PEOPLE VS ESTONILO

KEYWORDS:
Mission accomplished sir, big picture of
cortero, no name of mayor carlos
District supervisor of Public Schools of
Masbate

CASE FILED:
Complex Crime of Murder with Direct
Assault (Art 148)
RTC:
Complex Crime of Murder with Direct
Assault
CA:
AFFIRM
RP indivisible penalty
Moved for MR
SC:
AFFIRM
Medico-Legal Finding:
Floro sustained gunshot wounds caused by
more than 1 firearm based on the sizes of
the slugs recovered and that some of them
were fired at close range
In short:
Floro invited to house of Mayor showed
Mayor program picture of Cortero was super big
+ Mayors name was not there Mayor got mad
Following day he was killed in the school

Carlos Sr., Rey, Edel, Nonong, Bulldog, Nonoy,

Titing, Gali and Negro
Deceased FLORO = District supervisor of
Public Schools of Masbate (PA)
Prosecution presented 9 witnesses

TESTIMONY OF FELIX (son of deceased)

April 4 - Day before his father (Floro) was
gunned down he was with some teachers at
the Celeria Inoncencia Elementary School in
Masbate working on the closing ceremonies
to be held the following day
Morales called on Floro and told him that
Mayor Carlos, Sr. (accusd) wanted to see him
Floro and Felix went to see Mayor Carlos
Floro showed the Mayor a program of the
celebration of the Federation of the 7 th Day
Adventist that contained the names of the gov,
congressman and placer mayoralty candidate
COTERO
He asked father why picture of Cotero was so
big and Mayor Carlos names was not
mentioned in the program replied that he
cannot help it because Cotero aid for the
program
Mayor Carlos got mad and scolded Floro
SERAPION
While he was printing yhe name of Municipal
Councilar Candidate Dela Pisa on the street
facing the Celera Elementary School --> he
heard GUNSHOTS coming from inside the
compound of the school
Saw more or less 6 persons coming out of the
school identified 3 of them in the courtroom
(Edel, Nonoy and Nonong)
Saw the se men approach Mayor Carlos
vehicle which was near the school
Heard Nonoy say Mission, accomplished sir
ANTIPOLO TESTIMONY (DIRECT EVIDENCE)
Riding a motorcycle and passing by the gate of
the school
Eyewitness to the crime
Heard gunshots and someone shouted that
Floro was shot
Saw 4 persons holding short firearms (Nonoy
and Negro)
Gali (accused) shouted sir, thats enough
escape!
Mayor Carlos said leave it because its already
dead
ELSAS TESTIMONY
Testified as to motive for killing of Floro
Testified that there are some people who were
jealous of Floros position because he could

W/N GUILTY BRD OF COMPLEX CRIME OF

MULTIPLE MURDER WITH DIRECT ASSAULT

YES! GUILTY!
-

Defense:
Some of the testimonies of the prosecution
witness constitute circumstancial evidence
and that the prosec was not able prove their
guilty beyond reasonable doubt

Court found no indication that the troal and

the CA overlooked or failed to appreciate facts
that would change the outcome of the case
Did not err in giving credence to the
testimonies of the prosec witnesses
Antipolos testimony did not suffer from any
serious and material inconsistence that could
possibly detract from credibility
He identified the accused-appellant Nonoy
and accused Negro as those who fired at
Floro about seven times, while accusedappellants Edel and Nonong were on standby
also holding their firearms. He also witnessed
accused Gali shouting to the gunmen to stop
and escape. He narrated that after all the
accused left, Mayor Carlos, Sr., Rey and
Materdam arrived aboard the mayor's vehicle.
He also heard Mayor Carlos said "leave it
because it's already dead." From his direct
and straightforward testimony, there is no
doubt as to the identity of the culprits.
MURDER WAS ESTABLISHED
1.
Floro was killed
2.
Ex-Mayor Carlos, Rey, Edel, Nonong,
and Calvin were 5 of 9 perpetrators
3.
The killing was attended with AC of EP
as testified by witnesses as well as
treachery
4.
Killing of Floro was neither parricide nor
infanticide
nd
2 Element established
o
There is motive to kill
o
Floro supported Cortero reys
opponent for mayor
o
Planned to kills Floro on 2
separate occasions Ipatumba si
Floro; plotting to kill
o
Antipolo eyewitness the killing
corroborated by Serapion
o
mission accomplished sir
Consists of both direct and circumstancial
evidence
3rd element
o
There is treachery
o
Successively fired, no means to
defend himself, shot at a lose
distance,
without
risk
to
themselves, had lookouts

