6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

PhilippineLawReviewers

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000
JAN24
PostedbyMagz
PEOPLEv.PAMBID
G.R.No.124453.March15,2000
DefenseofInsanity
Facts:
Amandiagnosedofschizophreniaandmildmentalretardationrapedasixyearoldgirl.Accusedpleadednotguiltyonthegroundof
insanity.
Held:
Accusedappellantspleaofinsanityisunacceptable.WhileArt.12(1)oftheRevisedPenalCodeprovidesthatanimbecileorinsane
personisexemptfromcriminalliability,unlesshehasactedduringalucidinterval,thepresumptionunderArt.800oftheCivilCodeis
thateverymanissane.Anyonewhopleadstheexemptingcircumstanceofinsanitybearstheburdenofprovingit.Hemustshowthathe
wascompletelydeprivedofreasonwhenhecommiedthecrimecharged,formereabnormalityofhismentalfacultiesdoesnotexclude
imputability.

PEOPLEv.FRONDA
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
G.R.No.130602.March15,2000.

1/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

G.R.No.130602.March15,2000.
DirectEvidencev.CircumstantialEvidence
Facts:
ThreestudentswereconvictedofviolatingtheDangerousDrugsActaftertheyallegedlydeliveredabrickofmarijuanatopolicemenwho
posedasbuyers.
Held:
Tobecaughtagrantedelictonecessarilyimpliespositiveidenticationbytheeyewitnessoreyewitnesses.Suchisadirectevidenceof
culpability,whichisthatwhichprovesthefactindisputewithouttheaidofanyinferenceorpresumption,incontrasttocircumstantial
evidence,whichistheproofoffactsfromwhichtakencollectivelytheexistenceoftheparticularfactindisputemaybeinferredasa
necessaryorprobableconsequence.Circumstantialevidence,however,isnotaweakerformofevidencevisavisdirectevidence,forour
rulesmakenodistinctionbetweendirectevidenceoffactandevidenceofcircumstancesfromwhichtheexistenceofafactmaybe
inferred.Nogreaterdegreeofcertaintyisrequiredwhentheevidenceiscircumstantialthanwhenitisdirect;forineithercase,thetrierof
factmustbeconvincedbeyondreasonabledoubtoftheguiltoftheaccused.
UndertheRulesofCourt,circumstantialevidencewouldbesucientforconvictionifthefollowingconcur:(a)thereismorethanone
circumstance;(b)thefactsfromwhichtheinferencesarederivedareproved;and(c)thecombinationofallthecircumstancesissuchasto
produceaconvictionbeyondreasonabledoubt.Or,asjurisprudentiallyformulated,ajudgmentofconvictionbasedoncircumstantial
evidencecanbeupheldonlyifthecircumstancesprovenconstituteanunbrokenchainwhichleadstoonefairandreasonableconclusion
pointingtotheaccused,totheexclusionofallothers,astheguiltyperson,i.e.,thecircumstancesprovenmustbeconsistentwitheach
otherandconsistentwiththehypothesisthattheaccusedisguilty.

PEOPLEv.ARIZAPA
G.R.No.131814.March15,2000.
Improvidentpleaofguilt
Facts:
Accusedwassentencedtodeathafterbeingconvictedofincestuouslyrapinghisstepdaughter.
Held:
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
2/19
Therecorddisclosesthefailureofthelowercourttomakeasearchinginquiryonwhethertheaccusedsadmissionofguiltwasvoluntarily

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

Therecorddisclosesthefailureofthelowercourttomakeasearchinginquiryonwhethertheaccusedsadmissionofguiltwasvoluntarily
madeandwhetherheunderstoodthelegalimplicationsofsuchadmission.However,sincethetrialcourtextensivelyreceivedevidencein
determiningtheguiltoftheaccused,themannerinwhichthepleaofguiltwasmade,whetherimprovidentlyornot,losesitssignicance
forthesimplereasonthattheconvictionoftheaccusedwasbasedontheevidenceprovinghiscommissionoftheoensechargedandnot
onhisadmissioninopencourt;hisconvictionmayonlybesetasidewhentheimprovidentpleaofguiltwasthesolebasisforthe
condemnatoryjudgment.

PEOPLEv.FABON
G.R.No.133226.March16,2000
AggravatingcircumstanceRobberywithhomicide
Circumstantialevidence
Held:
Theproperdesignationofthecrimecommiedisrobberywithhomicideaggravatedbyrape.Whenrapeandhomicidecoexistinthe
commissionofrobbery,itistherstparagraphofArticle294oftheRevisedPenalCodethatapplies,therapetobeconsideredasan
aggravatingcircumstance.Moreover,dwellingisalsoconsideredaggravatingincasessuchasthisprimarilybecauseofthesanctityof
privacythatthelawaccordstothehumanabode.Dwellingisaggravatinginrobberywithviolenceorintimidationbecausethisclassof
robberycanbecommiedwithoutthenecessityoftrespassingthesanctityoftheoendedpartyshouse.
Circumstantialevidenceisdenedasthatwhichindirectlyprovesafactinissue.UnderSection4ofRule133oftheRevisedRuleson
Evidence,circumstantialevidenceissucienttoconvictanaccusedifthefollowingrequisitesconcur:(a)thereismorethanone
circumstance,(b)thefactsfromwhichtheinferencesarederivedareproven,and(c)thecombinationofallthecircumstancesissuchasto
produceaconvictionbeyondreasonabledoubt.

