You are on page 1of 3

Source and Limitation Liang vs People the Rules on Criminal Procedure was Felonies and Crimes

ADB official is not immune from given retroactive effect.


People vs Marti criminal liability arising from official Nature, Concept, Definition and
Constitutional protection of a civilian duty People vs Llanto Elements
against the state Rape with no proof of being relative of
Gonzales vs Abaya the victim. Rules on Criminal People vs Temblor
Pesigan vs Angeles Oakwood mutiny. Petitioners with no Procedure can be given retroactive Positive identification and motive to
Tanada vs Tuvera immunity from jurisdiction of the effect. get firearm for purposes of materials
Publication and validity courts for rebellion for the NPA proved the guilt of
People vs Ignas Temblor in killing Campangan
People vs Billaber Territoriality Treachery and premeditation are not
Dimayacyac vs CA specified in the information. Rules on People vs Hassan
No double jeopardy US vs Ah Sing Criminal Procedure can be given Hassan was acquitted of murder since
Opium through an international ship retroactive effect. he is a minor and illiterate and the
Basic principles which docked in Cebu. Import is the Court rules in favor of the poor and
same as bring. De Joya vs Jail Warden the oppressed
Legality Bouncing Checks. Only penal laws can
Miquiabas vs Commanding be given retroactive effect not SC People vs Delim
Bernardo vs People General circulars. Crime of murder degraded to
PD 772 only applies to squatters in Filipino is a civilian employee of the homicide since there was no proof of
urban areas US army. Thus, the US has no People vs Garcia intent and treachery.
jurisdiction over him. Homicide with no proof of unlicensed
People vs Pimentel firearm. Rules on Criminal Procedure People vs Pabiona
Double jeopardy was granted for Prospectivity can be given retroactive effect. Death of Pagayon was claimed to be
subversion with Tajun only convicted accidental as he fell from the roof.
guilty of simple illegal possession of Gumabon vs Director of Prisons People vs Buayaban Presumption of innocence is given
firearms. The state is prejudiced. Ruling in People vs Hernandez that No such thing as robbery in band with more weight than that of guilt.
there is no such thing as a complex homicide. This shall be given
Generality crime of rebellion with murder, arson retroactive effect extinguishing the Culpa and Dolo
and robbery must be given retroactive aggravating circumstance and
US vs Sweet effect lowering the penalty. People vs Carmen
US citizen who is a police in the Murder was degraded to reckless
Philippines is punishable by Philippine In re: Kay Villegas Kami People vs Lacson 1,2,3 imprudence resulting to homicide as a
law on misdemeanour Support for a delegate to the Court held that prospectivity is only cult tried to cure a kid of his alleged
Constitutional Convention is not applicable to the case of Lacson in dementia
Bayan vs Executive Secretary stopped or penalized by a newly moving to dismiss the case
VFA is constitutional since it met the passed law. People vs Buan
requirements on the senate votes and Interpretation and Construction Bus driver cannot be convicted of
the agreement of the USA to the People vs Narvaez serious physical injuries and damages
treaty Protection of property grants Pascual vs Board of Medical to property when he was already
retroactive effect of a lower penalty Examiners acquitted in the first trial for slight
Nicolas vs Romulo Pascual charged with malpractice has physical injuries pertaining to the
Smith was found guilty of rape. People vs Ringor a right to self-incrimination same incident
Romulo-Kenney Agreement is in Illegal possession of unlicensed
conflict with the VFA so Smith cannot firearm is not considered as an People vs Lopez Reodica vs CA
be under the custody of the US aggravating circumstance by a new No proof aggravating circumstance The trial court has no jurisdiction over
embassy. law. Applied both retroactively and lowers the charge from murder to slight physical injuries that demands a
prospectively. homicide right penalty of arresto menor
Schneckenburger vs Moran
Consul of Uruguay in the Philippines People vs Masapol People vs Muleta People vs Nepomuceno, Jr.
