1. US v. Eduave, G.R. No. 12155, 2 February 1917, 36 Phil.

l. 209 (SUAREZ) two brothers, Ismael and Edgardo, emerged from their house and ganged up on Ruben. Esmeraldo and
Ismael mauled Ruben with fist blows and he fell to the ground. Edgardo hit Ruben three times in that
FACTS: helpless position with a hollow block on the parietal area while Esmeraldo and Ismael continued
The accused rushed upon the girl with a deadly weapon and suddenly struck her from behind, with a mauling Ruben. Ruben felt dizzy but managed to stand up. Ismael threw a stone at him, hitting him in
sharp bolo, producing a frightful gash in the lumbar region and slightly to the side eight and one-half the back. When the policeman on board a mobile car arrived, Esmeraldo, Ismael, and Edgardo fled to
inches long and two inches deep, severing all of the muscles and tissues of that part. The motive of the their house.
crime was that the accused was incensed at the girl for the reason that she had theretofore charged him
criminally before the local officials with having raped her and with being the cause of her pregnancy. Ruben was brought to the hospital. His attending physician declared that he sustained lacerated wounds
He was her mother's querido and was living with her as such at the time the crime here was committed. on the parietal area, cerebral concussion or contusion, hematoma on the left upper buttocks, multiple
abrasions on the left shoulder, and hematoma periorbital left. He was prescribed medicine for back pain
A deadly weapon was used. The blow was directed toward a vital part of the body. The aggressor stated which he has to take for one month.
his purpose to kill, thought he had killed, and threw the body into the bushes. When he gave himself up
he declared that he had killed the complainant.  The trial court found them guilty of frustrated murder. The accused appealed to the CA which affirmed,
with modification, the appealed decision.
ISSUE: Whether or not the felony committed is frustrated or attempted. 
They then filed an instant petition for review on certiorari. They insisted that the prosecution failed to
RULING: prove that the petitioners had the intention to kill Ruben when they mauled him with a hollow block.  
The Supreme Court ruled that the crime cannot be attempted murder. A crime cannot be held to be Petitioners aver that, based on the testimony of Dr. Cagingin, Ruben sustained only a superficial wound
attempted unless the offender, after beginning the commission of the crime by overt acts, is prevented, in the parietal area; hence, they should be held criminally liable for physical injuries only. Even if
against his will, from performing all of the acts which should produce the crime.   petitioners had the intent to kill Ruben, the prosecution failed to prove treachery; hence, they should be
held guilty only of attempted homicide.
According to Article 3 of the Penal Code, a felony is frustrated if there is no intervention of a foreign or
extraneous cause or agency between the beginning of the commission of the crime and the moment ISSUE: Whether or not the accused had the intention to kill Ruben and be liable for attempted murder
when all of the acts have been performed which should result in the consummated crime. On the other
hand, in case of frustrated crimes the subjective phase is completely passed. Subjectively the crime RULING:
is complete. Nothing interrupted the offender while he was passing through the subjective phase. The YES. An essential element of murder and homicide, whether in their consummated, frustrated or
crime, however, is not consummated by reason of the intervention of causes independent of the attempted stage, is the intent of the offenders to kill the victim immediately before or simultaneously
will of the offender. He did all that was necessary to commit the crime. If the crime did not result as a with the infliction of injuries. Intent to kill is a specific intent which the prosecution must prove by
consequence it was due to something beyond his control. direct or circumstantial evidence, while general criminal intent is presumed from the commission of a
felony by dolo.
The Supreme Court added that the subjective phase is that portion of the acts constituting the crime The prosecution was able to show that the accused had the intent to kill the victim. Esmeraldo and
included between the act that begins the commission of the crime and the last act performed by the Ismael pummeled the victim with fist blows. Even as Ruben fell to the ground, unable to defend himself
offender which should result in the consummated crime. This is followed by the objective phase or the against the sudden and sustained assault of petitioners, Edgardo hit him three times with a hollow block.
period where the act begins until he voluntarily desists. If between the start and end of the crime, he is Edgardo tried to hit Ruben on the head, missed, but still managed to hit the victim only in the parietal
stopped by an external force, there is an attempt. However, if there was no such interruption until the area, resulting in a lacerated wound and cerebral contusions. That the head wounds sustained by the
final act, such as in the instant case, it is frustrated. victim were merely superficial and could not have produced his death does not negate the petitioners’
criminal liability for attempted murder. Even if Edgardo did not hit the victim squarely on the head,
FALLO: petitioners are still criminally liable for attempted murder.
That the case before us is frustrated is clear. The penalty should have been thirteen years of cadena The last paragraph of Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code defines an attempt to commit a felony, thus:
temporal there being neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances. As so modified, the judgment is There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts,
affirmed with costs. So ordered. 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.
2. Rivera v. People, G.R. No. 166326, 25 January 2006, 480 SCRA 188 Petitioners, who acted in concert, commenced the felony of murder by mauling the victim and hitting
him three times with a hollow block; they narrowly missed hitting the middle portion of his head. If
Edgardo had done so, Ruben would surely have died.
FACTS:
Ruben went to a nearby store to buy food when Edgardo mocked him for being jobless and dependent FALLO:
on his wife for support. A heated exchange of words ensued. The next day, Ruben and his three-year- IN LIGHT OF ALL THE FOREGOING, the petition is DENIED for lack of merit. The Decision of the
old daughter went to a nearby store to buy food and look for his wife. Momentarily, Esmeraldo and his Court of Appeals is AFFIRMED WITH THE MODIFICATION that petitioners are sentenced to
suffer an indeterminate penalty of from two (2) years of prision correccional in its minimum period, as directly by overt acts and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the crime of
minimum, to nine (9) years and four (4) months of prision mayor in its medium period, as maximum. rape by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.
No costs. There is absolutely no dispute about the absence of sexual intercourse or carnal knowledge in the case.
SO ORDERED. The next question that thus comes to the fore is whether or not the act of the petitioner, i.e., the pressing
of a chemical-soaked cloth on top of Malou, constitutes an overt act of rape.
3. Baleros v. People, G.R. No. 138033, 22 February 2006, 483 SCRA 10 (SUMAYOD) Overt or external act has been defined as some physical activity or deed, indicating the intention to
commit a particular crime, more than mere planning or preparation, which if carried out to its complete
FACTS: termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the
At about 1:50 in the morning or sometime thereafter of December 13, 1991 in Manila, the defendant, voluntary desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and unnecessarily ripen into a concrete offense.
