 Mardy Doria came home late to find her sister missing o Rondero was convinced to provide hair samples

nvinced to provide hair samples which

 This prompted a search were later indorsed to the NBI for testing
 Her father, Maximo, in his search saw accused Rondero pumping a
well with an ice pick clenched in his mouth and was washing his  RONDERO: EXECUTED A WAIVER OF DETENTION + WAIVER OF
bloodied hands THE PROVISION OF SEC.12, ART.3 of the CONSTI on the RIGHTS FO
 Maximo returned to the search party and informed the Kagawad THE ACCUSSED DURING CUSTODIAL INVESTIGATION
what he saw without revealing that it was the latter’s son.
 After several more hours of searching, they found the lifeless body TRIAL
of Mylene (victim) lying on a cemented pavement near the  DR. CORNEL
canteen. o Hymenal laceration Sexual intercourse or by object
o She was naked forcibly inserted
o Right hand raised abover her head  RONDERO
o Fractured left hand behind her back o Did not testify at the trial
o Her right hand tightly gripped several hair strands o Opted to present his wife and father as witness to account
o Blue rubber slipper with a tiny lead painted in red was for his whereabouts on the night of ths incident
found beside her body while the other slipper behind her  WIFE OF RONDERO
back o Alibi for Rondero
o A pair of shorts identified to be hers was found under her  Quarelled with her husband
buttocks  The quarel became violent that this prompted his
 Maximo then led the policemen to the well where he saw the father to intervene
accused earlier washing his hands.  With a bloodied nose, he went to bed with his
o The policemen found the well splattered with blood. wife around 8pm
 It was only when they were back to the headquarters when  FATHER OF RONDERO
Maximo revealed what he saw (see bullet #2) o Alibi for Rondero
o Because of this lead the policemen returned to Pugaro  Corroborated the story
and arrested Rondero.
 An autoposy was conducted TC JUDGEMENT: CONVICTED RONDERO OF THE CRIME OF MURDER AND
o Vaginal Smear: No sperm cell SENTENCED HIM TO DEATH
o Cause of death: Cardio Respiratory Arrest
 The hair strands found were sent to the NBI for lab exam RONDERO: MR
 Meanwhile, Rondero was formally charged with the special
complex crime of rape with homicide. TC ORDER: MODIFIED EARLIER DECISION  CONVICTED RONDERO OF
o Arraignment: Pleaded not Guilty THE CRIME OF HOMICIDE, RECLUSION PERPETUA
 The hair strands sent for examination could not be examined  Ground:
because the proper comparative specimens were not given o Under the RA 7610, penalty for homicide when the victim
o The NBI gave suggestions as to which part of the had hair is under 12 years old is RP
strands should be pulled from
RONDERO  SC
 There is error in judgement
 TC COMMITTED GRAVE ERROR IN FINDING ACCUSED GUILTY TO
THE CRIME OF HOMICIDE DESPITE ILLEGAL ARREST AND ILLEGAL
DETENTION OF RONDERO
 Argues that the circumstantial evidence1 is not strong enough
 Alleges that there was warrantless arrest

ISSUE: WON RONDERO CAN STILL CONTEST JUDGEMENT BY VIRTUE OF

WARRANTLESS ARREST

HELD: NO
When an accused appeals from the judgement of the trial court, he
waives the constitutional safeguard against double jeoparrd and throws
the whole case open for review of the apellate court, which is then called
to render such judgement as law and justice dictate, whether favourable
or unfavourable.
 It is hornbook knowledge that any irregularity attending the arrest
of an accused is deemed waived when, instead of quashing the
information for lack of jurisdiction over his person, the accused
voluntarily submits himself to the court by entering a plea of guilty
or not guilty during the arraignment and participating in the
proceedings.
o This applies even if it might be true that Rondero’s arrest
was not lawful as the police officers who arrested him had
no personal knowledge of facts indicating that he was the
perpetrator of the crime just commited.

1
CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE (Sec. 4, Rule 133, RROC)
Evidence which proves a fact or series of facts from which the facts in issue may
be established by inference.
NATIONAL EXCHANGE CO. vs. DEXTER
The case is an action instituted by National Exchange Co., petitioner, in the
Court of First Instance as assignee of C.S. Salmon & Co. for the purpose of
recovering from I.B. Dexter a balance of 15,000 pesos.
 The 15000 pesos is the par value of 150 shares of the capital stock
of C.S. Salmon & Co. with interest and costs.
A special stipulation contained in a subscription to corporate stock
which, if valid, would lessen the capital of the company and relieve the
subscriber from liability to be sued upon the subscription is illegal.
It is declared in the Philippines that all franchises granted by the Govt.
shall forbid the issuance of stock except in exchange for actual cash or for
property at a fair valuation equal to the par value of the stock.

The trial court gave judgement for National Exchange Co. to recover the
amount claimed with consequent legal interest.
 It is from this judgement that the defendant, I.B. Dexter is
appealing from.
I.B. Dexter signed a written subscription to the corporate stock of C.S.
Salmon & Co.
 The written subscription containts that Dexter subscribes to 300
shares of the capital stock of C.S. Salmon and Company, payable
from the first dividends declared on any and all shares of said
company owned by him at the time dividends are declared, until
the full amoung of the subscription has been paid.
The subject stipulation has the effect that the subscription shall be
payable from the first dividends to be paid on the shares is unlawful in so
far as it purports to relieve the subscriber from liability to be sued; and the
subscriber is liable for the par value of the stock to the same extent as if
such stipulation had not been inserted in the contract.
The law in the Philippines states that all subscribers alike are bound to pay
full par value in cash or its equivalent, and any attempt to discriminate in
favor of one subscriber by relieving him of his liability wholly or in part is
forbidden.

Because of this subscription, 15,000 was paid from a dividend declared at

about that time by C.S. Salmon & Co, supplemented by money supplied by
I.B. Dexter.
 Beyond this payment nothing has been paid on shares and no
further dividend has been declared by C.S. Salmon.
 There is still therefore a balance of 15000 still unpaid by
subscription

The ISSUE in this case is whether the stipulation contained in the

subscription [to the effect that the subscription is payable from the first
dividends declared on the shares] has the effect of relieving the
subscriber from personal liability in an action to recover the value of the
shares

The court held that the subject stipulation is invalid.