has no privileges and immunities like Rape with aggravating circumstance Rape with homicide cannot be Only lawful acts can be exempted
that of the ambassadors and of a use of knife. Sec 8 of Rule 110 of charged based on extrajudicial from criminal liability thus having an
ministers. confession obtained by force unlicensed firearm that accidentally
went off and hit his wife is not Urbano vs Intermediate Appellate Lecaroz vs Sandiganbayan People vs Lizada
excusable. Court There was no conspiracy between Lizada was only found guilty of 3 out
Urbano cannot be liable for homicide Mayor Lecaroz and his son who was of 4 counts of rape. The other one
Mistake of Fact due to proximate cause since there reinstated as the Chairman of the was attempted rape since Lizada did
was medical proof that the tetanus Kabataang Baranggay. not continue the crime when the
Ah Chong vs US that caused the death of the victim victim’s brother entered the room.
The mistake of fact arose from Ah was not inflicted by him People vs Bello
Chong’s belief that it was a robber All the chain of events and the Frustration
trying to enter his home. Therefore, Proposal and Conspiracy conduct of Marife lead to no other
he is acquitted since if there was no conclusion than that she conspired People vs Campuhan
mistake of fact and the person US vs Bautista with her co-accused to commit the Campuhan was only charged with
entering was a real robber and not his Bautista is guilty of junta due to crime. attempted rape as it was not proven
roommate, then it is a case of self- conspiracy since he knew the plans of that he inserted his penis to the
defense. overthrowing the government upon People vs Rom genitalia of the 4 year old child.
accepting the position offered to him Based on the testimony of Ancla, it
People vs Oanis was undeniable that Corsales was also Consummation
Oanis is not acquitted since there was People vs Vengco holding a balisong and was also
an error in personae due to Conspiracy may be inferred though no stabbing the victim. US vs Adiao
negligence. actual meeting among the accused is Adiao must be convicted of
proven People vs Comadre consummated theft even if he was not
Relation of RPC to Special Laws It was not proven beyond reasonable able to get the belt out of the
People vs Valdez doubt that George and Danilo helped Customs House.
People vs Dizon Orodio conspired with Valdez since he Antonio in the crime when he threw a
Judge was found to act with gross was with him the night of the killing. grenade in the roof of Antonio. People vs Hernandez
ignorance of the law when he A conspiracy can be proven even if Hernandez raped a 9 year old kid. The
acquitted Lo Chi Fai for violating a only one of the accused did the actual Attempt Court held that mere penetration of
Central Bank circular killing. the penis to the labia of the genitalia
People vs Lamahang can be considered as consummated
People vs Simon People vs Escober When Lamahang was caught crime of rape.
There is no doubt that Simon violated Escober, a former guard is not proven attempting to break in a house of
the Dangerous Drugs Act to be part of the conspiracy since his another, he can only be charged with People vs Erinia
act during the commission of the attempted trespass to dwelling. Erinia was only convicted of frustrated
Padilla vs CA crime is not proven to be part of the rape since the Court held that it was
The special law can only use RPC as nefarious plot. People vs Dio impossible for his penis to enter the
supplementary if it uses Since the watch remained with the genitalia of a 3 years and 11 months
nomenclatures, principles and People vs Nacional victim, Dio can only be charged with old girl. Sticky substance was found in
properties of the RPC. Therefore, A meeting was proven to have attempted robbery with homicide. the genitalia. Malcom dissented.
Padilla’s surrender can be considered transpired before the actual killing of
a mitigating circumstance even if this the alleged military informants. Thus, People vs Trinidad People vs Velasco
was not specified in the special law. conspiracy existed. Trinidad was not able to perform all Medical opinion and positive
the acts of execution that would have identification made Velasco guilty of
Wrongful act different from that People vs Elijorde brought about the death of Tan the crime of consummated rape of a
intended Elijorde was the only one convicted making him only convicted with five year old girl in the North
since his two companions did not attempted homicide. Cemetery.