Baleros (Chito), went to the dormitory room of Albano (Malou). He placed himself on top of her and
covered her face with a piece of cloth soaked in chemicals with dizzying effects. Malou struggled to In the crime of rape, penetration is an essential act of execution to produce the felony. Thus, for there to
free herself until she was able to free her right hand and grab hold of the sex organ of Baleros which she be attempted rape, the accused must have commenced the act of penetrating his sexual organ to the
then squeezed. However, the defendant was able to flee the place and was not known at that time by vagina of the victim but for some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance, the
Malou. penetration, however, slight, is not completed.
Later that morning, the police asked the dormers to look for anything not belonging to them in the Unit.
Montes, another occupant of Room 310, went inside their unit and found a bag cloth type from their Petitioner’s act of lying on top of the complainant, embracing and kissing her, mashing her breasts,
unit which they did not know was there and surrendered the same to the investigators. Christian, also an inserting his hand inside her panty, and touching her sexual organ, while admittedly obscene and
occupant of Room 310, knew that it belonged to Chito. detestable acts, do not constitute attempted rape absent any showing that petitioner actually commenced
Among the contents of the bag were one (1) night dress colored salmon pink and one (1) printed forcing his penis into the complainant’s sexual organ.
handkerchief, both positive to test for chloroform, a volatile poison.
It was later found out that Chito was a suitor of Malou which she rejected a week ago.
FALLO:
The RTC convicted Chito guilty of attempted rape. The defendant then went to CA where his appellate
WHEREFORE, the assailed Decision of the Court of Appeals affirming that of the Regional Trial Court
recourse was docketed and affirmed the RTC’s judgment. Chito then moved for reconsideration but his
of Manila, is hereby REVERSED and SET ASIDE and a new one entered ACQUITTING petitioner
motion was denied by the CA.
Renato D. Baleros, Jr. of the charge for attempted rape. Petitioner, however, is adjudged GUILTY of
The defendant then filed a petition with the SC, on the contention that the CA erred-
light coercion and is accordingly sentenced to 30 days of arresto menor and to pay a fine   of ₱200.00,
with the accessory penalties thereof and to pay the costs.
1. In not finding that it is improbable for petitioner to have committed the attempted rape
imputed to him, absent sufficient, competent and convincing evidence to prove the offense
4. Valenzuela v. People, G.R. No. 160188, 21 June 2007
charged.
2. In convicting petitioner of attempted rape on the basis merely of circumstantial evidence since
FACTS:
the prosecution failed to satisfy all the requisites for conviction based thereon.
On May 1994, Aristotle Valenzuela, petitioner and Jovy Calderon were seen outside SM North Edsa by
3. In not finding that the circumstances it relied on to convict the petitioner are unreliable,
security guard Lorenzo Lago, unloading cases of detergent Tide Ultramatic in an open parking space.
inconclusive, and contradictory.
Shortly after, Calderon loaded the cases of detergent inside a taxi and attempts to leave the parking area.
4. In not finding that proof of motive is miserable wanting his case.
Lago proceeds to stop the taxi and asks for the receipt of the merchandise, wherein Valenzuela and
5. In awarding damages in favor of the complainant despite the fact that the award was improper
Calderon responded by fleeing on foot. Both were apprehended along with the stolen merchandise
and unjustified absent any evidence to prove the same.
valued at P 12,090. 
6. In failing to appreciate in his favor the constitutional presumption of innocence and that moral
Petitioner and Calderon were charged with theft and pleaded not guilty. Valenzuela claims to have been
certainty has not been met, hence, he should be acquitted on the ground that the offense
with his cousin at the parking lot, walking beside BLISS complex. Calderon claims that he was in the
charged against him has not been proved beyond reasonable doubt.
area to withdraw from his ATM account when they decided to buy snacks inside the supermarket when
they heard the gunshot fired by Lago. Petitioner and Calderon claimed that they were mere innocent
ISSUE: Whether or not Baleros (Chito) is guilty of attempted rape. bystanders who were in the vicinity when Lago fired a gunshot that caused everyone to flee out of fear.
 
RULING: In a Decision promulgated by the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Petitioner and Calderon were
NO. Under Article of the Revised Penal Code, rape is committed by a man who has a carnal knowledge convicted of consummated theft. 
or intercourse with a woman under any of the following circumstances: 1) By using force or  
intimidation; 2) When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and 3) when the The petitioner filed an appeal before the Court of Appeals, that he should be convicted only of
woman is under twelve years of age or is demented. Under Article 6, in relation to the aforementioned frustrated theft instead of consummated theft as he was not able to freely dispose of the articles stolen.
article of the same code, rape is attempted when the offender commences the commission of rape The Court of Appeals rejected the contention and affirmed the petitioner’s conviction.  
ISSUE: WON the crime of theft is consummated or frustrated
RULING:
There is no crime of frustrated theft in the Revised Penal Code.
  6. People v. Borinaga, G.R. No. 33463, 18 Dec. 1930, 55 Phil. 433
The crime of theft was consummated. The SC held that unlawful taking, or apoderamiento, is deemed
complete from the moment the offender gains possession of the thing, even if he has no opportunity to FACTS:
dispose of the same. The most fundamental notion in the crime of theft is the taking of the thing to be Harry Mooney contracted Juan Lawaan, who is associated with Basilio Borinaga, for the construction
appropriated into the physical power of the thief, which idea is qualified by other conditions, such as of a fish corral. One morning, Lawaan, with some of his men, went to Mooney to collect the whole
that the taking must be effected animo lucrandi and without the consent of the owner; and it will be here amount stated in the contract even when only two-thirds of the fish corral had been finished. Mooney
noted that the definition does not require that the taking should be effected against the will of the owner refused to give the money which prompted Lawaan to warn Mooney that something would happen to
but merely that it should be without his consent, a distinction of no slight importance.  him. 
 
FALLO : On the evening of the same day, Mooney was in the store of Perpetua Najarro. He was sitting with his
The petition is DENIED. Costs against petitioner.  back being to the window when Basilio Borinaga struck a knife at Mooney from the said window.
  Fortunately, the knife  lodged in the back of the chair on which Mooney was seated which resulted in
SO ORDERED. 
him falling from the chair but containing no injury at all. Borinaga ran away towards the market. Prior
to this event, Borinaga was overheard telling a companion,  "I will stab this Mooney, who is an
5.  People v. Lamahang, L-43530, 3 August 1935, 61 Phil. 703 American brute." After the attack, he was also heard saying that he only hit the back of the chair instead
of hitting the back of Mooney. He went back after 10 minutes with the knife in his hand, but was again
FACTS unsuccessful because he was frightened away by Mooney and Perpetua who were on their guard with a
 March 2, 1935, early at dawn, while the policeman Jose Tomambing was on his patrol, he caught flashlight on.  Borinaga was again overheard stating that he had missed his mark and was unable to give
Aurelio Lamahang making an opening with an iron bar on the wall of a cheap goods store. The another blow because of the flashlight. 
owner, Tan Yu, was in slumber inside with another Chinaman. When Tomambing arrested him,
Lamahang was only able to break one board and unfasten another from the wall.  Borinaga was prosecuted and was convicted for the crime of frustrated murder. He was sentenced to
 The CFI found him guilty of attempted robbery.  fourteen years, eight months, and one day of imprisonment, reclusion temporal, with the accessory
penalties and the costs.
