Professional Documents
Culture Documents
2015)
BOOK 1 (Articles 1-99, RPC)
FELONIES
(Stages of execution)
The Court cannot simply assume that there was attempted rape simply because
accused undressed himself and the offended party, plus the fact that accused did
rape the latter on three other occasions. Thus, for there to be an attempted rape,
the accused must have commenced the act of penetrating his sexual organ to the
vagina of the victim but for some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous
desistance, the penetration, however slight, is not completed. - People of the
Philippines vs. Domingo Dominguez, Jr., alias Sandy, G.R. No. 180914,
November 24, 2010
The crime of robbery remained unconsummated because Elmer Lagdaan refused to
give his money to Joseph Barra and no personal property was shown to have been
taken. It was for this reason that Elmer Lagdaan was shot. Joseph Barra can only
be found guilty of attempted robbery with homicide. People of the Philippines
vs. Joseph Barra, G.R. No. 198020, July 10, 2013
CONSPIRACY
Acts of conspiracy of each accused need not be directly proved as it can be
inferred from the acts of the accused prior to, during or subsequent to the
incident. What is material is that the actions of the accused pertain to a joint
purpose, concert of action or community of interest in conspiracy an act one is the
act of all. - People of the Philippines vs. Arnold Garchitorena y Camba
A.K.A. Junior; Joey Pamplona A.K.A. Nato and Jessie Garcia y Adorino, G.
R. No. 175605, August 28, 2009
Conspiracy is always predominantly mental in composition because it consists
primarily of a meeting of minds and intent. It is present when the accused by their
acts aimed at the same object, one performing one part and another performing
another so as to complete it with a view to the attainment of the same object, and
their acts though apparently independent were in fact concerted and cooperative,
indicating closeness of personal association, concerted action and concurrence of
sentiments. Clearly, it is attendant in circumstances when there was concerted
action between the accused-appellants before, during and after the offense which
ably demonstrated their unity of design and objective in successfully committing
the crime. - People of the Philippines vs. Joseph Serrano and Anthony
Serrano, G.R. No. 179038, May 6, 2010
Neither can the rapid turn of events be considered to negate a finding of conspiracy.
Unlike evident premeditation, there is no requirement for conspiracy to exist that
there be a sufficient period of time to elapse to afford full opportunity for meditation
and reflection. Instead, conspiracy arises on the very moment the plotters agree,
expressly or impliedly, to commit the subject felony. - People of the Philippines
Page 1 of 32
Self-defense, under Article 11, paragraph 1, and accident, under Article 12,
paragraph 4 of the Revised Penal Code, are affirmative defenses which the accused
is burdened to prove, with clear and convincing evidence. Such affirmative defenses
involve questions of facts adduced to the trial and appellate courts for resolution. By
admitting killing the victim in self-defense or by accident without fault or without
intention of causing it, the burden is shifted to the accused to prove such affirmative
defenses. He should rely on the strength of his own evidence and not on the
weakness of that of the prosecution. If the accused fails to prove his affirmative
defense, he can no longer be acquitted. - People of the Philippines vs. Marcial
Malicdem, G.R. No. 184601, November 12, 2012
Under paragraph 4, Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code, to successfully invoke
avoidance of greater evil as a justifying circumstance, the following requisites
should be complied with: (1) the evil sought to be avoided actually exists (2) the
injury feared be greater than that done to avoid it and (3) there be no other
practical and less harmful means of preventing it. Moreover, Punzalan failed to
satisfy the third requisite that there be no other practical and less harmful means of
preventing it. Under paragraph 4, Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code, infliction of
damage or injury to another so that a greater evil or injury may not befall ones self
may be justified only if it is taken as a last resort and with the least possible
prejudice to another. If there is another way to avoid the injury without causing
damage or injury to another or, if there is no such other way but the damage to
another may be minimized while avoiding an evil or injury to ones self, then such
course should be taken. - People of the Philippines vs. Arturo Punzalan, Jr.,
G.R. No. 199892, December 10, 2012
A person who invokes self-defense has the burden of proof. He must prove all the
elements of self-defense. However, the most important of all the elements is
unlawful aggression on the part of the victim. Unlawful aggression must be proved
first in order for self-defense to be successfully pleaded, whether complete or
incomplete. - People of the Philippines vs. Gary Vergara y Oriel and Joseph
Inocencio y Paulino, G.R. No. 177763, July 3, 2013
AGGRAVATING CIRCUMSTANCES
To take advantage of superior strength is to use force out of proportion to the means
available to the person attacked to defend himself.