PEOPLEV.MACARSE
G.R.No.121780.March17,2000
DefenseofAlibi
Facts:
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
AccusedappellantwaschargedandconvictedofHighwayRobberywithHomicide.Hismaindefensewasalibi.

3/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

AccusedappellantwaschargedandconvictedofHighwayRobberywithHomicide.Hismaindefensewasalibi.
Held:
Foralibitobebelieved,thefollowingmustbeshown:(a)presenceofaccusedappellantinanotherplaceatthetimeofthecommissionof
theoense,and(b)physicalimpossibilityforhimtobeatthesceneofthecrime.

PEOPLEv.MANRIQUEZ
G.R.Nos.12251011.March17,2000.
WaiverofCounsel;ExtrajudicialConfession
Conspiracy
Treachery
Facts:
AccusedappellantwaschargedandconvictedofMurder.Heimpugnedthevalidityofhiswaiverofcounselandextrajudicialconfession
anddeniedconspiracyandtheaendanceoftreachery.
Held:
Onesrighttobeinformedoftherighttoremainsilentandtocounselcontemplatesthetransmissionofmeaningfulinformationrather
thanjusttheceremonialandperfunctoryrecitationofanabstractconstitutionalprinciple.Itisnotenoughfortheinterrogatortomerely
repeattothepersonunderinvestigationtheprovisionsofSection12,ArticleIIIofthe1987Constitution;theformermustalsoexplainthe
eectsofsuchprovisioninpracticaltermse.g.,whatthepersonunderinterrogationmayormaynotdoandinalanguagethesubject
fairlyunderstands.Therighttobeinformedcarrieswithitacorrelativeobligationonthepartofthepoliceinvestigatortoexplain,and
contemplateseectivecommunication,whichresultsinthesubjectsunderstandingofwhatisconveyed.Sinceitiscomprehensionthatis
soughttobeaained,thedegreeofexplanationrequiredwillnecessarilyvaryanddependontheeducation,intelligence,andother
relevantpersonalcircumstancesofthepersonundergoinginvestigation.Infurtherensuringtherighttocounsel,itisnotenoughthatthe
subjectisinformedofsuchright;heshouldalsobeaskedifhewantstoavailofthesameandshouldbetoldthathecouldaskforcounsel

https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
ifhesodesiredorthatonecouldbeprovidedhimathisrequest.Ifhedecidesnottoretainacounselofhischoiceoravailofonetobe

4/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

ifhesodesiredorthatonecouldbeprovidedhimathisrequest.Ifhedecidesnottoretainacounselofhischoiceoravailofonetobe
providedforhimand,therefore,choosestowaivehisrighttocounsel,suchwaiver,tobevalidandeective,muststillbemadewiththe
assistanceofcounsel,who,underprevailingjurisprudence,mustbealawyer.
Aconspiracyexistswhentwoormorepersonscometoanagreementconcerningthecommissionofafelonyanddecidetocommitit.To
establishtheexistenceofaconspiracy,directproofisnotessentialsinceitmaybeshownbyfactsandcircumstancesfromwhichmaybe
logicallyinferredtheexistenceofacommondesignamongtheaccusedtocommittheoensecharged,oritmaybededucedfromthe
modeandmannerinwhichtheoensewasperpetrated.
Thereistreacherywhentheoendercommitsanyofthecrimesagainstpersons,employingmeans,methodsorformsintheexecution
thereofwhichtenddirectlyandspeciallytoinsureitsexecutionwithoutrisktohimselfarisingfromthedefensewhichtheoendedparty
mightmake,whichmeansthatnoopportunitywasgiventothelaertodoso.

PEOPLEV.SAPAL
G.R.No.124526.March17,2000.
Irregularitiesinarrest
Convictionbasedonproofbeyondreasonabledoubt
Accusedappellantwasarrestedbasedonawarrantissuedagainsthimafterhefailedtoaendhisarraignment.Hecontendsthatcertain
irregularitiesaendedhisarrest,andthattheprosecutionfailedtoshowhisguiltbeyondreasonabledoubt.
Held:
Admiedly,accusedisdeemedtohavewaivedhisrighttoquestiontheirregularitiesaendinghisarrestforhisfailuretoraisethesameat
theopportunetime,i.e.,beforeheenteredhisplea.Nonetheless,thepeculiarfactualcircumstancessurroundingthecase,e.g.,thepolice
authoritiesfailuretocomplywiththecleardirectiveofthewarrantofarrestissuedbyJudgeBarrios,theunduedelayinpreparingthe
documentsrelatingtothearrestofaccusedandhiswifeandindeliveringthemtotheproperauthoritiesforinquest,andthefailureofthe
lawenforcerstoprovideaccusedwithacounselduringthecustodialinvestigation,eectivelydestroythepresumptionofregularityinthe
performancebyGomezandhiscolleaguesoftheirduties.Suchbeingthecase,thepresumptionofregularitycannotbemadethesolebasis
oftheconvictionofaccused.
Itiswellseledthatwherethecircumstancesshowntoexistyieldtwoormoreinferences,oneofwhichisconsistentwiththe
presumptionofinnocencewhiletheotherorothersmaybecompatiblewiththendingofguilt,thecourtmustacquittheaccused:forthe
evidencedoesnotfulllthetestofmoralcertaintyandisinsucienttosupportajudgmentofconviction.
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/