COMPLEX CRIM E OF MURDER WITH DIRECT

ASSAULT
2 modes of commiting this under Art 148 of
the RPC
Committed 2nd kind of assault
Elements:

To successfully prosecute the crime of murder, the

following elements must be
established:
1.
that a person was killed;
2.
That the accused killed him or her;
3.
that the killing was attended by any of
the qualifying circumstances mentioned
in Article 248 of the Revised Penal
Code; and
4.
that the killing is not parricide or
infanticide.
COMPLEX CRIM E OF MURDER WITH DIRECT
ASSAULT
Elements:
1.
There must be an attack, use of force or
serious intimidation or resistance upon a
PA or his agent
2.
The assault was made when the person
was performing his duties or on the
occasion of such performance and
3.
The accused knew that the victim is a
person in authority or his agent the
accused must have the intention to
offend, injure, assault the offended party
as a PA or agent of PA

bring voters to his side during election time

1.

ROSALINDA
Mayor Carlos went to her house and to her that
he would kill her husband following Floro
SERVANDO
He was in the house of the Mayor Carlos say
impatuba si Floro Casas
Bodyguard
Daming witness

DEFENSE OF MAYOR CARLOS

He and floro are close friends
He learned that he and his son were suspects
in Floros killing 5 months after the incident
Confirmed that he was with Rey and Dela Cruz
while inquiring about the shooting at the school
Denied meeting Felix, Rosalinda or that
Servando was his bodyguard

DEFENSE OF REY
He was in his house planning to Campaign
passed by Celera Elementary School saw
fathers car proceeded to meet the
counselors in Ranios house all went to
Barangay Matagantang
Expressed that this criminal case may be
politically motivated because he won as mayor
QUIRINO
He and his family were having dinner at their house
near school heard gunshorts peeped thru the
fence
NONONG
Engaged in drinking spree in Nining Berdidas
house and stayed there until 11 pm
EDEL
Rey called him to go to Ranios house in
Masbate
Denied being a boyguard of Mayor
BULLDOG
He was with his wife attending a birthday party
near Celera Elementary school went to
school to check on what happened and learned
that Floro was shot
Denied being a boyguard of Mayor

There must be an attack, use of force or

serious intimidation or resistance upon a
PA or his agent
2.
The assault was made when the person
was performing his duties or on the
occasion of such performance and
3.
The accused knew that the victim is a
person in authority or his agent the
accused must have the intention to
offend, injure, assault the offended party
as a PA or agent of PA
Floro was the duly appointed District
Supervisor of Public Schools in Masbate = PA
But contrary to the statement that there was
DA just because Floro was a PA this court
clarifies that the finding of DA is based on the
FACT THAT THE ATTACK OR ASSAULT ON
FLORO, WAS IN REALITY MADE BY
REASON OF THE PERFORMANCE OF HIS
DUTY AS DISTRICT SUPERVISOR
When the assault results in the killing of that
agent or of a person in authority for that
matter, there arises the complex crime of
direct assault with murder or homicide.

SYDECO VS PEOPLE

PROSECUTIONS VERSION

KEYWORD: Drunk driving, ford ranger,

resistance and disobedience to PA, 55 yrs old

CASE FILED: 2 separate informations

Violation of Section 56(f) of RA 4136 drunk
driving
Resistance and disobedience to a PA or the
agents of such person (Art 151)

MTC
GUILTY
RTC:
AFFIRMED
Failure to testify of doctor is not fatal
Under ROC, observations of the police
officers regarding petitioners state of
drunkenness would suffice (PRESUMPTION
OF REGULARLITY OF PERFORMANCE OF
POLICE OFFICERS)
CA:
AFFIRMED
SC:
-

REVERSED
NOT GUILTY
Police officers = X regularly performing duty
Accuseds act of exercising ones right is
NOT equal to disobedience
X lawful order of police officer