Tying the victim hog-style after rendering him immobilized constituted outraging or
scoffing at the corpse of the victim.
For voluntary surrender to be appreciated, it must be spontaneous, in such a
manner that it shows the intent of the accused to surrender unconditionally to the
authorities, either because he acknowledges his guilt or because he wishes to save
them the trouble and expense of finding and capturing him. People of the
Philippines vs. Ramon Regalario, Marciano Regalario, Sotero Regalario,
Bienvenido Regalario and Noel Regalario, G.R. No. 174483, March 31, 2009
Page 3 of 32
It is basic in our penal law that treachery is present when the offender employs
means, methods or forms which tend directly and especially to insure the execution
of the crime, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended
party might make. - People of the Philippines vs. Joseph Asilan y Tabornal,
G.R. No. 188322, April 11, 2012
When the victim was stabbed by accused, the latter inside the trial, judicial notice
can be taken that when the tricycle driver is seated on the motorcycle, his head is
usually higher or at the level of the roof of the side car which leaves his torso
exposed to the passengers who are seated in the side car. Hence, there was no way
for Jesus to even be forewarned of the intended stabbing of his body both from the
people seated in the side car and those seated behind him. Thus, treachery is
present. There is treachery when the means, methods, and forms of execution gave
the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or to retaliate; and such
means, methods, and forms of execution were deliberately and consciously adopted
by the accused without danger to his person. What is decisive in an appreciation of
treachery is that the execution of the attack made it impossible for the victim to
defend himself.
Furthermore, in a case of special complex crime of carnapping with homicide, there
must be proof not only of the essential elements of carnapping, but also that it was
the original criminal design of the culprit and the killing was perpetrated in the
course of the commission of the carnapping or on the occasion thereof. - People of
the Philippines vs. Joel Aquino y Cendana, G.R. No. 201092, January 15,
2014
The accused, charged for the felony of murder, questions the appreciation of the
qualifying circumstance of abuse of strength when the same was not in the
Information. The Court ruled that even if abuse of superior strength was properly
alleged and proven in court, it cannot serve to qualify or aggravate the felony at
issue since it is jurisprudentially settled that when the circumstance of abuse of
superior strength concurs with treachery, the former is absorbed in the latter. People of the Philippines vs. Marcelino Dadao, Antonio Sulindao, Eddie
Malogsi (deceased) and Alfemio Malogsi, G.R. No. 201860, January 22,
2014
TREACHERY
The essence of the qualifying circumstance of treachery is the suddenness, surprise
and the lack of expectation that the attack will take place, thus, depriving the victim
of any real opportunity for self-defense while ensuring the commission of the crime
without risk to the aggressor. - People of the Philippines vs. Dante Jadap, G.R.
No. 177983, March 30, 2010
There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against persons,
employing means, methods, or forms in the execution, which tend directly and
specially to insure its execution, without risk to the offender arising from the
Page 4 of 32
For the defense of Bulagao that he was suffering from mental retardation be given
credit, There must be a showing from the findings of the psychologist that Bulagao
had the same mental or psychological condition at the time of the said
incidents. The RTC noted that the psychological examination of Bulagao was
conducted more than a couple of years after the dates of the complained of
incidents. Even assuming that accused-appellant was of such mental state at the
time of the incidents, the psychologist testified that accused-appellant had the
capacity to discern right from wrong. - People of the Philippines vs. Aniceto
Bulagao, G.R. No. 184757, October 5, 2011
MITIGATING CIRCUMSTANCES
When the prosecution fails to prove the exact date of the commission of the offense
and there is a question whether the accused reached the age of majority at the time
of the commission, such question shall be resolved in favor of the accused and
therefore shall benefit from the mitigating circumstance of minority. People of the
Philippines vs. Richard O. Sarcia, G.R. No. 169641, September 10, 2009
PAROLE
No jurisprudence in criminal law is more settled than that alibi is the weakest of all
defenses, for it is easy to contrive and difficult to disprove, and for which reason it is
generally rejected.