5/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

PEOPLEv.SANDIEGO
G.R.No.129297.March17,2000
RapeJurisprudentialguidelines
Held:
Inrapecases,courtsareguidedbythefollowingconsiderations:
1)Anaccusationforrapecanbemadewithfacility;itisdiculttoprovebutmoredicultfortheperson,thoughinnocent,todisprove
thesame;
2)Inviewoftheintrinsicnatureofthecrimeofrapewhereonlytwopersonsareusuallyinvolved,thetestimonyofthecomplainantmust
bescrutinizedwithextremecaution;and
3)Theevidencefortheprosecutionmuststandorfallonitsownmeritsandcannotbeallowedtodrawstrengthfromtheweaknessofthe
evidenceforthedefense.
Thetestofsuciencyofforceorintimidationinrapeiswhetheritproducesareasonablefearinthevictimthatifsheresistsordoesnot
giveintothesexualdemandsoftheaccused,thethreatwouldbecarriedout.

PEOPLEV.CHECHUNTING
G.R.Nos.13056869.March21,2000
Warrantlessearchesandseizures
Fruitofthepoisonoustreedoctrine
Accusedappellantwaschargedandconvictedfordispatchingintransitandhavinginhispossessionlargeamountsofshabu.He
contendsthattheshabuisinadmissibleinevidenceasitwasseizedwithoutavalidsearchwarrant.
Held:
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
6/19
Thelawfularrestbeingthesolejusticationforthevalidityofthewarrantlesssearchundertheexception,thesamemustbelimitedtoand

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

Thelawfularrestbeingthesolejusticationforthevalidityofthewarrantlesssearchundertheexception,thesamemustbelimitedtoand
circumscribedbythesubject,timeandplaceofthearrest.Astosubject,thewarrantlesssearchissanctionedonlywithrespecttothe
personofthesuspect,andthingsthatmaybeseizedfromhimarelimitedtodangerousweaponsoranythingwhichmaybeusedas
proofofthecommissionoftheoense.Withrespecttothetimeandplaceofthewarrantlesssearch,itmustbecontemporaneouswiththe
lawfularrest.Statedotherwise,tobevalid,thesearchmusthavebeenconductedataboutthetimeofthearrestorimmediatelythereafter
andonlyattheplacewherethesuspectwasarrested,orthepremisesorsurroundingsunderhisimmediatecontrol.
Itmustbestressedthatthepurposesoftheexceptionareonlytoprotectthearrestingoceragainstphysicalharmfromthepersonbeing
arrestedwhomightbearmedwithaconcealedweapon,andalsotopreventthepersonarrestedfromdestroyingtheevidencewithinhis
reach.Theexceptionthereforeshouldnotbestrainedbeyondwhatisneededinordertoserveitspurposes.
Asaconsequenceoftheillegalsearch,thethingsseizedontheoccasionthereofareinadmissibleinevidenceundertheexclusionaryrule.
Theyareregardedashavingbeenobtainedfromapollutedsource,thefruitofapoisonoustree.However,objectsandpropertiesthe
possessionofwhichisprohibitedbylawcannotbereturnedtotheirownersnotwithstandingtheillegalityoftheirseizure.Thus,theshabu
seizedbytheNARCOMoperatives,whichcannotlegallybepossessedbytheaccusedunderthelaw,canandmustberetainedbythe
governmenttobedisposedofinaccordancewithlaw.

PEOPLEV.ADILA,JR.
G.R.No.133434.March21,2000.
Defenseofalibi
Accusedappellantwaschargedandconvictedforincestuouslyrapinghis11yearoldstepdaughter.Heinterposedthedefenseofdenial
andalibi.
Held:
Thedefenseofalibiinterposedbytheaccusedappellanthardlydeservesanyseriousconsideration.Forthisdefensetoprosper,the
accusedmustprove,amongotherthings,thatnotonlyhashebeenatsomeotherplaceatthetimeofthecommissionofthecrimebutthat
itwouldhavealsobeenphysicallyimpossibleforhimtobeatthelocuscriminisatthetimethereof.