ISSUE
ISSUE:
 Whether or not the CFI erred in convicting Lamahang of attempted robbery. W/N Basilio Borinaga was correctly charged of frustrated murder instead of attempted murder?
RULING
RULING:
 Yes, Lamahang was erroneously convicted of attempted robbery. To commence a felony directly NO. In order that the crime committed by the defendant-appellant might have been a consummated
by overt acts, there must be two requisites: (1) That there be external acts, (2) such external acts murder it would have been necessary for him to have inflicted a deadly wound upon a vital spot in the
have direct connection with the crime intended to be committed.  body of Mooney, with treachery, as a result of which he should have died.
 In the case of robbery, for the simple act of entering by means of force another person’s dwelling
to be justified as an attempt to commit this offense, it must be shown that the offender has the According to the definition given by the Code, a frustrated felony is committed "when the offender
intention to take possession for the purpose of gain of some personal property belonging to performs all the acts of execution which should produce the felony as a consequence, but which,
another. nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator".
 Here, the crime was attempted trespass to dwelling. The intention of the accused was observed Borinaga, with his intention to kill Mooney, approached him from behind to strike him with a knife,
when he made an opening with an iron bar through the wall to enter the store against the will of the however, his blow landed on the chair which Mooney was sitting on and did not cause the slightest
owner who was inside. Since he was not able to perform all acts of execution which would physical injury on Mooney. The acts of execution performed by Borinaga did not produce the death of
consummate the felony of trespass to dwelling, it is regarded as an attempt only. If Lamahang was Mooney as a consequence nor could they have produced it because the blow did not reach his body;
able to enter the store, he would have performed all acts of execution. therefore the culprit did not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony. There
was lacking the infliction of the deadly wound upon a vital spot of the body of Mooney.
FALLO
 Wherefore, the decision of the CFI was revoked, and the accused was declared guilty of attempted The interference of the frame of the back of the chair which prevented Borinaga from wounding
trespass to dwelling. Mooney in the back with a deadly knife, made his acts constitute an attempt to commit murder; for he
 had commenced the commission of the felony directly by overt acts, and did not perform all the acts of Whether or not the shooting of Marcelo Kalalo constitutes attempted felony
execution which constitute the felony by reason of a cause or accident other than his own voluntary
desistance. RULING: 

FALLO: The fact that Marcelo Kalalo fired four consecutive shots at Hilarion Holgado after he and his co-
Wherefore, the court concluded  that the facts alleged in the information and proved during the trial appellants had already killed Arcadio Holgado and Marcelino Panaligan, shows that he was bent on
are not sufficient to constitute the crime of frustrated murder, but simply the crime of an attempt to killing Hilarion. He performed everything necessary on his part to commit the crime that he determined
commit murder. to commit but he failed by reason of causes independent of his will, either because of his poor aim or
because his intended victim succeeded in dodging the shots, none of which found its mark. The acts
7. People v. Kalalo, G.R. No. 39303-05, 17 Mar. 1934, 59 Phil. 715 thus committed by the said appellant Marcelo Kalalo constitute attempted homicide with no modifying
circumstances to be taken into consideration, because none has been established.
FACTS:  FALLO: 

Prior to October 1, 1932, the date of the commission of the three crimes alleged in the three information In Case No. 6860, the court finds that the crime committed by the appellant Marcelo Kalalo is
which gave rise to Case Nos. 6858, 6859, and 6860, the first two for murder and the last for frustrated attempted Homicide, and he is sentenced to two years, four months and one day of presion correctional.
murder. The appellant Marcelo Kalalo and Isabela Holgado, the latter being the sister of the deceased
Arcadio Holgado and a cousin of the other deceased Marcelino Panaligan, had a litigation over a parcel 8. People v. Trinidad, G.R. No. 79123-25, 9 January 1989, 169 SCRA 51
of land situated in the barrio of Calumpang. On September 28, 1931, and on December 8, 1931,
Marcelo Kalalo filed a complaint against Isabela Holgado in the court of first instance of Batangas by An appeal from the RTC’s decision after accused has been charged with two crimes of Murder and one
Virtue of a motion filed by his opponent Isabela Holgado, his first complaint was dismissed on crime of Frustrated Murder, claiming that the adduced evidence is insufficient to prove his guilt beyond
December 7th of the same year, and his second complaint was likewise dismissed on February 5, 1932. reasonable doubt.
Marcelo Kalalo Cultivated the land in question during the agricultural years 1931 and 1932, but when
harvest time came Isabela Holgado reaped all that had been planted thereon.  FACTS:
On October 1, 1932, Isabela Holgado and her brother Arcadio Holgado, decided the land to be plowed, Principal witness Ricardo Tan’s testimony:
and employed several laborers for that purpose. These men, together with Arcadio Holgado, went to the Lolito Soriano, the deceased victim, was a fish dealer. His helpers were Ricardo Tan, the driver, and the
said land early that day, but Marcelo Kalalo, who had been informed thereof, proceeded to the place other deceased victim Marcial Laroa. While on their way to Davao City to sell fish, accused Emeliano
accompanied by his brothers Felipe and Juan Kalalo, His brother-in-law Gregorio Ramos and by Trinidad, a member of the Integrated National Police, was in uniform and had two firearms -  a carbine,
Alejandro Garcia, who were later followed by Fausta Abrenica the mother and Alipia Abrenica the aunt and a .38 caliber revolver, asked for a ride to Agusan del Sur. On their way to Butuan on the late
of the first three. afternoon of January 20, Tan was advised by Trinidad to drive slowly because, according to him, the
place was dangerous. Suddenly, Tan heard two gunshots and Soriano and Laroa slumped dead. While
Marcelo, Felipe, Juan, Gregorio and Alejandro were all armed with bolos. Upon their arrival at the land, Tan did not see the shooting of Laroa, he witnessed the shooting of Soriano after being alerted by the
they ordered those who were plowing it by request of Isabela and Arcadio, to stop, which the laborers carbine’s first gunfire. 
did in view of the threatening attitude of the five.