Section 3 of Republic Act No. 9346 provides that persons convicted of offenses
punished with reclusion perpetua, or whose sentences will be reduced to reclusion
perpetua, shall not be eligible for parole under Act No. 4103, otherwise known as
the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended. - People of the Philippines vs.
Vicente Candellada, G.R. No. 189293, July 10, 2013
BOOK II (Articles 114-365, RPC) and related Special Laws
FALSIFICATION BY PUBLIC OFFICER, EMPLOYEE OR NOTARY OR
ECCLESIASTICAL MINISTER
In the falsification of public or official documents, whether by public officials or by
private persons, it is unnecessary that there be present the idea of gain or the
intent to injure a third person; the principal thing punished is the violation of the
public faith and the destruction of the truth as therein solemnly proclaimed. Romeo D. Lonzanida vs. People Of The Philippines, G.R. No. 160243-52,
July 20, 2009
COMPREHENSIVE DANGEROUS DRUGS ACT OF 2002
When all the elements of the crimes charged were present thereby establishing the
guilt beyond reasonable doubt of the accused, no error has been committed in the
Page 6 of 32
It is settled that Sec. 86 of Republic Act No. 9165 does not invalidate operations on
account of the law enforcers failure to maintain close coordination with the PDEA. People of the Philippines vs. Jesusa Figueroa y Coronado, G.R. No. 186141,
April 11, 2012
Illegal possession of prohibited or regulated drugs is committed when the following
elements concur: (1) the accused is in possession of an item or object which is
identified to be a prohibited drug; (2) such possession is not authorized by law; and
(3) the accused freely and consciously possessed the said drug. - People of the
Philippines vs. Jimmy Biyala Velasquez, G.R. No. 177224, April 11, 2012
This Court has already ruled in several cases that the failure of the arresting officer
to comply strictly with Section 21 of Republic Act No. 9165 is not fatal. It will not
render the arrest of the accused illegal or the items seized or confiscated from him
inadmissible. What is of utmost important is the preservation of the integrity and
the evidentiary value of the seized items, as the same would be utilized in the
determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused.
Also, in every prosecution for the illegal sale of prohibited drugs, the presentation of
the drug, i.e., the corpus delicti, as evidence in court is material. In fact, the
existence of the dangerous drug is crucial to a judgment of conviction. It is,
therefore, indispensable that the identity of the prohibited drug be established
beyond doubt. Even more than this, what must also be established is the fact that
the substance bought during the buy-bust operation is the same substance offered
in court as exhibit. The chain of custody requirement performs this function in that it
ensures that unnecessary doubts concerning the identity of the evidence are
removed.
Finally, the Court acknowledged that a testimony about a perfect chain is not
always the standard as it is almost always impossible to obtain an unbroken chain.
The Court stresses that what is of utmost importance is the preservation of the
integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items. - People of the
Philippines vs. Maricar Brainer y Mangulabnan, G.R. No. 188571, October
10, 2012
The elements that should be proven in both the sale and possession of dangerous
drugs intrinsically include the identification of what was seized by police officers to
be the same item examined and presented in court. This identification must be
established with moral certainty and is a function of the rule on the chain of
custody. - People of the Philippines vs. Meriam Guru y Kazan, G.R. No.
189808, October 24, 2012
This Court has reviewed and scrutinized in detail the testimonies of the prosecution
witnesses and found glaring inconsistencies that relate to the identity of the
prohibited drug allegedly confiscated from Del Rosario. The patent inconsistency
Page 9 of 32
Page 10 of 32
The elements that must be established for the successful prosecution of illegal sale
of dangerous drugs, viz: (1) the identity of the buyer and the seller, the object, and
consideration; and (2) the delivery of the thing sold and the payment for the same.
