Professional Documents
Culture Documents
filed
by
said
appellee
alleged
lack
of
There
are
two
fundamental
rules
on
this
the
French
rule,
according
to
which
crimes
steamer
anchored
in
the
port
of
Cebu,
the
PADILLA vs DIZON
FACTS
Respondent Hon. Baltazar R. Dizonpresided the criminal
case against Lo Chi Fai, who was caught by customs
guard at MIA while attempting to smuggle foreign
currency and foreign exchange instruments ( 380 pcs
amounting to US$355,349.57) out of the country.In his
decision, respondent judge acquitted Lo Chi Fai, saying
that Lo Chi Fai had no willful intention to violate the law
(sec 6, Central Bank Circular No. 96.) He also directed
the release to Lo Chi Fai of at least the amount of
US$3,000.00 under Central Bank Circular No. 960..
Commissioner of Customs, Alexander Padilla, then filed a
complaint
against
Baltazar
R.
Dizon
for
rendering
Yes.
Respondent
judge
has
shown
gross
again
displayed
incompetence
and
gross
10
11
exercising
his
legitimate
right
of
self-
12
13
accused
must,
therefore,
be
considered
the
14
it may be inferred:
15
for
the
worse
and
bring
about
dangerous
about
against
the
doctor's
orders,
which
16
17
of
its
consequences,
although
both
were
18
19
20
People vs Ortega
FACTS:
San
Andres,
Searfin,
Boyet
and
Andre
Dont,
help
me!
(Huwag,
tulunganninyoako!)
Ariel got
21
wounds, contributory
o
o
13 stab wounds
stab wound on the upper left shoulder, near the
stab wound on the back left side of the body and the
22
Unable to move,
Andre then
23
54
24
---------------------------------------------------------------------Urbano v. IAC
Facts:
On October 23, 1980, petitioner FilomenoUrbano was on
his way to his ricefield. He found the place where he
stored palay flooded with water coming from the
irrigation canal. Urbano went to the elevated portion to
see what happened, and there he saw Marcelino Javier
and Emilio Efre cutting grass. Javier admitted that he
was the one who opened the canal. A quarrel ensued,
and Urbano hit Javier on the right palm with his bolo, and
again on the leg with the back of the bolo. On October
27, 1980, Urbano and Javier had an amicable settlement.
Urbano paid P700 for the medical expenses of Javier. On
November 14, 1980, Urbano was rushed to the hospital
where he had lockjaw and convulsions. The doctor found
the condition to be caused by tetanus toxin which
infected the healing wound in his palm. He died the
following day. Urbano was charged with homicide and
was found guilty both by the trial court and on appeal by
the Court of Appeals. Urbano filed a motion for new trial
based on the affidavit of the Barangay Captain who
25
having
close
causal
connection
with
its
event
should,
as
an
ordinarily
prudent
and
26
Considering
the
circumstance
surrounding
27
the
proximate
cause.
And
if
an
independent
28
Jenny,
had
illicit
relationship.
The
illicit
29
HELD
No. Article 247 of the RPC must be applied in the instant
case.
ART. 247. Death or physical injuries inflicted under
exceptional circumstances. Any legally married person
who,
having
surprised
his
spouse
in
the
act
of
30
rules shall
circumstances,
to
be
applicable,
parents
with
under the
respect
to
same
their
31
32
33
34
minutes
after
the
maltreatment
and
was
35
attracted
the
attention
of
Emigdio
36
aware
of
Omamdam's presence.
No evidence that there was disagreement or ill
feelings between Bindoy&Omamdam. On the
contrary, they were nephew & uncle, & were on
good terms with each other.
2. The witness for the defense corroborates the
defendant to the effect that Pacas and Bindoy were
actually struggling for the possession of the bolo, and
37
that when the latter let go, the former had pulled so
violently that it flew towards Omamdam, who was
therefore hit in the chest, without Bindoy's seeing him,
because
Omamdam
had
passed
behind
him.
The
38
39
Facts:
The accused and Juana Buralo was sweethearts. Juana
had been jealous of the accused on account of the latter
having frequently visited the house of one Carmen. Their
relations were such that the accused invited Juana to
take a walk on the afternoon of August 9, 1925. Juana
refused him, later sending him a note of excuse. On the
third day, or the night of August 11th, the accused went
to the threshold of Cirilo Banyan's house where Juana
Buralo had gone to take part in some devotion. There
the accused, revolver in hand, requested Francisco
Abellon to ask Juana to come downstairs and as Abellon
refused to do so, the accused said: "If you do not want to
go upstairs, I will get Juana and if anyone tries to defend
her I will kill him."
The accused waited until Juana and her niece Perfecta
Buralo came downstairs, when they went in the direction
of their house. The accused, who was seen by the two
girls, followed them without saying a word. It is only a
short distance from the house where the devotion took
place to that of the offended party, the houses being
adjacent. As the two girls were going upstairs, the
accused, while standing at the foot of the stairway, fired
a shot from his revolver which wounded Perfecta Buralo,
the bullet passing through a part of her neck, having
entered the posterior region thereof and coming out
through the left eye, which was completely destroyed.
Due to proper medical attention, Perfecta Buralo did not
die and is on e of the witnesses who testified at the trial
of this case.