PEOPLEv.SAPINOSO
G.R.No.122540.March22,2000.
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
Held:

7/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

Held:
Inrapecases,threewellknownprinciplesguidetheCourt,namely:(1)anaccusationforrapecanbemadewithfacility;itisdicultto
provebutmoredicultforthepersonaccused,thoughinnocent,todisprove,(2)inviewoftheintrinsicnatureofthecrimeofrapewhere
twopersonsareusuallyinvolved,thetestimonyofthecomplainantmustbescrutinizedwithextremecaution,and(3)theevidenceofthe
prosecutionmuststandorfallonitsownmeritsandcannotbeallowedtodrawstrengthfromtheweaknessoftheevidenceforthe
defense.Likewise,whenthecomplainantinarapecase,moresoifsheisaminor,testiesthatshehasbeenraped,shesaysineectall
thatisnecessarytoshowrapehasbeencommied,theoendedpartymostoftenbeingtheonlyoneavailabletoprovedirectlythe
commissionofrape.Thecredibilityofthecomplainantis,thus,ofutmostimportance,fortheaccusedmaybeconvictedsolelyonthebasis
ofthecomplainantstestimonyifthesamemeetsthetestofcredibility.Furthermore,wehaveheldthattheconductofthevictim
immediatelyfollowingtheallegedsexualassaultisofutmostimportanceinestablishingthetruthorfalsityofthechargeofrape.
Wellseledistherulethatalibiisaninherentlyweakdefensewhichcannotprevailoverthepositiveidenticationoftheaccusedbythe
victim.Foralibitoprosper,thedefendantmustprovenotonly(1)thathewassomewhereelsewhenthecrimewascommiedbut(2)it
mustbelikewisedemonstratedthathewassofarawaythathecouldnothavebeenphysicallypresentattheplaceofthecrimeorits
immediatevicinityatthetimeofitscommission.

PEOPLEV.DEDACE
G.R.No.132551.March22,2000
Statutoryrape
Held:
Thegravamenofstatutoryrapeiscarnalknowledgeofawomanbelowtwelve(12)yearsofage.Itiswellseledthatcompleteorfull
penetrationofthecomplainantsprivatepartisnotnecessarytoconsummaterape.Whatisessentialisthattherebepenetrationofthe
sexualorgan,nomaerhowslight.Neitheristheruptureofthehymenessentialfortheoenseofconsummatedrape.Itisenoughthat
thereisproofofentranceofthemaleorganwithinthelabiaofthepudendum.Therefore,itisunnecessarytoshowtowhatextent
penetrationofthewomansbodyhasbeenmade.

PEOPLEv.MAMALIAS
G.R.No.128073.March27,2000
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
Appealofanaccusedescapee

8/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

Appealofanaccusedescapee
Held:
Thegeneralruleisthatapartyappealingwhoeesthejurisdiction,pendingtheappeal,isincontemptoftheauthorityofthecourtandof
thelawandplaceshimselfinapositiontospeculateonthechancesforareversal,meanwhilekeepingoutofthereachofjusticeand
preparingtorenderthejudgmentnugatoryornot,athisoption.Moreover,theescapeeloseshisstandingincourtandunlesshe
surrendersorsubmitstothejurisdictionofthecourt,heisdeemedtohavewaivedanyrighttoseekrelieffromthecourt.Bethatasit
may,theescapeofanaccusedappellantduringthependencyofhisappealwillnotnecessarilypreventtheCourtfromexercisingits
jurisdictioninexceptionalcases.

PEOPLEv.MITRA
G.R.No.130669.March27,2000.

Rapephysicalresistance
Held:
Itiswellseledthatphysicalresistanceneednotbeestablishedinrapewhenintimidationisexerciseduponthevictimandthelaer
submitsherself,againstherwill,totherapistsadvancesbecauseoffearforherlifeandpersonalsafety.Itissucientthatthe
intimidationproducesfearinthemindofthevictimthatifshedidnotsubmittothebestialdemandsoftheaccused,somethingfarworse
wouldbefallheratthetimeshewasbeingmolested.AspronouncedbytheCourt,ifresistancewouldneverthelessbefutilebecauseof
intimidation,thenoeringnoneatalldoesnotmeanconsenttotheassaultsoastomakethevictimssubmissiontothesexualact
voluntary.

PEOPLEV.MERIS
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
PEOPLEv.MERIS