What is material is the proof that the transaction or sale actually took place,
coupled with the presentation in court of the corpus delicti. The delivery of the
contraband to the poseur-buyer and the receipt of the marked money consummate
the buy-bust transaction between the entrapping officers and the accused. The
chain of custody of the seized drugs in a buy-bust operation had been sufficiently
established when there was proof of the following: first, the seizure and marking, if
practicable, of the illegal drug recovered from the accused by the apprehending
officer; second, the turnover of the illegal drug seized by the apprehending officer to
the investigating officer; third, the turnover by the investigating officer of the illegal
drug to the forensic chemist for laboratory examination; and fourth, the turnover
and submission of the marked illegal drug seized from the forensic chemist to the
court. - People of the Philippines vs. Linda Alviz y Yatco and Elizabeth De La
Vega y Bautista, G.R. No. 177158, February 06, 2013
A testimony about a perfect chain is not always the standard as it is almost always
impossible to obtain an unbroken chain." The arresting officers failure to conduct a
physical inventory and to photograph the items seized from De Jesus will not render
his arrest illegal or the items confiscated from him inadmissible in evidence as they
were able to nonetheless preserve the integrity and the evidentiary value of the
said items. This is what is of utmost importance as the seized items are what would
be used in the determination of De Jesus guilt or innocence.
What is significant is that the links in the chain of custody were all accounted for by
the prosecution, from the time the items were confiscated from De Jesus, up to the
time they were presented in court during trial as proof of the corpus delicti. In any
case, unless De Jesus can show that there was bad faith, ill will, or tampering with
the evidence, the presumption that the integrity of the evidence has been
preserved, and that the police officers discharged their duties properly and with
regularity, will remain. - People of the Philippines vs. Victor De Jesus y Garcia,
G.R. No. 198794, February 06, 2013
Noncompliance with Section 21(1), Article II of Republic Act No. 9165 regarding
chain of custody, does not necessarily render the arrest illegal or the items seized
inadmissible because what is essential is that the integrity and evidentiary value of
the seized items are preserved which would be utilized in the determination of the
guilt or innocence of the accused. - People of the Philippines vs. Lolita Quesido
y Badarang, G.R. No. 189351, April 10, 2013
Page 11 of 32
Page 12 of 32
Page 13 of 32
MURDER
The Court held that while there were indeed discrepancies in the testimony of the
prosecution witnessed, they are not sufficient to negate the guilt of accused. As
long as the testimony jibes on material points, the slight clashing statements
neither dilute the credibility nor the veracity of their testimony. - People of the
Philippines vs. Darwin Bernabe Garcia, G.R. No. 185726, October 16, 2009
Unlawful aggression is a condition sine qua non, without which there can be no selfdefense, whether complete or incomplete. - People of the Philippines vs.
Page 14 of 32
Page 15 of 32
It is enough that there is the slightest penetration of the male organ into the female
sex organ. The mere touching by the male organ of the labia of the pudendum of
the womans private part is sufficient to consummate rape. It was therefore
consummated rape which accused-appellant committed. - People of the
Philippines vs. Mario Castro, G.R. No. 172874, December 17, 2008
In the prosecution of criminal cases, especially those involving the extreme penalty
of death, nothing but proof beyond reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to
constitute the crime with which an accused is charged must be
established. Qualifying circumstances or special qualifying circumstances must be
proved with equal certainty and clearness as the crime itself; otherwise, there can
Page 17 of 32
Page 18 of 32
Article 266A(1)(d) provides the definition of the crime of statutory rape, the
elements of which are: (1) that the offender had carnal knowledge of a woman and
(2) that such a woman is under twelve years of age or is demented. As a special
qualifying circumstance of the crime of rape, the concurrence of the victims
minority and her relationship to the accused must be both alleged and proven
beyond reasonable doubt.
Full penetration of the vaginal orifice is not an essential ingredient, nor is the
rupture of the hymen necessary, to conclude that carnal knowledge took place the
mere touching of the external genitalia by a penis that is capable of consummating
the sexual act is sufficient to constitute carnal knowledge.