People vs Sabalones show support or participation when he
Sabalones claims that the crime was stabbed the victim. People vs Lopez People vs Mendoza
an aberratio ictus but this does not The Court ruled that Lopez can only Mendoza was only found guilty of
diminish their criminal liability. The People vs Botona be liable of Attempted Murder with incestuous rape for raping his
Court further held that it was a case The accused are found to have respect to Mario Seldera. It was daughter for the second case. The
of error in personae. conspired since they shared a established by the doctor that the first case was ruled to be attempted
common objective which is to kill their gunshot wounds acquired by Mario rape since she was unconscious
brother in law. were not fatal and will in fact heal in before the penetration occurred.
seven days.
Impossible Crimes People vs Ong Chiat Lay Accomplices cooperation after its execution, she is
The two companions of Ong Chiat Lay at the very least an accessory to the
Intod vs CA are acquitted of arson but Ong Chiat People vs Mandolado offense committed by the accused.
The ruling was modified from was found guilty. Since it was claimed An accomplice cooperates in the
attempted murder to an impossible that there was conspiracy, the execution of the offence by previous People vs Cui
crime punishable by Article 4 (2) since acquittal of one means acquittal of all. or simultaneous acts, provided he has The Cui couple participated
he fired the gun to an empty room no direct participation in its execution subsequent to the commission of the
thinking that his target was there. People vs Dela Cruz or does not force or induce other to act of kidnapping.
Kidnapping. The inducer need not commit it, or his cooperation is not
Principals take part in the commission of the indispensable. Ortilliano only fired his
offense, one who induces another to gun every time Mandolado fired his.
By direct participation commit a crime is guilty as principal
even though he might have taken no People vs Doble
People vs Nunag part in its material execution. The owner of the banca is convicted
Rape case of five men on a girl with as accomplices since they did not
the girl identifying 3 of the men. All People vs Indanan participate in the bank robbery and
five are still convicted of rape since Indanan was the headman of Parang. killing per se.
the two showed indispensable He ordered his men to kill Sariol
cooperation. claiming that such order was from the People vs Doctolero
governor. His men committed a crime The two appellants were standing in
People vs Dela Cerna because of his command. the room ready to lend assistance to
Murder of father and son with the their brother who is killing the two
killing the son as wasn't part of the People vs Kiichi Omine women and injuring a child.
plan. Serapio acted alone in killing the One who said "stab him!" is not guilty
son. of inducement because inducement People vs Elijorde
must precede the criminal act. Elijorde was the only one convicted
People vs Doria since his two companions did not
Marijuana entrapment case. There Indispensable cooperation show support or participation when he
was no evidence of participation of stabbed the victim.
Gaddao because she wasn't People vs Maluenda
commiting, planning to commit, nor Legarto’s participation as a co- People vs De Vera
committed any offense. principal by indispensable cooperation Appellant was not a mere spectator
in the crime is not proven and he is but a look out to ensure that the
Those who force or induce others merely an accessory. His acts such as crime was carried out. Therefore, he
to commit delivery of ransom money were was an accomplice.
limited after the abduction was
People vs Yamson already consummated. People vs Cachola
Jeanette was swindled of fake gold The other six accused cannot be said
bars but there was no proof that she People vs Montealegre to be accomplices since they are not
forced or induced the abduction and Montealgre did not himself commit proven to be part of the crime since
killing of the victims. the act of stabbing but he is equally they were only with the suspects 2
guilty for having prevented the victim hours after the killing.
People vs Bolivar from resisting the attack against him.
There was no sufficient evidence to Accessories
convict Barrion of inducing Canaguran People vs Eguia
to kill Callao and no evidence was A conspiracy existed between Eguia People vs Talingdan
presented to show that Barrion had and Reyes for the withdrawal of funds Teresa did not directly participate in
moral ascendancy/dominance over of the former. Eguia had no funds at the conspiracy and thus, cannot have
Canaguran that the latter would be all during that time. the same liability as her co-accused
induced to kill. but she knew it was going to be done
and did not object. As evidenced by
her passive attitude before the crime
was commenced and her active

You might also like