1

Case Title: Ivler v San Pedro o Homicide requires proof of an additional fact (element) which Slight physical
Reference Number: injuries does not
Reckless Imprudence
Key Words: material only to determine the penalty
Voluntarily, but without malice, doing or failing to do an act from which material damage
ISSUE: results by reason of inexcusable lack of precaution on the part of the person performing
W/N accused is entitled to the application of double jeopardy or failing to perform such act, taking into consideration his employment, degree of
intelligence, physical condition and other circumstances regarding persons, time and
W/N he is guilty of a quasi offense (Art. 48) place
Quizon v Justice of Peace: in negligence, what is punished is the mental attitude or
FACTS: condition behind the act, the dangerous recklessness, lack of care or foresight
Vehicular collision involving Jaso Ivler and the Ponce spouses o Intentional crimesact itself is punished
Was charged by Pasig MeTC with Prior conviction or acquittal of Reckless Imprudence Bars subsequent prosecution for the
o Reckless imprudence resulting to slight physical injuries same Quasi-Offense
Sustained by Evangeline Ponce People v Buan: Reason and precedent both coincide in that once convicted or acquitted of a specie act of
o Reckless imprudence resulting to homicide reckless imprudence, the accused may not be prosecuted again for that same act. For the essence of the quasi
offense of criminal negligence under article 365 of the Revised Penal Code lies in the execution of an imprudent
Sustained by Nestor Ponce or negligent act that, if intentionally done, would be punishable as a felony. The law penalizes thus the
Petitioner pleaded guilty to the charge of Reckless imprudence resulting to slight physical negligent or careless act, not the result thereof. The gravity of the consequence is only taken into account to
injuries determine the penalty, it does not qualify the substance of the offense. And, as the careless act is single,
o His counsel motioned for the quashal of the second charge whether the injurious result should affect one person or several persons, the offense (criminal negligence)
remains one and the same, and can not be split into different crimes and prosecutions
MeTC denied motionno identity in the two cases
Petitioner appealed to RTC Pasig; RTC dismissed the appeal
Tests of Double Jeopardy
HELD: Whether the 2nd offense charged, necessarily incudes the offense charged in the
former complaint or information
Non-Appearance of Arraignment Whether the same evidence which proves one offense, would prove the other
Absence merely renders his bondsman potentially liable
Non-Application of Art. 48 (Complex Crimes)
Absence is not tantamount to him as a fugitive without standing
Art. 48: procedural device allowing single prosecution of multiple felonies falling under
Double Jeopardy either of two categories: (1) when a single act constitutes two or more grave or less grave
felonies and (2) when an offense is a necessary means for committing the other
Protects an accused from post-conviction prosecution for the same offense with prior
o Benefit the accused who, in lieu of serving multiple penalties, will only serve the
verdict rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction
maximum of the penalty for the most serious crime
o Protects him from post=conviction prosecution for the same offense, with the
Art. 365 is a substantive rule penalizing not an act defined as a felony but the mental
prior verdict rendered by a court of competent jurisdiction upon a valid
information attitude behind the act, the dangerous recklessness, lack of care or foresight
o Crafted as one quasi-crime resulting in one or more consequences
ELEMENTS
o Complaint or information was sufficient in form and substance to sustain a Art. 48 is incongruent to the notion of quasi crimes under Art. 365
o Conceptually impossible for a quasi-offense to stand for (1) a single act
conviction
o The court had jurisdiction constituting tow or more grave or less grave felonies; or (2) an offense which is
a necessary means for committing another
o Accused had been arraigned and had pleaded
o Accused was convicted or acquitted or the case was dismissed without his Prosecutions under Art. 365 should proceed from a single charge regardless of the
express consent number or severity of the consequences
o No splitting of charges under Art. 365
MeTC: 2nd case requires proof of an additional fact which the other does not
Criminal negligence, and not criminal act