Sie sind auf Seite 1von 10

Dungo v People (2015)

DANDY DUNGO and GREGORIO SIBAL, JR. vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES
G.R. No. 209464 July 1, 2015

Facts:

On January 14, 2006, at Villa Novaliches, Brgy. Pansol, Calamba City, Laguna, the Alpha
Phi Omega Fraternity in conspiracy with more or less twenty other members and officers
conducted initiation rite. MARLON VILLANUEVA y MEJILLA, a neophyte was subjected
to physical harm.
After the initiation rites, accused Sibal inquired about Villanueva's condition but he was
ignored by Castillo. He then called co-accused Dungo for help. After Dungo arrived at the
resort, they hailed a tricycle and brought Villanueva to JP Rizal Hospital. There, he gave a
false name to the security guard as he heard that Dungo had done the same.

RTC found Dungo and Sibal guilty of the crime of violating Section 4 of the Anti-Hazing
Law and sentenced them to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua.

The CA ruled that the appeal of Dungo and Sibal was bereft of merit.

Issue:

Whether or not herein accused were guilty of violation of R.A. No. 8049.

Ruling:
Yes, they are guilty of violation of R.A. No. 8049.

Section 1 of R.A. No. 8049 defines hazing as an initiation rite or practice as a prerequisite for
admission into membership in a fraternity, sorority or organization by placing the recruit,
neophyte or applicant in some embarrassing or humiliating situations such as forcing him to
do menial, silly, foolish and other similar tasks or activities or otherwise subjecting him to
physical or psychological suffering or injury. From the said definition, the elements of the
crime of hazing can be determined:
1. That there is an initiation rite or practice as a prerequisite for admission into membership
in a fraternity, sorority or organization;
2. That there must be a recruit, neophyte or applicant of the fraternity, sorority or
organization; and

3. That the recruit, neophyte or applicant is placed in some embarrassing or humiliating


situations such as forcing him to do menial, silly, foolish and other similar tasks or activities
or otherwise subjecting him to physical or psychological suffering or injury.

Classes of direct participants are: the first class of principals would be the actual participants
in the hazing. If the person subjected to hazing or other forms of initiation rites suffers any
physical injury or dies as a result thereof, the officers and members of the fraternity, sorority
or organization who actually participated in the infliction of physical harm shall be liable as
principals. The second class of principals would be the officers, former officers, or alumni of
the organization, group, fraternity or sorority who actually planned the hazing. The third class
of principals would be the officers or members of an organization group, fraternity or sorority
who knowingly cooperated in carrying out the hazing by inducing the victim to be present
thereat due to their indispensable cooperation in the crime by inducing the victim to attend
the hazing. The next class of principals would be the fraternity or sorority's adviser. The last
class of principals would be the parents of the officers or members of the fraternity, group, or
organization.

Exceptionally, under R.A. No. 8049, the participation of the offenders in the criminal
conspiracy can be proven by the prima facie evidence due to their presence during the hazing,
unless they prevented the commission of the acts therein.

Ysidoro vs People of the Philippines, GR 192330 (Partial Digest)


Posted on September 17, 2016

FACTS:

This case is about a municipal mayor charged with illegal diversion of food intended for those sufferi
ng from malnutrition to the beneficiaries of reconsideration projects affecting the homes of victims
of calamities.

Polinio told Garcia that the SFP still had sacks of rice and boxes of sardines in its storeroom. And sinc
e she had already distributed food to the mother volunteers, what remained could be given to the C
SAP beneficiaries.

Garcia and Polinio went to petitioner Arnold James M. Ysidoro, the Leyte Municipal Mayor, to seek h
is approval. After explaining the situation to him, Ysidoro approved the release and signed the withd
rawal slip for four sacks of rice and two boxes of sardines worth P3,396.00 to CSAP.

She also pointed out that the Supplemental Feeding Implementation Guidelines for Local Governme
nt Units governed the distribution of SFP goods. Thus, Ysidoro committed technical malversation wh
en he approved the distribution of SFP goods to the CSAP beneficiaries.

The evidence shows that on November 8, 2000 the Sangguniang Bayan of Leyte enacted Resolution
00-
133 appropriating the annual general fund for 2001. This appropriation was based on the executive
budget which allocated P100,000.00 for the SFP and P113,957.64 for the Comprehensive and Integra
ted Delivery of Social Services which covers the CSAP housing projects.

The Sandiganbayan held that Ysidoro applied public property to a pubic purpose other than that for
which it has been appropriated by law or ordinance.

ISSUE 1:

Whether or not he approved the diversion of the subject goods to a public purpose different from th
eir originally intended purpose

RULING 1:

The crime of technical malversation as penalized under Article 220 of the Revised Penal Code has thr
ee elements: a) that the offender is an accountable public officer; b) that he applies public funds or p
roperty under his administration to some public use; and c) that the public use for which such funds
or property were applied is different from the purpose for which they were originally appropriated b
y law or ordinance.