9/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

PEOPLEv.MERIS
G.RNos.11714550&117447.March28,2000
Jurisdictionoverpersonoftheaccused
Estafa
Accusedappellantwaschargedandconvictedofillegalrecruitmentinlargescaleandestafa.Shecontendsthatherconvictionwas
erroneousbecausethecourtneveracquiredjurisdictionoverherperson,asherarrestwasillegal,andthattheprosecutionfailedto
establishestafa.
Held:
Jurisdictionoverthepersonoftheaccusedisacquiredeitherbyarrestorvoluntaryappearanceincourt.Hence,grantingarguendothat
accusedappellantsarrestwasdefective,suchisdeemedcureduponhervoluntarysubmissiontothejurisdictionofthecourt.Itshouldbe
stressedthatthequestionoflegalityofanarrestaectsonlythejurisdictionofthecourtoverthepersonoftheaccused.Consequently,if
objectionsbasedonthisgroundarewaived,thefactthatthearrestwasillegalisnotsucientcauseforseingasideanotherwisevalid
judgment.ThetechnicalitycannotrenderthesubsequentproceedingsvoidanddeprivetheStateofitsrighttoconvicttheguiltywhenall
thefactsonrecordpointtotheculpabilityoftheaccused.
Estafaiscommiedbyanypersonwhodefraudsanotherbyusingactitiousname,orfalselypretendstopossesspower,inuence,
qualications,property,credit,agency,businessorimaginarytransactions,orbymeansofsimilardeceitsexecutedpriortoor
simultaneouslywiththecommissionofthefraud.Theoendedpartymusthavereliedonthefalsepretense,fraudulentactorfraudulent
meansoftheaccusedappellantandasaresultthereof,theoendedpartysuereddamages.

PEOPLEV.TIPAY
G.R.No.131472.March28,2000
RapeJurisprudentialguidelines
Held:
TheCourthaslaiddowncertainguidingprinciplesinreviewingrapecases,towit:(a)anaccusationofrapecanbemadewithfacilityand
whiletheaccusationisdiculttoprove,itisevenmoredicultforthepersonaccused,althoughinnocent,todisprovethecharge;(b)
consideringtheintrinsicnatureofthecrime,onlytwopersonsareusuallyinvolvedinthecrimeofrape,thetestimonyofthecomplainant
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
shouldbescrutinizedwithgreatcaution,and(c)theevidencefortheprosecutionmuststandorfallonitsownmerit,andcannotbe

10/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

shouldbescrutinizedwithgreatcaution,and(c)theevidencefortheprosecutionmuststandorfallonitsownmerit,andcannotbe
allowedtodrawstrengthfromtheweaknessoftheevidenceforthedefense.

PEOPLEv.CULA
G.R.No.133146.March28,2000
Rapephysicalresistance;burdenofprovingvictimsminority
Held:
Thelawdoesnotimposeuponarapevictimtheburdenofprovingresistance.Physicalresistanceneednotbeestablishedinrapewhen
intimidationisexerciseduponthevictimandshesubmitsherselfagainstherwilltotherapistslustbecauseoffearforlifeandpersonal
safety.
Atallevents,itistheburdenoftheprosecutiontoprovewithcertaintythefactthatthevictimwasbelow18whentherapewascommied
inordertojustifytheimpositionofthedeathpenalty.Therecordofthecaseisbereftofanyindependentevidence,suchasthevictims
dulycertiedCerticateofLiveBirth,accuratelyshowingprivatecomplainantsage.

PEOPLEv.BARREDO
G.R.No.133832.March28,2000
Rape
Held:
Inrapecases,thecourtsareguidedbythelongstandingrulethatpenetrationisnotessentialforconvictionoftheculprit.Mereknocking
atthedoorsofthepudenda,sotospeak,bytheaccusedspenissucestoconstitutethecrimeofrape,andthefactthatherhymenisstill
intactdoesnotnegateitscommission.

PEOPLEv.CABINGAS
G.R.No.79679.March28,2000.
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
Rapewithafeeblemindedperson

11/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

Rapewithafeeblemindedperson
Held:
Sexualintercoursewithafeeblemindedwomanisrape.Theoensechargediswithinthecontemplationofparagraph2ofArticle335of
theRevisedPenalCode,likewhentheoenderhadcarnalknowledgeofawomandeprivedofreason.

PEOPLEv.CAVERTE
G.R.No.123112.March30,2000
Selfdefense;treachery
Accusedappellantwaschargedandconvictedofmurderandfrustratedmurder.
Held:
Thereisselfdefensewhenthefollowingelementsconcur:(1)unlawfulaggressiononthepartofthepersoninjuredorkilledbythe
oender;(2)reasonablenecessityofthemeansemployedtopreventorrepelit;and(3)lackofsucientprovocationonthepartofthe
persondefendinghimself.Itisadoctrinalrulethatwhenanunlawfulaggressionthathasbegunnolongerexists,theonemakinga
defensehasnorighttokilloreventowoundtheformeraggressor.
Thereistreacherywhentwoconditionsconcur,towit:(1)theemploymentofmeansofexecutionthatgivesthepersonaackedno
opportunitytodefendhimselfortoretaliate;and(2)deliberateorconsciousadoptionofthemeansofexecution.Treacheryexistswhere
theaackwasperpetratedsuddenlyandwithoutwarning.

PEOPLEV.AQUINO
G.R.No.129288.March30,2000.
Robberywithhomicide
Accusedappellantswerechargedandconvictedofthecomplexcrimeofrobberywithhomicide.Theycontendthattheyshouldhave
beenconvictedofhomicideonly.
Held:
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
Theelementsofthecrimewereprovedbeyondreasonabledoubt.Inanyevent,inrobberywithhomicide,theimportantconsiderationis12/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

Theelementsofthecrimewereprovedbeyondreasonabledoubt.Inanyevent,inrobberywithhomicide,theimportantconsiderationis
thattherebeanexusbetweentherobberyandthekillingwhetherprior,subsequenttoorcommiedatthesametime.