Aguilar, Bondino, Cruz and another office were

manning checkpoint on Roxas Boulevard
Spotted a sewering red Ford Ranger Pick up
from 20m away
The team members flagged the vehicle down
and asked petitioner to alight from the vehicle
Petitioner denied being drunk and insisted that
he could manage to drive
In a raised void said, PI mo, bakit mo ko
hinuhuli!
Policemen arrested the petitioner who put up
resistance police was eventually able to
subdue him brought to the Ospital ng
Maynila where he was examined and found
positive of alcoholic breath

DEFENSE VERSION
Claimed to be a victim in the incident in
question
Filed criminal charges for PI, robbery and
arbitrary detention against policemen
Petitioner said that he together with a cook and
waitress were on their way home from their
restaurant in Macapagal Ave
They were stopped by the police flashlights
trained on side of the bechicle
Policemen asked him to get down the car but
he just opened the window and said plain view
lang boss, plain view lang.
Policeman got irked and accused him of being
drunk pointing at the 3 cases of empty beer
bottles in the trunk of the vehicle explained
that it came from his restaurant
Policemen boxed him on the mouth, poked a
gun at his head and blurted PI mo, gusto mo
tapusin na kita dito marami ka pang sinasabi
Policemen pulled him out of the car and
pushed him into a mobile car whereupon he
asked his companions to call his wife
Brought him to ospital ng Maynila but no
alchocol breath test was done because he
refused but the doctor still issued a med cert
Detained at 3 am (June 12) and released June
13
Medical Examination before release showed
that he suffered PI and no alcohol breath
Also stated that the procedure for dealing with
traffic violation is not to arrest the driver but to
confiscate the license only

W/N petitioner is guilty

NO!
-

CA erred in upholding the presumption of

regularity in the performance of duties by the
police officer
CA erred in giving weight to the med cert by
Dr. in the absence of testimony before the
court
Peace officers and traffic enforcers, like other
public officials and employees are bound to
discharge their duties with prudence, caution
and attention, which careful men usually
exercise in the management of their own
affairs.
Police officers = X regularly performing duties
Did not demand the presentation of the
drivers license or issue any ticket or similar
citation paper for traffic violation as required
by SEC 29 OF RA 4136
Instead of requiring the vehicle occupant to
answer the routinary questions said foul
words
Swerving is not necessarily indicative of
imprudent behavior let alone constitutive of
reckless driving
To constitute the offense of reckless driving,
the act must be something more than a mere
negligence in the operation of a motor vehicle,
and a willful and wanton disregard of the
consequences is required. Nothing in the
records indicate that the area was a "no
swerving or overtaking zone." Moreover, the
swerving incident, if this be the case, occurred
at around 3:00 a.m. when the streets are
usually clear of moving vehicles and human
traffic, and the danger to life, limb and
property to third persons is minimal.

ART 151
The two key elements of resistance and
serious disobedience punished under Art. 151
of the RPC are:
1.
That a person in authority or his agent is
engaged in the performance of official
duty or gives a lawful order to the
offender; and
2.
That the offender resists or seriously
disobeys such person or his agent.
Petitioners act of exercising ones right
against unreasonable searches and seizures
in the middle of the night cannot be equated
to disobience let alone resisting a lawful order
in contemplated in Art 151
There is nothing in RA 4136 authorizing the
check-point mannig polce to order petitioner
and his companions to get out of the vehicle
for search

Art. 151. Resistance and disobedience to a

person in authority or the agents of such
person. The penalty of arresto mayor and a fine
not exceeding 500 pesos shall be imposed upon
any person who not being included
in the provisions of the preceding articles shall
resist or seriously disobey any person in
authority, or the agents of such person, while
engaged in the performance of official duties;
When the disobedience to an agent of a person
in authority is not of a serious nature, the penalty of
arresto menor or a fine ranging from 10 to 100
pesos shall be imposed upon the offender.

No reasonable suspicion of the occurrence of

stop and frisk action
Dragged the accused out of the vehicle
instead of asking him nicely
In case of doubt as the moral certainty of
culpability, the balance tops in favor of
innocent or at least in favor of milder form of
criminal liability