Tan hurriedly got off the still moving car to hide in the bushes which then hit the muddy side of the
Shortly after Nine o’clock on the morning of the same day, Isabela Holgado, Maria Gutierrez and road. Tan afterwards heard a shot emanating from the car. About 20-30 minutes later, a passenger jeep
Hilarion Holgado arrived at the place with food for the laborers but to their surprise the laborers were passed by. Tan rode on the front seat of the jeep, but noticed that Trinidad was seated at the back.
not working, they were given their food and not long after they had finished eating, Marcelino Trinidad ordered him to get out and to approach him but instead, Tan moved backward and ran around
Panaligan, Cousin of Isabela and Arcadio, like wise arrived. Having informed of the cause of the the jeep followed by Trinidad. When the jeep started to drive away, Tan clung to its side. Trinidad fired
suspension of the work, took his revolver with him. Marcelino ordered to continue the work already. At two shots, one of which hit Tan on his right thigh. Tan jumped to another passenger jeep passing by but
this juncture Marcelo Kalalo approached Arcadio while Felipe, Juan, and Gregorio Ramos approached was told to get out. Fortunately, a member of the Philippine Constabulary chanced upon him and helped
Marcelino Panaligan. At Fausta Abrenica’s instigation “What is Detaining you?” they all him board a bus for Butuan City.
simultaneously struck their bolos at Arcadio and Marcelino killing them instantly. After they have
fallen to the ground dead, Marcelo Kalalo took from its holster on the belt of Marcelino’s Body, the Trinidad’s defense:
revolver which the deceased carried, and fired four consecutive shots at Hilarion Holgado who was then Trinidad contended that he was in CDO on the date of the incident. He went to his sister's house at
fleeing from the scene in order to save his own life. Camp Alagar on the evening of Jan. 20. In addition to his sister, he claimed to have seen Sgt. Caalim,
Mrs. Andoy, and Paelmo. This was corroborated by Sgt. Caalim. Trinidad claimed that he left for
ISSUE:  Butuan the next day, and was on his way to report for duty when he was arrested at Agusan del Norte. 
 Unionwhich was docketed as Civil Case No. 226.  Elvisa also filed a complaint against the spouses
Trinidad also contended that the absence of gunpowder burns on the deceased victims negates Tan's Martinez in the MCTC of Tubao for damages which was docketed as Civil Case No. 227.
claim that they were shot "point-blank." Point of fact, it matters not how far the assailant was at the time
he shot the victims, the crucial factor being whether he did shoot the victim or not.This term refers Dean went to the Tubao Credit Cooperative (TCC) office to pick up the dividend certificate of his wife
merely to the "aim directed straight toward a target" and has no reference to the distance between the who was a member of the cooperative. He just left the building when the petitioner, armed with a bolo,
gun and the target.  suddenly emerged from behind the vehicle and stabbed him on the left breast. Dean fled to the bank
office and was able to gain entry into the bank. Petitioner ran after him and upon cornering him, tried to
ISSUE: stab him again. Dean was able to parry the blow with his right hand, and the bolo hit him on the right
W/N Trinidad is correct in contending that he can only be convicted of attempted murder in relation to elbow. Dean fell to the floor and tried to stand up, but the petitioner stabbed him anew on his left breast.
Tan’s shooting.
After a consideration of the evidence adduced in this case, the Trial Court finds accused BENJAMIN
RULING/HELD: MARTINEZ guilty of the crime of Frustrated Homicide as principal.
Yes, Trinidad should only be held criminally liable for attempted murder.
Petitioner then argued that the trial court made a serious error when it convicted him of Frustrated
Trinidad had commenced the commission of the felony directly by overt acts but was unable to perform Homicide since he had merely acted in self-defense when Dean insulted him, spat on his face and
all the acts of execution which would have produced it by reason of causes other than his spontaneous assaulted him with fist blows. 
desistance such as, that the jeep to which Tan was clinging was in motion, and there was a spare tire
which shielded the other parts of his body. Moreover, the wound on his thigh was not fatal and the Petitioner appealed the case to the CA. The appealed Decision dated April 30, 2001 of the trial court is
doctrinal rule is that where the wound inflicted on the victim is not sufficient to cause his death, the affirmed, subject to the afforested modification of the minimum period of the sentence. 
crime is only Attempted Murder, the accused not having performed all the acts of execution that would
have brought about death (People vs. Phones, L-32754-5, July 21, 1978, 84 SCRA 167; People vs. ISSUE:
Garcia, L-40106, March 13, 1980, 96 SCRA 497). Whether or not the elements of Frustrated Felony have been met.

But while the circumstances do spell out the two crimes of Murder, the penalty will have to be
modified. For, with the abolition of capital punishment in the 1987 Constitution, the penalty for Murder
is now reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua (People vs. Lopez, et al. G.R.
No. 71876-76, January 25, 1988 citing People vs. Gavarra, No. L-37673, October 30, 1987; People vs.
Masangkay, G.R. No. 73461, October 27, 1987).
FALLO:
WHEREFORE, the guilt of the accused Emeliano Trinidad for the crimes of Murder (on two counts)
and Attempted Murder, having been proven beyond reasonable doubt, his conviction is hereby
AFFIRMED.
9. Martinez v. CA, G.R. No. 168827, 13 April 2007 (APARRI)
G.R. No. 168827             April 13, 2007
BENJAMIN P. MARTINEZ, Petitioner,
vs.
COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.
FACTS: 
10. Mondragon v. People, L-17666, 30 June 1966, 17 SCRA 476
Dean Dongui-is was a teacher at the Tubao National High School, La Union. Petitioner Benjamin
Martinez was the husband of Dean’s co-teacher, Lilibeth Martinez. The petitioner had been peddling FACTS:
false reports that Dean and Elvisa had illicit relations  Dean Martinez and his wife Freda filed a
complaint for damages against the spouses Martinez in the Municipal Circuit Trial Court of Tubao, La
RULING:
Yes. It cannot be denied that the petitioner had the intention to kill Dean. Petitioner performed all the
acts of execution but the crime was not consummated because of the timely medical intervention
applied on the victim. Upon the other hand, petitioner was armed with a deadly 14½-inch bolo. The
attack on Dean was swift and unannounced; undeniably, petitioner’s attack was treacherous.
The elements of the Frustrated Felony  were met when the petitioner: 
1. Performed all the acts of execution to cause harm on Dean 
2. All the acts he performed against  Dean had produced a felony as consequences 
3. But the felony was not produced
4. By reason of timely medical intervention applied to the victim that was  independent of the
will of the perpetrator
IN LIGHT OF ALL THE FOREGOING, the assailed Decision is hereby AFFIRMED WITH
MODIFICATION. Petitioner is hereby found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Frustrated Murder
under Article 248 in relation to Article 6, first paragraph of the Revised Penal Code and is hereby
sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty from nine (9) years and four (4) months of prision mayor
in its medium period, as minimum, to seventeen (17) years and four (4) months of reclusion temporal in
its medium period, as maximum.