PEOPLEV.BALTAZAR
G.R.No.115990.March30,2000.
Held:
ThemorepressingissueiswhetheralltheelementsofrapeasallegedintheInformationweredulyprovedbytheprosecution.Herewe
ndthefollowingdulyestablishedbeyondreasonabledoubt.First,appellanthadcarnalknowledgewiththevictim.

PEOPLEV.BASE
PEOPLEv.BASE
G.R.No.109773.March30,2000
Extrajudicialconfessions
Conspiracy;treachery
Held:
Foranextrajudicialconfessiontobeadmissible,itmustbe:1.]voluntary;2.]madewiththeassistanceofcompetentandindependent
counsel;3.]express;and4.]inwriting.Whiletheinitialchoiceincaseswhereapersonundercustodialinvestigationcannotaordthe
servicesofalawyerisnaturallylodgedinthepoliceinvestigators,theaccusedreallyhasthenalchoiceashemayrejectthecounsel
chosenforhimandaskforanotherone.Alawyerprovidedbytheinvestigatorsisdeemedengagedbytheaccusedwhereheneverraised
anyobjectionagainsttheformersappointmentduringthecourseoftheinvestigationandtheaccusedthereaftersubscribestotheveracity
ofhisstatementbeforetheswearingocer.Verily,tobeaneectivecounsel[a]lawyerneednotchallengeallthequestionsbeing
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
propoundedtohisclient.Thepresenceofalawyerisnotintendedtostopanaccusedfromsayinganythingthatmightincriminatehim 13/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

propoundedtohisclient.Thepresenceofalawyerisnotintendedtostopanaccusedfromsayinganythingthatmightincriminatehim
but,rather,itwasadoptedinourConstitutiontoprecludetheslightestcoercionaswouldleadtheaccusedtoadmitsomethingfalse.The
counsel,however,shouldneverpreventanaccusedfromfreelyandvoluntarilytellingthetruth.
When,asinthiscase,[a]nextrajudicialstatementsatisestherequirementsoftheConstitution,itconstitutesevidenceofahighorder
becauseofthestrongpresumptionthatnopersonofnormalmindwoulddeliberatelyandknowinglyconfesstoacrimeunlessprompted
bytruthandconscience.Thedefensehastheburdenofprovingthatitwasextractedbymeansofforce,duress,promiseorreward.
Section3,Rule133oftheRulesofCourtprovidesthat[a]nextrajudicialconfessionmadebyanaccusedshallnotbesucientgroundfor
conviction,unlesscorroboratedbyevidenceofcorpusdelicti.Inthiscasetheprosecutionpresentedotherevidencetoprovethetwo
elementsofcorpusdelicti,towit:a.]acertainresulthasbeenproven,i.e.amanhasdied;and2.]somepersoniscriminallyresponsible.
Conspiracyexistswhentwoormorepersonscometoanagreementconcerningthecommissionofafelonyanddecidetocommitit.Direct
proofisnotessential,forconspiracymaybeinferredfromtheactsoftheaccusedpriorto,duringorsubsequenttotheincident.Suchacts
mustpointtoajointpurpose,concertofactionorcommunityofinterest.
Thereistreachery[w]hentheoendercommitsanyofthecrimesagainstpersons,employingmeans,methodsorformsintheexecution
thereofwhichtenddirectlyandspeciallytoinsureitsexecutionwithoutrisktohimselfarisingfromthedefensewhichtheoendedparty
mightmake.Theessenceofalevosiaistheswiftandunexpectedaackontheunarmedvictimwithouttheslightestprovocationonthe
victimspart.Thefactthattreacherymaybeshownifthevictimisaackedfrombehinddoesnotmeanitcannotalsobeappreciatedif
theaackisfrontal.Evenafrontalaackcanbetreacherouswhenitissuddenandthevictimisunarmed.

PEOPLEv.CAMPUHAN
G.R.No.129433.March30,2000.
Stagesofrape
InthecaseofPeoplev.Orita,theSCheldthatrapewasconsummatedfromthemomenttheoenderhadcarnalknowledgeofthevictim
sincebyitheaainedhisobjective.Alltheelementsoftheoensewerealreadypresentandnothingmorewasleftfortheoendertodo,
havingperformedalltheactsnecessarytoproducethecrimeandaccomplishit.Weruledthenthatperfectpenetrationwasnotessential;
anypenetrationofthefemaleorganbythemaleorgan,howeverslight,wassucient.TheCourtfurtherheldthatentryofthelabiaorlipsof
thefemaleorgan,evenwithoutruptureofthehymenorlacerationofthevagina,wassucienttowarrantconvictionforconsummated
rape.Wedistinguishedconsummatedrapefromaemptedrapewheretherewasnopenetrationofthefemaleorganbecausenotallactsof

https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
14/19
executionwereperformedastheoendermerelycommencedthecommissionofafelonydirectlybyovertacts.Theinferencethatmaybe

