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
Timothy Scott Sherman v. William L. Smith, Warden, Maryland House of Correction Annex John Joseph Curran, Attorney General For The State of Maryland, 70 F.3d 1263, 4th Cir. (1995)
Chester Hollman v. Harry E. Wilson, Superintendent, Retreat The District Attorney of The County of Philadelphia The Attorney General of The State of Pennsylvania, 158 F.3d 177, 3rd Cir. (1998)