martin Mandolado was sentenced to death while Julain Ortillano to 6-17 years imprisonment
-at SULTAN KUDARAT, MAGUINDANAO they shoot HERMINIGILDO FAJARDO
TENORIO
-Contrary to law with the aggravating circumstances of treachery, evident premeditation, and the use
of superior strength

-for the killing of Herminigildo Fajardo Tenorio, and also in Criminal Case No. 561 for the killing of
Nolasco Mendoza, with the aggravating circumstances of (1) 'advantage was taken of his being a
draftee in the Philippine Army,' and (2) 'abuse of confidence or obvious ungratefulness' without the
presence of any mitigating circumstances and is meted the following penalty, to wit;
Martin was a trainee of the AFP, he and his group alighted a bus going to midsasayap. They had a
drink at the bus terminal when martin got drunk went to the public market and started firing at
people.

-it was murder but no aggravating circumstance but mitigating circumstance of drunkenness by not
being habitual.

People V. Salvador Arrojado

-on June 1, 1996 in Roxas City, SALVADOR ARROJADO stabbed MARY ANN ARROJADO 10
times killing her.

Salcador and mary ann are 1st cousins

Starting February 15, 1996, accused-appellant lived with the victim and her father. He helped care
for the victim's father, for which he was paid a P1,000.00 monthly salary.

In the early morning of June 1, 1996, accused-appellant went to the house cousin, Erlinda Arrojado
Magdaluyo, and reported that the victim had committed suicide. In response, Erlinda, together with
her husband Romulo Magdaluyo and her father Teodorico Arrojado, went with accused-appellant to
the house in Barangay Tanwue where they found the victim dead. The victim, who was bloodied,
was lying on her left side facing the bedroom door with her hands clasped together. On her bed was
a rosary and a cruifix. Near her was a knife (Exh. C).7 Erlinda recognized it to be the knife kept in the
kitchen. Erlinda also noticed that the electric fan was turned on full blast, while all the windows were
closed except the window on the east side which was slightly open. As he went to the other room,
where the victim's father stayed, accused-appellant told Erlinda that he was afraid he might be
suspected as the one responsible for the victim's death. 8

The accused was the only person in the world who had the strong motive to eliminate from earthly
existence the deceased, who had no known enemies, as he could no longer endure the verbal
abuse to which he was frequently subjected, even on trivial matters, by the deceased whom he must
have perceived as his evil tormetor. Being older [but] every now and then scolded, insulted, and
humiliated, he must have felt that the deceased had no respect for him as a person and elder
cousin.
He was guilty of aggravating circumstance of abuse of confindence but was not sentcnecd to death
penalty beacsue of the date of December 1, 2000, the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure took
effect, requiring that every complaint or information state not only the qualifying but also the
aggravating circumstances.

Nightime

People v Gerry Silva

GERRY SILVA alias "Sitoy" and ALEXANDER GULANE Y OLEDAN alias "Alex or Armando" were
found guilty of murder by the Regional Trial Court for the killing of Leo Latoja and were sentenced to
reclusion perpetua
While leo was on his way to work, he left his money iin the house so he ordered his co worker to get
his money.