US vs.

Ah Sing
Art. 2. Applicability of provisions
US vs. Bull
Facts: H.N. Bull was master of steamship
Standard, which transported 677 cattle and
carabaos on 2 Dec 1909 without proper
means of securing them or bedding, thus, a
number were cruelly torn (ropes were tied on
nose rings), bruised, and killed. Ship route:
Formosa-Phils.
Issue: WON Phil. laws apply, as there is no
information regarding where this occurred.
Held: Yes; this was ongoing as the ship
entered the Phil. territory, therefore, Phil.
laws apply. - Feliciano
People vs. Wong Cheng
Facts: Wong Cheng smoked opium while
aboard merchant vessel Changsa, anchored
in Manila Bay 2.5 miles from shore.
Issue: WON Philippines has jurisdiction over
Merchant ships in its territory?
Held: Yes; smoking within territory allows
substance to produce pernicious effects,
which is against public order. It is also an act
of defiance of authority. -Feliciano
US vs. Look Chaw
Facts: Mrs. Jacks and Milliron found sacks of
contraband substance opium on steamship
Errol on 18 August 1910 in, around 11-12
am. 3 sacks were found containing 49, 80
packs, (4) packs each; total = 129 packs to
be sold, 4 for personal consumption. The 129
were supposedly going to be sold in Mexico
and Vera Cruz.
Issue: Was Look Chaw accountable, as he
didnt bring down the opium from the ship
and did not intend to sell within Philippines?
Held: Yes; investigation showed that he did
sell to a secret service agent while in the
port. - Feliciano

Facts: Ah Sing as onboard steamer Shun

Chang which docked on Cebu from Saigon on
25 April 1917. He had bought 8 cans of
opium there, which were found on the ship,
hidden in the ashes below the boiler of ship
engine. No evidence regarding intent to
import was brought to court.
Issue: Is he guilty of importing when intent
was not so proven?
Held: Yes, without reasonable doubt; its
illogical that he would transport from SaigonManila-Saigon for pleasure, and he could not
possibly need as much for just him. -Feliciano
US vs. Lol-lo and Saraw
Facts: 2 Dutch boats left Matuta on 30 June
1920, headed for Peta. First boat had 1
person aboard and the second had 11 men,
women and children. After a few days, at
7pm, the second boat arrived between the
isles of Buang and Bukid and was stopped by
6 vintas with 24 men, all armed. They asked
for food, took cargo, hurt men, and raped
women. Then, 2 women were taken, the rest
were put back on boat made to sink. Lol-lo
raped one of the women on the way to
Maruro, where both women escaped.
Issue: Given that piracy is punishable in all
jurisdictions, does Art. 153 still apply since is
still
says
Spain
instead
of
Philippines etc?
Held: Yes; all laws still applicable in
Philippines until so changed or repealed.
Feliciano

Art. 3. Definition of felony

US vs. Ah Chong
Facts: Ah Chong was a cook in mess hall at
Fort McKinley (now Fort Bonifacio) and
stayed there at Bldg. 27. One night, he woke
up to the sound of someone trying to force

his way into the room. There was no way to

know who it was as it was dark and the room
only had 1 door and 1 window, and vines
covered the window; all he could do was ask
who it was. He asked twice, and then, when
no response came, he threatened the
attacker that if he continued, he would be
killed. He took a knife which he kept under
his pillow because of the robberies occurring
recently, and when he was hit on the knee by
a chair he uses to keep the door closed, he
attacked and killed the man who turned out
to be his roommate, Pascal Gualberto. He
called for help immediately but it was too
late.
Issue: Is he liable for the crime?

In his appeal, appellant questions the legality

of his arrest and the seizure of prohibited
drugs found inside his house.
In the case at bench, appellant was caught
red-handed in delivering two tin foils of
marijuana to Pat. Orolfo, Jr., the poseurbuyer.
Applying
the
aforementioned
provision of law, appellant's arrest was
lawfully effected without need of a warrant of
arrest. "Having caught the appellant in
flagrante as a result of the buy-bust
operation, the policemen were not only
authorized but were also under obligation to
apprehend the drug pusher even without a
warrant of arrest"

-Feliciano

The trial court sentenced appellant to suffer

the penalty of life imprisonment and to pay a
fine of P20,000.00 pursuant to Section 4,
Article II of the Dangerous Drugs Act of 1972,
as amended by B.P. Blg. 179. However, said
law was further amended by R.A. No. 7659.