The creation of the two items shows the Sanggunian’s intention to appropriate separate funds for SF
P and the CSAP in the annual budget.

Since the municipality bought the subject goods using SFP funds, then those goods should be used fo
r SFP’s needs, observing the rules prescribed for identifying the qualified beneficiaries of its feeding
programs. The target clientele of the SFP according to its manual are: 1) the moderately and severely
underweight pre-
school children aged 36 months to 72 months; and 2) the families of six members whose total month
ly income is P3,675.00 and below.

Ysidoro disregarded the guidelines when he approved the distribution of the goods to those providin
g free labor for the rebuilding of their own homes. This is technical malversation. If Ysidoro could not
legally distribute the construction materials appropriated for the CSAP housing beneficiaries to the S
FP malnourished clients neither could he distribute the food intended for the latter to CSAP benefici
aries.

People of the Philippines vs Orlito Villacorta


On January 22, 2002, Danilo Cruz went to a sari-sari store to buy bread. Out of nowhere,
Orlito Villacorta appeared and thereafter stabbed the left part of the body of Cruz with a
sharpened bamboo stick. After that, Villacorta fled.
Cruz was helped by bystanders and he was brought to a nearby hospital where he was
treated as out-patient. He was discharged on the same day but on February 14, 2002, or
21 days after the stabbing incident, he returned to the same hospital where he was treated
for severe tetanus. The next day on February 15, 2002, Cruz died. The medical report
states that Cruz died of tetanus infection secondary to stab wound.
The trial court as well as the Court of Appeals convicted Villacorta for murder.
ISSUE: Whether or not Villacorta is guilty of murder.
HELD: No. In this case, the proximate cause of the death is not the stabbing done by
Villacorta upon Cruz. There was an efficient intervening cause which appeared between
the time of the stabbing and the time of the death of Cruz.
In explaining this, the Supreme Court took into consideration the fact that severe tetanus
(the kind of tetanus which causes immediate death) has an incubation period of 14 days
or less. In this case, the stabbing made by Vilalcorta could not have caused the tetanus
infection as 22 days already lapsed from the time of the stabbing until the date of death of
Cruz. Something else caused the tetanus other than the stabbing – in short, Cruz acquired
the tetanus 14 days or less before February 15, 2003 and not on the date of stabbing.
The court explained further:
The rule is that the death of the victim must be the direct, natural, and logical consequence
of the wounds inflicted upon him by the accused. And since we are dealing with a criminal
conviction, the proof that the accused caused the victim’s death must convince a rational
mind beyond reasonable doubt. The medical findings, however, lead us to a distinct
possibility that the infection of the wound by tetanus was an efficient intervening cause later
or between the time [Cruz] was wounded to the time of his death. The infection was,
therefore, distinct and foreign to the crime.

Villacorta is however guilty of slight physical injuries based on the facts. Neither is he guilty
of attempted nor frustrated murder, his intent to kill was not proven by the prosecution.

Seguritan v. People
Lessons Applicable: intent

Laws Applicable:

FACTS:

November 25,1995: Roño Seguritan y Jara alias Ranio was having a drinking session with his uncles
Lucrecio Seguritan (51 year old farmer), Melchor Panis and Baltazar Panis, in the house of Manuel
dela Cruz. Ranio was seated beside Lucrecio as he claimed that Lucrecio’s carabao entered his farm
and destroyed his crops which bun the heated argument. As Lucrecio was about to stand up, he
punched him twice hitting him in the right and left temple causing him to fall face-up to the ground
and hit a hollow block which was being used as an improvised stove causing him to fall face-up to
the ground and hit a hollow block which was being used as an improvised stove. Lucrecio rode a
tricycle home. His wife noticed blood on his forehead so he explained that he was stoned.

November 25,1995 9pm: Lucrecio’s wife and daughter noticed that his complexion has darkened and
foamy substance was coming out of his mouth as he slept. They tried to revive Lucrecio but failed.

December 4, 1995: Lucrecio’s wife learned of the incident and requested the assistance of the
NBI. NBI Medico-Legal Officer Dr. Vertido concluded that Lucrecio’s cause of death was traumatic
head injury

October 1, 1996: He was charged with Homicide

Ranio presented Joel Cabebe, the Assistant Registration Officer of Gonzaga, Cagayan, and Dr.
Corazon Flor, the Municipal Health Officer of Sta. Teresita, Cagayan, to prove that Lucrecio died of a
heart attack

RTC: homicide

CA: Affirmed

Ranio argued that he should be liable only for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide due to the
absence of intent to kill Lucrecio

ISSUE: W/N Ranio is guilty of homicide even if there is no intent

HELD: YES. petition is DENIED. AFFIRMED penalty of six years and one day of prision mayor as
minimum, to 12 years and one day of reclusion temporal as maximum with MODIFICATION that
petitioner is further ordered to pay P25,000.00 as temperate damages in lieu of actual damages, and
P50,000.00 as civil indemnity
When death resulted, even if there was no intent to kill, the crime is homicide, not just physical
injuries, since with respect to crimes of personal violence, the penal law looks particularly to the
material results following the unlawful act and holds the aggressor responsible for all the
consequences thereof.

Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code provides

1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from that
which he intended.

Unlawful act - punching Lucrecio

He who is the cause of the cause is the cause of the evil caused

Quinto v. Andres
G.R. No. 155791 March 16, 2005

Lessons Applicable: Proximate cause, EX to Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly
liable.

Laws Applicable:

FACTS:

November 13, 1995 7:30 am: Edison Garcia, 11 year-old and Grade 4 elementary school pupil, and
his playmate, Wilson Quinto saw Dante Andres and Randyver Pacheco by the mouth of a drainage
culvert.

Andres and Pacheco invited Wilson to go fishing with them inside the drainage culvert. Wilson
agreed while Garcia seeing that it was dark inside, opted to remain seated in a grassy area about two
meters from the entrance of the drainage system

Only Pacheco had a flashlight. Pacheco, who was holding a fish, came out of the drainage system
and left without saying a word. Then, Andres came out, went back inside, and emerged again
carrying Wilson who was already dead. He laid his body down in the grassy area.

Garcia, shocked, fled from the scene. Andres went to the house of Melba Quinto, Wilson’s mother,
and informed her that her son had died. They rushed to the drainage culvert. Wilson was buried
without any complaints filed.

November 28, 1995: National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) took the sworn statements of Pacheco,
Garcia and Quinto

Pacheco alleged that he had never been to the drainage system catching fish with Andres and
Wilson

Dr. Dominic Aguda of the NBI’s autopsy showed that the cause death is drowning with traumatic
head injuries as contributory

NBI filed a criminal complaint for homicide against Andres and Pacheco with the RTC

Dr. Dominic Aguda testified that Wilson could have fallen, and that the occipital portion of his head
could have hit a blunt object, That the 14x7-centimeter hematoma at the back of Wilson’s head
could have rendered the him unconscious so he drowned. The 4x3-centimeter abrasion on the right
side of Wilson’s face could have also been caused by rubbing against a concrete wall or pavement, or
by contact with a rough surface. He also stated that the trachea region was full of mud, but that
there was no sign of strangulation.

RTC: granted demurer to evidence on the ground of insufficiency of evidence

CA: Affirmed RTC

ISSUE: W/N Acquittal in criminal case bars a civil action where the judgment of acquittal holds that
the accused did not commit the criminal acts imputed to them

HELD: YES. petition is DENIED

Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable.

o The civil liability of such person established in Articles 100, 102 and 103 of the Revised Penal
Code includes restitution, reparation of the damage caused, and indemnification for consequential
damages

GR: When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of civil liability arising from
the offense charged shall be deemed instituted with the criminal action

EX: the offended party waives the civil action, reserves the right to institute it separately or institutes
the civil action prior to the criminal action

With the implied institution of the civil action in the criminal action, the two actions are merged into
one composite proceeding, with the criminal action predominating the civil.

The prime purpose of the criminal action is to punish the offender in order to deter him and others
from committing the same or similar offense, to isolate him from society, to reform and rehabilitate
him or, in general, to maintain social order.

The sole purpose of the civil action is the restitution, reparation or indemnification of the private
offended party for the damage or injury he sustained by reason of the delictual or felonious act of
the accused

o While the prosecution must prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt for the
crime charged, it is required to prove the cause of action of the private complainant against the
accused for damages and/or restitution.

o Insofar as the civil aspect of the case is concerned, the prosecution or the private complainant is
burdened to adduce preponderance of evidence or superior weight of evidence. – failed

§ That the deceased fell or slipped cannot be totally foreclosed because even Garcia testified that
the drainage culvert was dark, and that he himself was so afraid that he refused to join respondents
Andres and Pacheco inside

§ failed to adduce proof of any ill-motive on the part of either respondent to kill the deceased
before or after the latter was invited to join them in fishing

GR: The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it the extinction of the civil action.