A mere denial, without any strong evidence to support it, can scarcely overcome the
positive declaration by the victim of the identity and involvement of appellant in the
crimes attributed to him. - People of the Philippines vs. Ricardo Pamintuan y
Sahagun, G.R. No. 192239, June 5, 2013
The only subject of inquiry on statutory rape is the age of the woman and whether
carnal knowledge took place. - People of the Philippines vs. Ricardo Piosang,
G.R. No. 200329, June 5, 2013
Accused-appellant Abel Diaz was convicted of the crime of rape. His appeal boils
down to a question of credibility of the prosecutions primary witness, the private
complainant Mara. He argues that the failure of Mara to make an outcry during the
two hours he allegedly stayed in her room makes her testimony not credible. In
rejecting his contention the Supreme Court ruled that the precise duration of the
rape is not material to and does not negate the commission of the felony. When one
is being raped, forcibly held, weak and in great pain, and in shock, she cannot be
reasonably expected to keep a precise track of the passage of time down to the last
minute. - People of the Philippines vs. Abel Diaz, G.R. No. 200882, June 13,
2013
What is material to the prosecution for illegal sale of dangerous drugs is the proof
that the transaction or sale actually occurred, coupled with the presentation in court
of the substance seized as evidence. With respect to illegal possession of dangerous
drugs, possession of dangerous drugs constitutes prima facie evidence of
knowledge or animus possidendi sufficient to convict an accused in the absence of a
satisfactory explanation of such possession. - People of the Philippines vs.
Mercidita T. Resurreccion, G.R. No. 188310, June 13, 2013
Inconsistencies in a rape victims testimony do not impair her credibility, especially
if the inconsistencies refer to trivial matters that do not alter the essential fact of
the commission of rape.
It is not uncommon for a rape victim to initially conceal the assault against her
person for several reasons, including that of fear of threats posed by her assailant.
A rape charge only becomes doubtful when the victims inaction or delay in
Page 24 of 32
In rape cases, the accused may be convicted based solely on the testimony of the
victim, provided that such testimony is credible, natural, convincing, and consistent
with human nature and the normal course of things. Rape victims are not expected
to make an errorless recollection of the incident, so humiliating and painful that
they might be trying to obliterate it from their memory, thus, a few inconsistent
remarks in rape cases will not necessarily impair the testimony of the offended
party. - People of the Philippines vs. Welmo. Linsie y Binevidez, G.R. No.
199494, November 27, 2013
In a prosecution for rape, the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the
testimony of the victim that is credible, convincing, and consistent with human
nature and the normal course of things. The very nature of the crime of rape,
conviction or acquittal depends almost entirely on the credibility of the
complainants testimony because of the fact that, usually, only the participants can
directly testify as to its occurrence.
Physical resistance need not be established when intimidation is brought to bear on
the victim and the latter submits out of fear the failure to shout or offer tenuous
resistance does not make voluntary the victims submission to the criminal acts of
the accused.
A love affair does not justify rape for a man does not have the unbridled license to
subject his beloved to his carnal desires against her will. - People of the
Philippines vs. Dalton Laurian, Jr. y Pugsot, G.R. No. 199868, December 11,
2013
It is a well-established rule that testimonies of rape victims, especially child victims,
are given full weight and credit. When a woman, more so if she is a minor, says she
has been raped, she says, in effect, all that is necessary to prove that rape was
committed. Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth. Courts usually give
greater weight to the testimony of a girl who is a victim of sexual assault, especially
a minor, particularly in cases of incestuous rape, because no woman would be
willing to undergo a public trial and put up with the shame, humiliation and dishonor
of exposing her own degradation were it not to condemn an injustice and to have
the offender apprehended and punished. - People of the Philippines vs. Lino
Paldo, G.R. No. 200515, December 11, 2013
It is jurisprudentially settled that when a woman says she has been raped, she says
in effect all that is necessary to show that she has been raped and her testimony
alone is sufficient if it satisfies the exacting standard of credibility needed to convict
the accused. Thus, in this jurisdiction, the fate of the accused in a rape case,
ultimately and oftentimes, hinges on the credibility of the victims testimony. In this
regard, the Court defers to the trial courts assessment of the credibility of victims
testimony, most especially, when it is affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
Furthermore, it is not absurd nor contrary to human experience that the victim gave
birth ten (10) months after the alleged sexual assault as there may be cases of long
Page 26 of 32
When the accused asserts that the cover of darkness and lack of lighting inside the
"kamalig" where the crime took place, utterly diminished victims ability to identify
him or anyone for that matter, is downright erroneous. The victim never claimed to
have seen her attacker inside the "kamalig." What was testified was the fact that
the victim saw appellant Jastiva when he walked past her by the open door of the
"kamalig" and his face was finally illuminated by the moonlight. The Court have held
that wicklamps, flashlight, even moonlight and starlight may, in proper situations,
be sufficient illumination, making the attack on the credibility of witnesses solely on
this ground unmeritorious. Furthermore, in other cases the Court ruled, If
identification of persons is possible even by the light of stars, with more reason that
one could identify persons by moonlight. - People of the Philippines vs. Aurelio
Jastiva, G.R. No. 199268, February 12, 2014
Under Section 3(b), Article I of Republic Act No. 7610, the term "child abuse" is
defined as the maltreatment of a child, whether habitual or not, which includes the
physical abuse of a child, among other acts. In this case, AAA positively identified
the accused-appellant as the person who kicked her in the buttocks, hit her head
with a hammer, and smashed her head on the wall on. Because of the said brutal
and inhumane acts of the accused-appellant, AAA suffered bruises and contusions
in different parts of her body. Furthermore, the Court finds no cogent reason to
disbelieve AAAs testimony, which was corroborated by the medical findings of Dr.