People vs. Oanis and Galanta

Retroactive laws

Facts: Under instructions to seize Balagtas

(escaped convict), the two policemen went
to a house where they suspected Balagtas to
be hiding. Upon finding a sleeping man
inside, they shot him. He turned out to be
Tecson, an innocent man.

ALBINO S. CO, petitioner,

vs.
COURT OF APPEALS and PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,

Held: No; it was a mistake of facts. The act

would have been lawful if the facts had been
as he believed them to be.

Issue: Are they liable?

Held: Yes; unlike in Ah Chong, facts did not
show that they tried to ascertain that they
had the right man. As they did not exercise
due precaution, they were guilty of murder.

in all cases involving violation of Batas

Pambansa Blg. 22 where the check in
question is issued after this date, the claim
that the check is issued as a guarantee or
part of an arrangement to secure an
obligation collection will no longer be
considered a valid defense.
WHEREFORE, the assailed decisions of the
Court of Appeals and of the Regional Trial
Court are reversed and set aside, and the
criminal prosecution against the accusedpetitioner is DISMISSED, with costs de oficio.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiffappellee,

vs. ARMANDO DE LARA Y GALARO
G.R. No. L-32485 October 22, 1970

IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION FOR

THE DECLARATION OF THE PETITIONER'S
RIGHTS AND DUTIES UNDER SEC. 8 OF
R.A. No. 6132.

Philippine Islands. The transport Lawton not

being a vessel of this class, our courts are
without jurisdiction to take cognizance of a
crime committed on board the same.

KAY VILLEGAS KAMI, INC., petitioner.

Upon these grounds we consider that the

order appealed should be affirmed, with the
costs de oficio. So ordered.

WHEREFORE, the prayer of the petition is

hereby denied and paragraph 1 of Sec. 8(a)
of R.A. No. 6132 is not unconstitutional.
Without costs

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiffappellee,

vs.
FAUSTA GONZALES, AUGUSTO
GONZALES, CUSTODIO GONZALES, SR.,
CUSTODIO GONZALES, JR., NERIO
GONZALES and ROGELIO LANIDA,
accused, CUSTODIO GONZALES, SR.,

THE UNITED STATES, complainantappellant,

vs.
WILLIAM FOWLER, ET AL., defendantsappellees.
Assistant Attorney-General Constantino, for
appellant.
William Lane O'Neill, for appellees

The two defendants have been accused of

the theft of sixteen bottles of champagne of
the value of $20, on the 12th August, 1901,
while on board the transport Lawton, then
navigating the high seas, which said bottles
of champagne formed part of the cargo of
the said vessel and were the property of
Julian Lindsay
This case deals with a theft committed on
board a transport while navigating the high
seas.
Of all crimes and offenses committed on the
high seas or beyond the jurisdiction of any
country, or within any of the navigable
waters of the Philippine Archipelago, on
board a ship or water craft of any kind
registered or licensed in the Philippine
Islands in accordance with the laws thereof."
The purpose of this law was to define the
jurisdiction of the courts of First Instance in
criminal cases for crimes committed on
board vessels registered or licensed in the

Murder
In fine, the guilt of the appellant has not
been proven beyond reasonable doubt.
WHEREFORE, the Decision of the Court of
Appeals is REVERSED and SET ASIDE and the
appellant is hereby ACQUITTED. Costs de
oficio.
FEDERICO SORIANO, petitioner,
vs.
THE PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, respondent.
Federico Soriano was charged on August 22,
1945, with the crime of theft of one electric
motor marked "Cyclix," with Western Electric
Company cable, and one lantern slide
projector, with their corresponding
accessories, for the operation of motion
pictures, valued at P6,000, belonging to the
eagle Cinema Co., Inc.,
Issue: if the act onstitute theft
Under the facts of this case, as found by the
Court of Appeals, the petitioner cannot
rightly be convicted of the crime of theft,
because he had not acted with intent of gain.

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE

ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
DONATO BINDOY, defendant-appellant.
Florentino Saguin for appellant.
Attorney-General Jaranilla for appellee.

SO ORDERED.