 At about 5:00 in the afternoon of July 11, 1954, complainant Serapion Nacionales was
opening the dike of his ricefield situated in Antandan, Miagao, Iloilo, to drain the water
 therein and prepare the ground for planting the next day, he heard a shout from afar telling This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of Manila finding the defendant-
him not to open the dike, Nacionales continued opening the dike, and the same voice shouted appellant herein Sy Pio, alias Policarpio de la Cruz, guilty of frustrated murder against Tan Siong Kiap
again, 'Don't you dare open the dike.' When he looked up, he saw Isidoro Mondragon coming and sentencing him to suffer an indeterminate sentence of 6 years, 1 month, and 11 days of prision
towards him. Nacionales informed Mondragon that he was opening the dike because he mayor, to 14 years, 8 months, and 1 day of reclusion temporal, to indemnify the offended party Tan
would plant the next morning. Without much ado, Mondragon tried to hit the complainant Siong Kiap in the sum of P350, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay the
who dodged the blow. costs.
 Mondragon drew his bolo and struck Nacionales on different parts of his body. Nacionales Defendant-appellant admitted to Captain Lomotan that his victims were Tan Siong Kiap, Ong Pian, and
backed out, unsheathed his own bolo, and hacked Mondragon on the head and forearm and Jose Sy. His statement was taken down in writing. This declaration was submitted at the time of the trial
between the middle and ring fingers in order to defend himself. Mondragon retreated, and and contains all the details of the assaults against the persons of Tan Siong Kiap, Ong Pian, and Jose
Nacionales did not pursue him but went home instead. The following day, Nacionales was Sy. It was stated that the defendant-appellant got the pistol from a Chinaman. With this pistol he went
treated. to the restaurant at 822 Ongpin and shot Ong Pian. Defendant-appellant resented Ong Pian because
 The petitioner, Isidoro Mondragon, was prosecuted in the Court of First Instance of Iloilo of he was dismissed from work and all the sums he borrowed was deducted to his wife’s salary in
the crime of frustrated homicide. After trial the Court of First Instance of Iloilo found him which he did not recognize it as an indebtedness. After shooting him, he proceeded to 511
guilty of the crime of attempted homicide and sentenced him to an indeterminate prison term Misericordia where Jose Sy and Tan Siong Kiap were, and there he fired at them. Defendant-appellant
of from 4 months and 21 days of arresto mayor to 2 years, 4 months and 1 day of prision resented Tan Siong Kap and Jose Sy because of their accusations against him. They said that he
correccional, with the accessory penalties of the law and the costs. Mondragon appealed to lost P70 because of gambling which the defendant-appellant used to hear and this nurtured
the Court of Appeals, and the latter court affirmed the decision of the Court of First Instance resentment against them. He shot Jose Sy first and turned around and fired at Tan Siong Kap when he
of Iloilo in all its parts, with costs. asked why he was doing the act. The bullet fired from the defendant-appellant's pistol entered the right
shoulder of Tan Siong Kiap but he immediately ran to a room behind the store to hide. From there Tan
ISSUE: Siong Kap still heard gunshots fired from the defendant-appellant's pistol, but afterwards the defendant-
appellant ran away. He then escaped to Sampaloc and went to the house of his mother to whom he told
 Whether or not the issue raised by the petitioner in the present appeal is that the Court of he had killed two persons. 
Appeals erred in finding him guilty of the crime of attempted homicide and not of the crime
of less serious physical injuries However, he disowned the confession at the trial and explained that he signed it without having read its
contents. He declared that it was not he who shot the three victims, but it was one by the name of Chua
RULING: Tone, with whom he had previously connived to kill the three other victims. He introduced no
witnesses, however, to support his denial. Neither did he deny that he admitted before Captain Lomotan
 There is merit in the contention of the petitioner. The courts have carefully examined the having killed the three persons, or having been found in Tarlac in possession of the caliber. In his cross-
record, and found that the intention of the petitioner to kill the offended party has not been examination he admitted many of the incidents mentioned in the confession, especially the cause of his
conclusively shown. resentment against his victims Ong Pian, Jose Sy, and Tan Siong Kiap.
 In this case, this would not constitute an attempted homicide. Because the 3 rd element of
attempted felony is not present which states that “the offender’s act is not stopped by his own Tan Siong Kiap was brought to the Chinese General Hospital, where his wound was treated. He stayed
spontaneous desistance”.  there from September 3 to September 12, 1949, when he was released upon his request and the
 During the fight between the offended party and appellant, when the offended party started physician's advice. He was asked to return to the hospital for further treatment, and he did so five times
fighting back with the use of his bolo, Mondragon retreated showing that there was no intent for a period of more than ten days. Thereafter his wound was completely healed. He spent the sum of
to kill Nacionales therefore the crime charged to Mondragon is less serious physical injuries. P300 for hospital and doctor's fees. The defendant-appellant shot two other persons before shooting and
wounding Tan Siong Kiap. 
FALLO:  
 ISSUES:
 The decision of the Court of Appeals appealed from should be, as it is hereby, modified in the 1.Whether or not Sy Pio can be convicted of frustrated murder.
sense that the petitioner is declared guilty of the offense of less serious physical injuries and 2.Did he perform all the acts of execution necessary to produce the death of his victim?
he is sentenced to suffer the penalty of (3) months and fifteen (15) days of arresto mayor, with
costs. RULING: 
The court held that it is not necessary that the accused actually commit all the acts of execution
necessary to produce the death of his victim, that it is sufficient that he believes that he has committed
11. People v. Sy Pio, L-5848, 30 April 1954, 94 Phil. 885 all said acts. In these cases, the court held that the crimes committed were frustrated murder, because
there was full and complete belief on the part of the assailant that he had committed all the acts of
FACTS: execution necessary to produce the death of the intended victim. In the case at the bar, Sy Pio fired at
Tan Siong Kiap, and the latter was hit, but was able to escape and hide in another room. Sy Pio must
have seen that Tan Siong Kiap was able to escape; Sy Pio knew that he had not performed all the acts of ISSUE:
execution necessary to kill his victim. It cannot be said that the subjective phase had been completed.
But because Sy Pio ran away after the incident, there was reasonable doubt in the court that Sy Pio may
have actually believed that he had committed all the acts of execution. This doubt must be resolved in
Sy Pio’s favor. Sy Pio was found guilty of attempted murder. HELD: 
FALLO:  carry out the robbery, which, however, was not consummated, because of resistance by the
Therefore, the judgment appealed from should be, as it is hereby, modified and the defendant-appellant
is found guilty of the crime of attempted murder, and the sentence imposed upon him reduced to an
indeterminate penalty of from 4 years, 2 months, and 1 day of prision correccional to 10 years of prision
mayor. In all other respects the judgment is affirmed. With costs against the defendant-appellant.