Rivamonte and Dr. Arellano that the victims hymen had "complete healed
lacerations at 1, 3, 6, 9 oclock positions." Jurisprudence provides that the eloquent
testimony of the victim, coupled with the medical findings attesting to her nonPage 27 of 32
Page 28 of 32
The deprivation required by Article 267 means not only the imprisonment of a
person, but also the deprivation of his liberty in whatever form and for whatever
length of time. It involves a situation where the victim cannot go out of the place of
confinement or detention or is restricted or impeded in his liberty to move. In other
words, the essence of kidnapping is the actual deprivation of the victims liberty,
coupled with indubitable proof of the intent of the accused to effect such
deprivation. - People of the Philippines vs. Alberto M. Basao alias "Dodong,"
Jovel S. Apole, Melquiades L. Apole, Estrelita G. Apole, Rolando A. Apole
alias "Bebot," Vicente C. Salon, Jaime Tandan, Renato C. Apole alias
"Boboy," Rolando M. Ochivillo alias "Allan," Lorenzo L. Apole, John Doe,
Peter Doe and Mike Doe, Jovel S. Apole, Rolando A. Apole, and Renato C.
Apole, G.R. No. 189820, October 10, 2012
In robbery with homicide, the original criminal design of the malefactor is to commit
robbery, with homicide perpetrated on the occasion or by reason of the robbery. The
intent to commit robbery must precede the taking of human life. The homicide may
take place before, during or after the robbery. It is only the result obtained, without
reference or distinction as to the circumstances, causes or modes or persons
intervening in the commission of the crime that has to be taken into consideration.
There is no such felony of robbery with homicide through reckless imprudence or
simple negligence. The constitutive elements of the crime, namely, robbery and
homicide, must be consummated.
It is immaterial that the death would supervene by mere accident; or that the victim
of homicide is other than the victim of robbery, or that two or more persons are
killed or that aside from the homicide, rape, intentional mutilation, or usurpation of
authority, is committed by reason or on the occasion of the crime. Likewise
immaterial is the fact that the victim of homicide is one of the robbers; the felony
would still be robbery with homicide. - People of the Philippines vs. Welvin Diu
y Kotsesa, and Dennis Dayaon y Tupit, G.R. No. 201449 , April 3, 2013
B.P. 22
The elements of violation of B.P. Blg. 22 are: (1) making, drawing, and issuance of
any check to apply on account or for value; (2) knowledge of the maker, drawer, or
issuer that at the time of issue he does not have sufficient funds in or credit with the
drawee bank for the payment of the check in full upon its presentment; and (3)
subsequent dishonor of the check by the drawee bank for insufficiency of funds or
credit, or dishonor for the same reason had not the drawer, without any valid cause,
ordered the bank to stop payment. - Liberata Ambito and Basilio Ambito vs.
People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 127327, February 13, 2009
ESTAFA
The receipt by the drawer of the notice of dishonor is not an element of the offense.
The presumption only dispenses with the presentation of evidence of deceit if such
notification is received and the drawer of the check failed to deposit the amount
Page 30 of 32
Page 31 of 32
Page 32 of 32