7/13/2019 Case Brief: Villareal vs.

People | The Welfare Of the People Shall Be The Supreme Law

The Welfare Of the People Shall Be The Supreme

Law

a repository of my notes from law school

Case Brief: Villareal vs. People

FEBRUARY 6, 2018 ⁄ JEFF REY

G.R. No. 151258 December 1, 2014
ARTEMIO VILLAREAL, Petitioner,
vs.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

FACTS:

In February 1991, seven freshmen law students of the Ateneo de Manila University School of Law
signified their intention to join the Aquila Legis Juris Fraternity (Aquila Fraternity). Hazing was pre-
requisite in joining for which Lenny was one of few who had undergone the process. After the initiation,
Lenny’s condition worsened due to the blows he received, the Aquilans rushed him to the hospital.
Lenny was pronounced dead on arrival.

Consequently, a criminal case for homicide was filed against the 35 Aquilans. Four of the accused
(Tecson, et. al.) were found to be guilty of homicide by the trial court but was reduced to crime of slight
physical injuries and sentenced to 20 days of arresto menor by the Court of Appeals. However, upon
appeal to the Supreme Court by the Office of the Solicitor General, the Supreme Court ruled that they
should be liable for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide instead.

In Motions for Clarification or Reconsideration, Tecson et. al. clarified the effect of the decision of the
Supreme Court to their criminal liability. According to Tecson et. al., they immediately applied for
probation after the CA rendered its Decision lowering their criminal liability from the crime of homicide,
which carries a non-probationable sentence, to slight physical injuries, which carries a probationable
sentence. Hence, they have already been discharged from their criminal liability and the cases against
them closed and terminated by virtue of their granted Applications for Probation for which the terms
therein are already been complied with.

ISSUE:

Whether Tecson et. al. can be covered by the Probation Law despite their appeal of conviction?

https://jeffsarabusing.wordpress.com/2018/02/06/case-brief-villareal-vs-people/ 1/2
7/13/2019 Case Brief: Villareal vs. People | The Welfare Of the People Shall Be The Supreme Law

HELD:

Yes. First, the Court in resolving this issue ruled that the RTC Branch 130 had no jurisdiction to act on
the probation applications of Tecson et. al. for the law requires that an application for probation be filed
with the trial court that convicted and sentenced the defendant, meaning the court of origin (Branch
121). Hence, its grant of probation with Tecson et. al. is void.

However, the Court abandoning its previous stance on ineligibility of those who have appealed their
conviction to probation, citing the then recent case of Colinares vs. People that the Probation Law never
intended to deny an accused his right to probation through no fault of his. Had the RTC done what was
right and imposed the correct penalty, he would have had the right to apply for probation. Moreover,
the Court was quick to clarify that it remains that those who will appeal from judgments of conviction,
when they have the option to try for probation, forfeit their right to apply for that privilege.

Note: See full text for the extensive discussion of SC about Hazing.

Advertisements

REPORT THIS AD
Categories: Case Digests, Criminal Law, Remedial Law and Legal Ethics Tags: 151258, appeal, aquila
legis juris fraternity, ateneo, colinares, criminal procedure, fraternity, hazing, homicide, non-
probationable sentence, probation, probation law, reckless imprudence, right to probation, slight
physical injuries, tecson, villareal

CREATE A FREE WEBSITE OR BLOG AT WORDPRESS.COM.

https://jeffsarabusing.wordpress.com/2018/02/06/case-brief-villareal-vs-people/ 2/2