12. People v. Dio, L-36461, 29 June 1984, 130 SCRA 151
An automatic review of a decision of the defunct Circuit Criminal Court, 7th Judicial District, which
imposed the death penalty.
Whether or not the defendant-appellant should be charged of the crime of robbery with
homicide, even when the robbery was not consummated
No, Where the killing of the victim was merely incidental to and an offshoot of the plan to
deceased, the crime committed is only attempted robbery with homicide. The evidence
adduced show that the appellant and his companion were unsuccessful in their criminal
venture of divesting the victim of his wrist watch so as to constitute the consummated crime
of robbery. Indeed, as adverted to earlier, when the victim expired, the ‘Seiko’ watch was still
securely strapped to his wrist. The killing of Crispulo Alega may be considered as merely
incidental to and an offshoot of the plan to carry out the robbery, which however was not
consummated because of the resistance by Crispulo. Consequently, this case would properly
come under the provision of Art. 297 of the Revised Penal Code.

FACTS: (People’s version) FALLO:

WHEREFORE, the judgment of the trial court is hereby modified; the appellant is found
Crispulo Alega, (a civil engineer by profession) went to Southeastern College, Pasay City to fetch his guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the special complex crime of attempted robbery with
girlfriend, Remedios Maniti (a third year high school student) at about noon time on July 24, 1971. homicide and he is sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty of 10 years and 1 day of
They proceeded to Pasay City Public Market. As they were going up the stairs  leading to Teresa and prision mayor as minimum to 20 years of reclusion temporal as maximum, to indemnify the
Sons Restaurant, Remedios who was ahead of Crispulo suddenly heard the dropping of her things that heirs of Crispulo Alega in the amount of P30,000.00, and to pay one-half of the costs. SO
were being carried by Crispulo. When she looked back, she saw a man later identified as Danilo Tobias ORDERED.
aka Danny Kulot (still at large and on the Wanted Person’s Files) twisting the neck of Crispulo, while
Hernando Dio aka Way Kaon (appellant) was holding Crispulo’s both hands. Tobias and Dio tried to 13. People v. Salvilla, G.R. No. 86163, 26 April 1990
divest Crispulo of his Seiko wrist watch, but the latter resisted their attempt and fought the robbers. At
this juncture, Tobias stabbed Crispulo on the left side of his chest. Crispulo ran down the stairs,
FACTS:
followed by his girlfriend who shouted for help. When he reached the front of Pasay Commercial Bank
he fell down and expired. At the time of his death, the Seiko watch was still strapped to his wrist. The
autopsy revealed that the cause of death was a stab wound at the region below his left breast which  On April 12, 1986 about noon time, in Iloilo City, Salvilla conspiring and confederating with
penetrated his heart. Reynaldo, Ronaldo and Simplicio, armed with guns and hand grenades, staged a robbery at the
New Iloilo Lumber Yard.
Appellant was arrested on October 24, 1972, was investigated at the Detective Bureau of the Pasay City  On their way inside, they met Rodita Habiero and declared a hold-up.
Police Department and gave a statement in the presence of Pat. Arturo Rimorin admitting that on that  They went inside the office and the petitioner pointed his gun at Severino Choco, the owner, and
date and time of the incident, he and his co-accused held up a man and a woman; they did not get the his two daughters, Mary and Mimmie.  They informed Severino that all they needed was money.
watch of the man; that he held the victim’s hand but the latter was able to free himself; that Danny  Severino asked Mary to get a paper bag wherein he placed P20,000 cash (P5000 acc to the
Kulot stabbed the man, that when the victim ran, they also ran away; and that he did not know what defense) and handed it to the petitioner. 
happened to the victim.
 Simplicio took the wallet and wristwatch of Severino after which the latter, his 2 daughters and
Rodita were kept inside the office.
Accused Hernando Dio pleaded not guilty when he was arraigned and after trial the court rendered the
following judgment:  At about 2:00 of the same day, the appellant demanded more money.
  The police and military authorities had surrounded the lumber yard.  Major Sequio, negotiated
“WHEREFORE, finding the accused, Hernando Dio, Guilty, beyond reasonable doubt, of with the accused and appealed to them to surrender.  The accused refused to surrender and release
the crime of Robbery with Homicide as defined under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code, the hostages.
as charged in the Amended Information, the Court hereby sentences him to suffer the penalty  The police and military authorities decided to assault the place when the accused still wouldn’t
of DEATH; to indemnify the heirs of the victim, Crispulo Alega the amount of P12,000.00; to budge after more ultimatums. 
pay moral damages in the amount of P10,000.00 and another P10,000.00, as exemplary  This resulted to injuries to the girls, as well as to the accused Ronaldo and Reynaldo Canasares.
damages; and to pay the costs.” Mary’s right leg had to be amputated due to her injuries.
 Salvilla claimed that the money, wallet and watches were all left on the counter and were never  Lito then laid down on his back and commanded her to mount him. In this position, only a
touched by them. small part again of his penis was inserted into her vagina. At this stage, appellant had both his
 The accused are claiming that the crime of robbery has not been consummated since they did not hands flat on the floor. Thus Abayan thought of escaping.
take the things outside of the building  Abayan dashed out to the other rooms but was consequently chased by Lito. Still naked, she
darted to the municipal building. When the policemen opened the door, they found the
ISSUE: WON the crime of robbery was consummated or attempted. complainant naked sitting on the stairs crying. Pat. Donceras was the first policeman to see
her.
HELD:  Afterward, the complainant was brought to Eastern Samar Provincial Hospital where she was
examined.
ISSUE:
 The SC ruled that they are guilty of consummated robbery with the use of violence against or
intimidation of persons.  Whether or not the crime committed was consummated rape.
 The SC held that it is no defense either that Appellant and his co-accused had no opportunity to
dispose of the personalities 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
RULING:
dispose of the same, the unlawful taking is complete.
 The Court of Appeals set the uniform rule that for the consummation of rape, perfect
penetration is not essential. Any penetration of the female organ by the male organ is
(Because in the element of robbery with the use of violence against or intimidation of persons, it is
sufficient. Entry of the labia or lips of the female organ, without rupture of the hymen or
already considered as consummated from the moment the person gets hold of the thing taken or is in a
laceration of the vagina is sufficient to warrant conviction in the crime of rape. from the
position to dispose of it properly. It is different from robbery by the use of force upon things. Since in
moment the offender has carnal knowledge of his victim, he actually attains his purpose and,
the latter, it will only be considered as consummated when the offender takes and carries out of the
from that moment also all the essential elements of the offense have been accomplished.
building the thing taken.)