40
41
42
43
44
that when the latter let go, the former had pulled so
violently that it flew towards Omamdam, who was
therefore hit in the chest, without Bindoy's seeing him,
because Omamdam had passed behind him. The
testimony of this witness was not contradicted by any
rebuttal evidence adduced by the fiscal.
3. If, in the struggle, the defendant had attempted to
wound his opponent, and instead of doing so, had
wounded Omamdam, he would be liable for his act, since
whoever willfully commits a felony or a misdemeanor
incurs criminal liability, although the wrongful act done is
different from that which he intended. This is not the
case here. Bindoy did not try to wound Pacas. He was
only trying to defend his possession of the bolo, which
Pacas was trying to wrench away from him. His conduct
was perfectly lawful.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------Impossible Crime
INTOD, et. al. V CA.
G.R. No. 103119October 21, 1992
Facts: Sulpicio Intod and 3 other men went to Salvador
Mandayas house to ask him to go with them to the
house of BernardinaPalangpangan. The group had a
meeting with AnicetoDumalagan who told Mandaya that
he wanted Palangpangan to be killed because of a land
dispute between them and that Mandaya should
45
46
means employed
ineffectual.
is
either
a)
inadequate
or
b)
47
48
49
o
Domasians alibi: at the time of the incident he was
watching a mahjong game in a friend's house and later
went to an optical clinic with his wife for the refraction of
his eyeglasses
o
Appealed
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
o
It is frustrated when the offender performs all the
acts of execution which would produce the felony as a
consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it
by reason of causes independent of the will of the
perpetrator.
o
It is attempted when the offender commences the
commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does
not perform all the acts of execution which should
produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident
other than his own spontaneous desistance.
60
3.
taking be done with intent to gain - descriptive
circumstances
4.
taking be done without the consent of the owner descriptive circumstances
5.
taking be accomplished without the use of violence
against or intimidation of persons or force upon things descriptive circumstances
61
Abandoned cases:
62
63
64
65
o
(1) that the offender has performed all the acts of
execution which would produce the felony
o
(2) that the felony is not produced due to causes
independent of the perpetrator's will
attempted crime the purpose of the offender must be
thwarted by a foreign force or agency which intervenes
and compels him to stop prior to the moment when he
has performed all of the acts which should produce the
crime as a consequence, which acts it is his intention to
perform
o
If he has performed all of the acts which should
result in the consummation of the crime and voluntarily
desists from proceeding further, it can not be an
attempt.
66
67
68
ARTICLE 11
C. STATE OF NECESSITY
TY V PEOPLE
[G.R. No. 149275. September 27, 2004]
69
against
Metrobank
payable
to
the
hospital.
No.
70
71
FACTS:
whom was Leah who was still 8 years old at that time.
She left her 3 children to the care of her parents-in-law
who were living under the same roof with their children,
accused - Joel (13), Butchoy (12), Tinggang (6), and their
nephew Boyet (6).
Early in the afternoon of May 6, 1990, Joel and
Bernardo ordered their niece Leah to sleep in their
parents room. Joel threatened to whip her if she refused.
She was woken up by her uncles Joel and Butchoy who
were undressing her; she struggled as they raped her.
When Boyet arrived, Joel and Bernardo ordered him
to
rape
Leah
and
threatened
to
box
him
if
he
72
to
prove
that
minor
acted
with
73
74
REMIENDO V. PEOPLE
(GR 184874; October 9, 2009)
FACTS: Robert was charged with a crime of rape against
a minor allegedly committed on March and May 1997.
He waited for AAAs parents to leave the house before
defiling the latter and threatening to kick her if she
should shout for help. He was a minor whose age is
above 15 but below 18 years old at the time of the
crime. He was then convicted of rape but on appeal
invoked a suspension of sentence pursuant to R.A. No.
9344. By the time he was convicted by the trial court
and before the case was elevated to the Court of
Appeals, he was already 22 years old.
ISSUE: WON RA 9344 may be given retroactive effect,
thus exempting the petitioner, who is convicted by RTC &
already 22 y/o before the case was elevated to CA.
HELD:
NO.
75
the
records
of
this
case,
it
is
manifested
if
she
should
shout
prove
that
Robert
can
to
discernment
prove
by
that
evidence
the
accused
of physical
acted
with
appearance,
76
PEOPLE V. GENITA
[G.R. No. 126171. March 11, 2004]
FACTS:
77
ISSUE:
shooting
could
not
have
been
an
accident.
is
incredible. Accident
is
an
exempting
78
shows
accidental. Both
that
the
victims
shooting
sustained
was
not
more
merely
than
one
the
truck
when
another
bullet
hit
his
right
if it were
true
that
someone
attacked
79
V.
NICOLAS
JAURIGUE
and
AVELINA
JAURIGUE
(C.A. No. 384 February 21, 1946)
FACTS:
started
he
snatched
Avelinas
It all
handkerchief
and
touched
her
breasts.
She
then
slapped
She armed
80
WON
should
mitigating circumstances
of
find
the
additional
voluntary
surrender,
81
surrender
from
loss
the
to
the
barrio
deceased
of reason
and
lieutenant,
which
produced
self-control
of
the
defendant
and
appellant
immediately
and
82
83