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

executionwereperformedastheoendermerelycommencedthecommissionofafelonydirectlybyovertacts.Theinferencethatmaybe
derivedtherefromisthatcompleteorfullpenetrationofthevaginaisnotrequiredforrapetobeconsummated.Anypenetration,in
whateverdegree,isenoughtoraisethecrimetoitsconsummatedstage.
ButtheCourtinOritaclariedtheconceptofpenetrationinrapebyrequiringentryintothelabiaorlipsofthefemaleorgan,evenifthere
benoruptureofthehymenorlacerationofthevagina,towarrantaconvictionforconsummatedrape.Whiletheentryofthepenisintothe
lipsofthefemaleorganwasconsideredsynonymouswithmeretouchingoftheexternalgenitalia,e.g.,labiamajora,labiaminora,etc.,the
crucialdoctrinalboomlineisthattouchingmustbeinextricablyviewedinlightof,inrelationto,orasanessentialpartof,theprocessof
penilepenetration,andnotjustmeretouchingintheordinarysense.Inotherwords,thetouchingmustbetackedtothepenetrationitself.The
importanceoftherequirementofpenetration,howeverslight,cannotbegainsaidbecausewhereentryintothelabiaorthelipsofthe
femalegenitaliahasnotbeenestablished,thecrimecommiedamountsmerelytoaemptedrape.
Wheretheaccusedfailedtoachieveanerection,hadalimporaccidpenis,oranoversizedpeniswhichcouldnottintothevictims
vagina,theCourtnonethelessheldthatrapewasconsummatedonthebasisofthevictimstestimonythattheaccusedrepeatedlytried,
butinvain,toinserthispenisintohervaginaandinalllikelihoodreachedthelabiaofherpudendumasthevictimfelthisorganonthelips
ofhervulva,orthatthepenisoftheaccusedtouchedthemiddlepartofhervagina.Thus,touchingwhenappliedtorapecasesdoesnot
simplymeanmereepidermalcontact,strokingorgrazingoforgans,aslightbrushorascrapeofthepenisontheexternallayerofthe
victimsvagina,orthemonspubis,asinthiscase.Theremustbesucientandconvincingproofthatthepenisindeedtouchedthelabiasor
slidintothefemaleorgan,andnotmerelystrokedtheexternalsurfacethereof,foranaccusedtobeconvictedofconsummatedrape.Asthe
labias,whicharerequiredtobetouchedbythepenis,arebytheirnaturalsitusorlocationbeneaththemonspubisorthevaginalsurface,
totouchthemwiththepenisistoaainsomedegreeofpenetrationbeneaththesurface,hence,theconclusionthattouchingthelabia
majoraorthelabiaminoraofthepudendumconstitutesconsummatedrape.
Thus,agrazingofthesurfaceofthefemaleorganortouchingthemonspubisofthepudendumisnotsucienttoconstituteconsummated
rape.Absentanyshowingoftheslightestpenetrationofthefemaleorgan,i.e.,touchingofeitherlabiaofthepudendumbythepenis,there
canbenoconsummatedrape;atmost,itcanonlybeaemptedrape,ifnotactsoflasciviousness.

PEOPLEv.BALTAZAR
G.R.No.115990.March31,2000
ElementsofRape
Evidentiaryvalueofmedicalexaminations
Held:
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
ThemorepressingissueiswhetheralltheelementsofrapeasallegedintheInformationweredulyprovedbytheprosecution.Herewe 15/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

ThemorepressingissueiswhetheralltheelementsofrapeasallegedintheInformationweredulyprovedbytheprosecution.Herewe
ndthefollowingdulyestablishedbeyondreasonabledoubt.First,appellanthadcarnalknowledgewiththevictim.Second,carnal
knowledgetookplacebyusingforceorintimidation.Appellantinsiststhatthecomplainantdidnotoeranytenaciousresistancetothe
allegedsexualassault.Nowhereisitrequiredinourlaworjurisprudence,however,thatawomanmustoertenaciousresistancetoa
sexualassault.Thelawdoesnotimposeupontherapevictimtheburdenofprovingresistance.Wehaveheldcountlessoftimesthatthe
forceorviolencerequiredinrapecasesisrelative.Whenapplied,itneednotbeoverpoweringorirresistible;itisenoughthatithas
enabledtheoendertoconsummatehispurposeortobringaboutthedesiredresult.Forrapetoexist,itisnotnecessarythattheforceor
intimidationemployedinaccomplishingthecrimebesogreatorofsuchcharacterascouldnotberesisted.Whatisnecessaryisthatthe
forceorintimidationbesucienttoconsummatethepurposewhichtheaccusedhadinmind.Thuswehaveheldthatphysicalresistance
neednotbeestablishedinrapecaseswhenintimidationisexerciseduponherandshesubmitsherselfagainstherwilltotherapistslust
becauseoffearforherlifeandpersonalsafety.Thevictimsfailuretoresisttheaccusedsassaultsuccessfullyandtoescapewhenthe
opportunitypresenteditselfshouldnotbeconstruedasamanifestationofconsent.Thirdly,thecoituswasagainstherwillandwithout
herconsent.
Insofarastheevidentiaryvalueofamedicalexaminationisconcerned,wehaveheldthatamedicalexaminationofthevictim,aswellas
themedicalcerticate,ismerelycorroborativeincharacterandisnotanindispensableelementinrape.Whatisimportantisthatthe
testimonyofprivatecomplainantabouttheincidentisclear,unequivocalandcredible.Amedicalexaminationisnotindispensabletothe
prosecutionofrapeaslongastheevidenceonhandconvincesthecourtthataconvictionforrapeisproper.