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.
FALLO: FALLO:
 The trial court’s judgement is modified, and the appellant found guilty of the crime of rape,
WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from is hereby AFFIRMED. and consequently, sentenced to suffer imprisonment of reclusion Perpetua and to indemnify
the victim in the amount of P30,000.
15. People v. Campuhan, G.R. No. 129433, 30 March 2000
14.  People v. Orita, G.R. No. 88724, 3 April 1990, 184 SCRA 105
FACTS: 
FACTS: On April 25, 1996 at around 4 PM, Ma. Corazon Pamintuan (Corazon), mother of the four
 Cristina Abayan (Abayan), the complainant, was a freshman student. While Ceilito Orita year old victim, went down from the second floor of their house to prepare drinks for the other two
(Lito) was a Philippine Constabulary soldier. children. At the ground floor, she met Primo Campuhan (Accused) who was then busy filling small
 Abayan on March 20, 1983 arrived at her boarding house, when suddenly, somebody held her plastic bags with water to be frozen into ice in the freezer located  on the second floor. Accused was the
and poked a knife to her neck. She recognized Lito who was a frequent visitor of another helper of Corazon’s brother. As Corazon was busy preparing the drinks, she heard one of her daughters
boarder. cry “Ayoko, ayoko” prompting Corazon to rush upstairs. Thereupon, she saw the accused inside her
children’s room kneeling before her daughter whose pajamas and panty were removed, while the
 Lito ordered her to go upstairs with him, with his left arm wrapped around her neck and his accused's pants were down to his knees. 
right hand poking a “balisong” to her neck. When they reached the second floor, he The accused was charged with the crime of rape and was convicted by the trial court relying
commanded her to look for a room. heavily on the testimony of Corazon ruling that carnal knowledge took place as full penetration of the
 Upon entering the room, Lito pushed Abayan who hit her head on the wall. With one hand vaginal orifice is not an essential ingredient, nor is the rapture of the hymen necessary. The mere
holding the knife, Lito undressed himself and ordered Abayan to take off her clothes. Scared, touching of the external genitalia by the penis capable of consummating the sexual act is sufficient to
she took off her t-shirt and pulled off her bra, pants and panty. constitute carnal knowledge.
 Lito ordered her to lie down on the floor and then mounted her. He made her hold his penis
and insert it in her vagina. She followed his orders as he continued to poke the knife to her. At ISSUE:
said position, however, appellant could not fully penetrate her. Only a portion of his penis Whether or not the trial court erred in convicting the accused of the crime of consummated rape.
entered her as she kept on moving.
HELD: 
 police station, admitted before several policemen that he had set the fire to the sack and the rag. He also
YES, Accused is guilty of attempted rape only.  admitted that he started the several other fires which had occurred in said house on previous days and
that he had performed such acts through the inducement of the other prisoner, Hugo Labarro, for they
Judicial depiction of consummated rape has not been confined to the oft-quoted “touching of felt resentment against their masters. That he acted as he did under the promise on Labarro's part to give
the female organ” but has also progressed into being described as “the introduction of the male organ him a peso for each such fire that he should start. Defendant Hugo Labarro was dismissed due to lack of
into the labia of the pudendum”,or “the bombardment of the drawbridge.” But in this case, the evidence.
prosecution has utterly failed in proving that the penis of the accused was able to penetrate the victim’s
vagina however slight.  ISSUE: Whether or not the accused has committed a crime of Frustrated Arson. 

Touching when applied to rape cases does not simply mean mere epidermal contact, stroking
or grazing of organs, a slight brush or a scrape of the penis on the external layer of the victim's vagina,
or the mons pubis, as in this case. There 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. As 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 minora of the pudendum constitutes consummated rape.
Furthermore, the penetration was belied by the victim's own testimony. The possibility of the
accused’s penis having breached the victim’s vagina is belied by the child’s own assertion that she
resisted the advances by putting her legs close together. Consequently, she did not feel any intense pain
but just felt unhappy about what the accused did to her.  that specified in article 549 of the Penal Code, should be imposed in its medium degree.
In cases where penetration was not fully established, the Court had always anchored its
conclusion that rape nevertheless was consummated on the victim’s testimony that she felt pain, or the
medico-legal finding of discoloration in the inner lips of the vagina or labia minora was a;ready gaping
with redness, or the hymenal tags were no long visible. However, none of these were shown in this
case.
RULING: 
The crime is classified only as frustrated arson, in as much as the defendant performed all the acts
conceived to the burning of said house, but nevertheless., owing to causes independent of his will, the
criminal act which he intended was not produced. The offense committed cannot be classified as
consummated arson by the burning of said inhabited house, for the reason that no part of the building
had yet commenced to burn, although, as the piece of sack and the rag, soaked in kerosene oil, had been
placed near partition of the entresol, the partition might have started to burn, had the fire not been put
out on time.
There is no extenuating or aggravating circumstance to be considered in a connection with the
commission of the crime, and therefore the penalty of presidio mayor immediately inferior in degree to
FALLO: 
For the foregoing reasons the judgment appealed from should be affirmed, with the modification
however, that the penalty imposed upon the defendant shall be given eight years and one day of
presidio mayor, with the accessory penalties prescribed in article 57 of the Code. The defendant shall
also pay the costs of both instances. So ordered.

FALLO: 17. People v. Aguilos, G.R. No. 121828, 27 June 2003

WHEREFORE, the Decision of the court a quo finding accused PRIMO “SONNY” CAMPUHAN Y
BELLO guilty of statutory rape and sentencing him to death and to pay damages is MODIFIED. He is FACTS:
instead found guilty of ATTEMPTED RAPE and sentenced to an indeterminate prison term of eight
(8) years four (4) months and ten (10) days of prision mayor medium as minimum, to fourteen (14)
years ten (10) months and twenty (20) days of reclusion temporal medium as maximum. Costs de
oficio.
16. US v. Valdes, L-14128, 10 December 1918
FACTS:
Mrs. Auckback, who appears to have been a resident of the neighborhood, called Mrs. Lewin and told
her that smoke was emitting from the lower floor of her house. Mrs. Lewin ordered the servant Paulino
Banal to look for the fire, as he did and he found, so asked with kerosene oil and placed between a post
of the house and a partition of the entresol, a piece of a jute sack and a rag which were burning. At that
moment the defendant Valdes was in the entresol, engaged in his work of cleaning, while, the other
defendant Hugo Labarro was cleaning the horses kept at the place.