THE UNITED STATES, plaintiff-appellee,

vs.
RAFAEL B. CATOLICO

The appellant was sentenced by the Court of

First Instance of Occidental Misamis to the
penalty of twelve years and one day
of reclusion temporal, with the accessories of
law, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased
in the amount of P1,000, and to pay the
costs. The crime charged against the
accused is homicide

crime of malversation of public funds and

sentencing him to two months'
imprisonment, to perpetual disqualification
to hold public office or public employment of
any kind, and to the payment of the costs.

The accused appealed from the judgment of

the trial court, and his counsel in this
instance contends that the court erred in
finding him guilty beyond a reasonable
doubt, and in convicting him of the crime of
homicide.

THE PEOPLE OF THE

PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
LORETO RENEGADO y SENORA,

In many criminal cases one of the most

important aids in completing the proof of the
commission of the crime by the accused is
the introduction of evidence disclosing the
motives which tempted the mind of the
guilty person to indulge the criminal act.

Accussed filed an appeal for acquittal

because of insanity.

In view of the evidence before us, we are of

opinion and so hold, that the appellant is
entitled to acquittal according to article 8,
No. 8, Penal Code. Wherefore, the judgment
appealed from is reversed, and the accused
Donato Bindoy is hereby acquitted with
costs de oficio.
JOHN PHILIP GUEVARRA, petitioner,
vs.
HONORABLE IGNACIO ALMODOVAR,
Minor involved in the death of playmate
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, this
petition is hereby DISMISSED for lack of merit
and the Temporary Restraining Order
effective 17 September 1986 is LIFTED. Let
this case be REMANDED to the lower court
for trial on the merits. No cost.

The judgment of conviction is reversed and

the defendant ordered discharged from
custody forthwith.

Murder of the teache

Denied.
THE PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
ANTONIO Z. OANIS and ALBERTO
GALANTA,
Charged with the crime of murder of one
Serapio Tecson, the accused Antonio Z. Oanis
and Alberto Galanta, chief of police of
Cabanatuan and corporal of the Philippine
Constabulary, respectively, were, after due
trial, found guilty by the lower court of
homicide through reckless imprudence and
were sentenced each to an indeterminate
penalty of from one year and six months to
two years and two months of prison
correccional and to indemnify jointly and
severally the heirs of the deceased in the
amount of P1,000.
Mistaken identity.

For all the foregoing, the judgment is

modified and appellants are hereby declared
guilty of murder with the mitigating
circumstance above mentioned, and
accordingly sentenced to an indeterminate
penalty of from five (5) years of prision
correctional to fifteen (15) years of reclusion
temporal, with the accessories of the law,
and to pay the heirs of the deceased Serapio
Tecson jointly and severally an indemnity of
P2,000, with costs.
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE
ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
FERNANDO DE FERNANDO, (municipal
policeman)
This appeal has been taken by the defendant
Fernando de Fernando from the judgment of
the Court of First Instance of Zamboanga, in
which he was held guilty of the crime of
murder and sentenced to suffer the penalty
of twenty years cadena temporal, to
indemnify the heirs of the deceased
Buenventura Paulino in the sum of P1,000
and to pay the costs, by virtue of a complaint
filed by the fiscal charging with the said
crime.
Bases for appeal:
(1) in holding that the acts committed by the
accused constituted the crime for murder;
(2) in not holding that the accused was
exempt from criminal liability and in not
acquitting him.
Mistaken identity

In view of the foregoing and reversing the

appealed judgment, the accused is held
guilty of the crime of homicide through
reckless negligence
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE
ISLANDS, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
CORNELIO BAYONA
This is an appeal from a decision of Judge
Braulio Bejasa in the Court of First Instance
of Capiz, finding the defendant guilty of a
violation of section 416 of the Election Law
and sentencing him to suffer imprisonment
for thirty days and to pay a fine of P50, with
subsidiary imprisonment in case of
insolvency, and to pay the costs.
Desiderio took possession of the revolver the
defendant was carrying.
If we were to adopt the specious reasoning
that the appellant should be acquitted
because it was not proved that he tried to
influence or intended to influence the mind
of any voter, anybody could sell intoxicating
liquor or hold a cockfight or a horse race on
election day with impunity.
As to the severity of the minimum penalty
provided by law for a violation of the
provision in question, that is a matter for the
Chief Executive or the Legislature.
For the foregoing reasons, the decision
appealed from is affirmed, with the costs
against the appellant.