PEOPLEv.SUITOS
G.R.No.125280.March31,2000
DefenseofAlibi
Accusedappellantwaschargedandconvictedofmurder.Hisdefensewasoneofalibi.
Held:
Foralibitoprosper,theaccusedshouldprovenotonlythathewasatsomeotherplacewhenthecrimewascommiedbutalsothatitwas
physicallyimpossibleforhimtobeatthelocuscriminisatthetimeofthecommission.

PEOPLEvs.CUPINO
G.R.No.125688.March31,2000.
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
CupinoandDejoraswerechargedandconvictedforconspiringtocommitmurder.

16/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

CupinoandDejoraswerechargedandconvictedforconspiringtocommitmurder.
Held:
Conspiracymustbeprovedasindubitablyasthecrimeitselfthroughclearandconvincingevidence,notmerelybyconjecture.Toholdan
accusedguiltyasacoprincipalbyreasonofconspiracy,hemustbeshowntohaveperformedanovertactinpursuanceorfurtheranceof
thecomplicity.Hence,conspiracyexistsinasituationwhereatthetimethemalefactorswerecommiingthecrime,theiractionsimpliedly
showedunityofpurposeamongthem,aconcertedeorttobringaboutthedeathofthevictim.Inagreatmajorityofcases,complicitywas
establishedbyproofofactsdoneinconcert,i.e.,actsthatyieldedthereasonableinferencethatthedoersthereofwereactingwitha
commonintentordesign.Therefore,thetaskineverycaseisdeterminingwhethertheparticularactsestablishedbytherequisitequantum
ofproofdoreasonablyyieldthatinference.

PEOPLEvs.ABALDE
G.R.No.123113.March31,2000.
Rapeguidelines
Held:
Inthedispositionofrapecases,theCourtisguidedbythefollowingprinciples:(1)anaccusationforrapecanbemadewithfacility;itis
diculttoprovebutmoredicultforthepersonaccused,thoughinnocent,todisprove;(2)inviewoftheintrinsicnatureofthecrimeof
rapewhereonlytwopersonsareusuallyinvolved,thetestimonyofthecomplainantmustbescrutinizedwithextremecaution,and(3)the
evidencefortheprosecutionmuststandorfallonitsownmeritsandcannotdrawstrengthfromtheweaknessoftheevidenceofthe
defense.

PEOPLEVS.AMIGABLE
G.R.No.133857.March31,2000
Medicalexamination/ndingsevidentiaryvalueinrapecases
Held:
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/
17/19
Lackoflaceratedwoundsdoesnotnegatesexualintercourse.Afreshlybrokenhymenisnotanessentialelementofrape.Forthatmaer,

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

Lackoflaceratedwoundsdoesnotnegatesexualintercourse.Afreshlybrokenhymenisnotanessentialelementofrape.Forthatmaer,
incrimesagainstchastity,themedicalexaminationofthevictimisnotanindispensableelementfortheprosecutionofthecrimeasher
testimonyalone,ifcredible,issucienttoconvicttheaccusedasinthiscase.

Source:
CriminalLawDigests
AteneoCentralBarOperations2001

AboutMagz
Firstofall,Iamnotalawyer.ImagraduateofABPoliticalScienceandwenttotheCollegeofLawbutstoppedgoingtolawschoolforsomereasons.
ImapassionateteacherwhohasbeenteachingEnglishtospeakersofotherlanguagesandapersonwholikeswritingandblogging.Ilostsome
importantlesandsoftwarewhenmycomputerbrokedownsothereasonIcreatedthiswebsiteistopreservethenotes,reviewersanddigestsIcollected
whenIwasatthelawschoolandatthesametime,Iwanttohelpoutlawstudentswhodonothaveenoughtimetogoandreadbooksinthelibrary.
ViewallpostsbyMagz
PostedonJanuary24,2012,inDigestsandtaggedCriminalLawDigestsMarch2000.Bookmarkthepermalink.Leaveacomment.

Leaveacomment

Comments0
https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/

18/19

6/22/2016

CriminalLawDigestsMarch2000|PhilippineLawReviewers

BlogatWordPress.com.TheMystiqueTheme.

https://lawphilreviewer.wordpress.com/2012/01/24/criminallawdigestsmarch2000/

19/19