On the same morning of the occurrence, the police arrested the defendants, having been called for the
purpose by telephone. Severino Valdes, after his arrest, according to the statement, drawn up in the
 February 5, 1988, Joselito Capa and Julian Azul Jr. were drinking beer when Edmar Aguilos
and Odilon Lagliba arrived at the store. Joselito and Julian invited the two on their drinking
spree. Although already drunk, Aguilos and Lagliba joined them.
 In the course of their drinking, an altercation sprung out from their conversation. When they
were about to leave, Edmar punched Julian then the two started to trade punches. Joselito
tried to pacify them but to no avail. Odilon, who was watching Edmar and Julian, did not
relish Joselito’s gesture.
 Odilon pulled a knife out, then stabbed Joselito. Ronnie, and Rene Pilola who were Odilon’s
gangmates joined him in stabbing the victim. Joselito fell into the canal. Odilon and Rene fled
while Ronnie chased Julian in an attempt to stab the latter. Ronnie went back to the scene and
smashed a piece of hollow block on Joselito’s head, then using a broken bottle, struck his
head once more. Joselito Capa died from multiple stab wounds.
 Rene Pilola, in his defense, denied the evidence of the prosecution as stated above. He argued
that he was staying in his cousin’s house, Julian Cadion, that night as the former was
suffering from an ulcer. He mentioned that he did not leave the house, and it was only his
cousin Julian Cadion who went out to check on the situation. 
  In her testimony, Agripina Gloria, a female security guard residing near where the commotion In such a case, it is not necessary that each of the separate injuries is fatal in itself. It is sufficient if the
took place, stated that when she heard the commotion outside, she saw Ronnie rush to the injuries cooperated in bringing about the victim’s death. Both the offenders are criminally liable for the
kitchen of her niece Teresita to acquire a knife and subsequently went to where the same crime by reason of their individual and separate overt criminal acts. Absent conspiracy between
commotion was originating from. Agripina saw Ronnie stabbing Joselito. She mentioned that two or more offenders, they may be guilty of homicide or murder for the death of the victim, one as a
she did not see Odilon nor Rene in the scene. principal by direct participation, and the other as an accomplice, under Article 18 of the Revised Penal
Code:
ISSUE: Art. 18. Accomplices. – Accomplices are the persons who, not being included in Article 17, cooperate
Whether or not there was conspiracy among Odilon, Ronnie, and Rene Pilola in stabbing Joselito Capa in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts.
to death. To hold a person liable as an accomplice, two elements must concur:
(a) the community of criminal design; that is, knowing the criminal design of the principal by direct
RULING/HELD: participation, he concurs with the latter in his purpose;
(b) the performance of previous or simultaneous acts that are not indispensable to the commission of the
crime.
Yes, there was a conspiracy. There may be one even if an offender does not know the identities of the
other offenders, and even though he is not aware of all the details of the plan of operation or was not in Accomplices come to know about the criminal resolution of the principal by direct participation
on the scheme from the beginning. One need only to knowingly contribute his efforts in furtherance of after the principal has reached the decision to commit the felony and only then does the
it. One who joins a criminal conspiracy in effect adopts as his own the criminal designs of his co- accomplice agree to cooperate in its execution. Accomplices do not decide whether the crime should
conspirators. Once established, all the conspirators are liable as co-principals regardless of the manner be committed; they merely assent to the plan of the principal by direct participation and cooperate in its
and extent of their participation since in contemplation of law, the act of one would be the act of all.  accomplishment. However, where one cooperates in the commission of the crime by performing
overt acts which by themselves are acts of execution, he is a principal by direct participation, and
Article 8. Conspiracy and proposal to commit felony. - Conspiracy and proposal to commit a felony are not merely an accomplice.
punishable only in the cases in which the law specially provides a penalty therefore. In this case, Odilon all by himself initially decided to stab Joselito. The appellant and Ronnie were on
the side of the street but decided to join in stabbing the victim with their respective knives. The three
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a men simultaneously stabbed the helpless victim. Odilon and the appellant fled from the scene together,
felony and decide to commit it. There is proposal when the person who has decided to commit a felony while Ronnie went after Julian. When he failed to overtake and collar Julian, Ronnie returned to where
proposes its execution to some other person or persons. Joselito fell and hit him with a hollow block and a broken bottle. Ronnie then hurriedly left. All the
overt acts of Odilon, Ronnie and the appellant before, during, and after the stabbing incident
To hold an accused guilty as a co-principal by reason of conspiracy, he must be shown to have indubitably show that they conspired to kill the victim.
performed an overt act in pursuance or furtherance of the conspiracy. The mere presence of an accused The victim died because of multiple stab wounds inflicted by two or more persons. It cannot be argued
at the situs of the crime will not suffice; mere knowledge, acquiescence or approval of the act without that by the time the appellant and Ronnie joined Odilon in stabbing the victim, the crime was already
cooperation or agreement to cooperate on the part of the accused is not enough to make him a party to a consummated because there is no evidence that before their arrival at the crime, the victim was already
conspiracy. There must be intentional participation in the transaction with a view to the furtherance of dead. 
the common design and purpose. Conspiracy to exist does not require an agreement for an appreciable
period prior to the occurrence. From the legal standpoint, conspiracy exists if, at the time of the All things considered, it was ruled that Ronnie and the appellant conspired with Odilon to kill the
commission of the offense, the accused had the same purpose and were united in its execution. As a victim; hence, all of them are criminally liable for the latter’s death. The appellant is not merely
rule, the concurrence of wills, which is the essence of conspiracy, may be deduced from the an accomplice but is a principal by direct participation. Even assuming that the appellant did not
evidence of facts and circumstances, which taken together, indicate that the parties cooperated conspire with Ronnie and Odilon to kill the victim, the appellant is nevertheless criminally liable as a
and labored to the same end. principal by direct participation. The stab wounds inflicted by him cooperated in bringing about and
accelerated the death of the victim or contributed materially thereto.
Even if two or more offenders do not conspire to commit homicide or murder, they may be held
criminally liable as principals by direct participation if they perform overt acts which mediately FALLO:
or immediately cause or accelerate the death of the victim, applying Article 4, paragraph 1 of the
RPC: WHEREFORE, the Decision, dated May 3, 1995, of Branch 164 of the Regional Trial Court of Pasig
  City in Criminal Case No. 73615, finding appellant Rene Gayot Pilola GUILTY beyond reasonable
Art. 4. Criminal liability. – Criminal liability shall be incurred: doubt of the crime of murder is AFFIRMED WITH MODIFICATION. The appellant is hereby
directed to pay to the heirs of the victim Joselito Capa the amount of ₱50,000 as civil indemnity; the
1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that amount of ₱50,000 as moral damages; and the amount of ₱25,000 as exemplary damages.
which he intended.