EX: civil action based on delict shall be deemed extinguished if there is a finding in a final judgment
in the civil action that the act or omission from where the civil liability may arise does not exist
a person committing a felony is criminally liable for all the natural and logical consequences resulting
therefrom although the wrongful act done be different from that which he intended

o Natural - an occurrence in the ordinary course of human life or events

o Logical - a rational connection between the act of the accused and the resulting injury or damage

The felony committed must be the proximate cause of the resulting injury

o Proximate cause

§ cause which in natural and continuous sequence, unbroken by an efficient intervening cause,
produces the injury, and without which the result would not have occurred

§ acting first and producing the injury, either immediately, or by setting other events in motion, all
constituting a natural and continuous chain of events, each having a close causal connection with its
immediate predecessor

o There must be a relation of “cause and effect,”

§ cause = felonious act of the offender

§ effect = resultant injuries and/or death of the victim.

The “cause and effect” relationship is not altered or changed because of the

o pre-existing conditions

§ pathological condition of the victim

§ predisposition of the offended party

§ physical condition of the offended party

o concomitant or concurrent conditions

§ negligence or fault of the doctors

§ conditions supervening the felonious act

Ø tetanus

Ø pulmonary infection

Ø gangrene

not the proximate cause of the resulting injury when:

1. there is an active force that intervened between the felony committed and the resulting injury,
and the active force is a distinct act or fact absolutely foreign from the felonious act of the accused;
or

2. the resulting injury is due to the intentional act of the victim

The offender is criminally liable for the death of the victim if his delictual act caused, accelerated or
contributed to the death of the victim.

the prosecution was burdened to prove the corpus delicti which consists of two things:
1. first, the criminal act - objective

2. second, defendant’s agency in the commission of the act - subjective element of crimes

· In homicide (by dolo) and in murder cases, the prosecution is burdened to prove:

1. the death of the party alleged to be dead

2. that the death was produced by the criminal act of some other than the deceased and was not
the result of accident, natural cause or suicide

3. that defendant committed the criminal act or was in some way criminally responsible for the act
which produced the death

GEMMA JACINTO vs PEOPLE

G.R. NO. 162540 13July2009 592SCRA26

FACTS: In June 1997, Baby Aquino, handed petitioner -collector of Mega Foam, a post dated checked
worth P10,000 as payment for Baby’s purchases from Mega Foam International, Inc. The said check
was deposited to the account of Jacqueline Capitle’s husband-Generoso. Rowena Recablanca,
another employee of Mega Foam, received a phone call from an employee of Land Bank, who was
looking for Generoso to inform Capitle that the BDO check deposited had been dishonored.
Thereafter, Joseph Dyhenga talked to Baby to tell that the BDO Check bounced. However, Baby said
that she had already paid Mega Foam P10,000 cash in August 1997 as replacement for the
dishonored check.

Dyhengco filed a compliant with the National Bureau of Investigation (NBI) and worked out an
entrapment operation with its agents. Thereafter, petitioner and Valencia were arrested. The NBI
filed a criminal case for qualified theft against the two (2) and Jacqueline Capitle.

RTC rendered a decision that Gemma, Anita and Jacqueline GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the
crime of QUALIFIED THEFT and each of the sentenced to suffer imprisonment of Five (5) years, Five
(5) months and Eleven (11) days to Six (6) years, Eight (8) months and Twenty (20) days.

ISSUE: Whether or not the crime committed falls the definition of Impossible Crime.

HELD: Yes, Since the crime of theft is not a continuing offense, petitioner’s act of receiving the cash
replacement should not be considered as continuation of the Theft.

The requisites of an impossible crime are:

That the Act performed would be an offer against persons or property;

That the act was alone with evil intent; and

That the accomplishment was inherently impossible or the means employed was either inadequate
or ineffectual.

The time that petitioner took a possession of the check meant for Mega Foam, she had performed
all the acts to consummate that crime of theft had it not been impossible of accomplishment in this
case.
Therefore, the Supreme Court held that petitioner Gemma T. Jacinto is found GUILTY of an
impossible crime and suffer the penalty of Six (6) months of arresto mayor and pay courts.

Intod v. CA

G.R. No. 103119 October 21, 1992


Lessons Applicable: Impossible Crimes
Laws Applicable:

FACTS:
• February 4, 1979: Sulpicio Intod, Jorge Pangasian, Santos Tubio and Avelino Daligdig went to Salvador
Mandaya's house and asked him to go with them to the house of Bernardina Palangpangan. Thereafter,
they had a meeting with Aniceto Dumalagan who told Mandaya that he wanted Palangpangan to be
killed because of a land dispute between them and that Mandaya should accompany them. Otherwise,
he would also be killed.
• February 4, 1979 10:00 pm: All of them armed arrived at Palangpangan's house and fired at
Palangpangan's bedroom but there was no one in the room.
• RTC: convicted Intod of attempted murder based on the testimony of the witness

ISSUE: W/N Intod is guilty attempted murder since it is an impossible crime under Art. 4 (2)

HELD: YES. petition is hereby GRANTED, the decision of respondent Court of Appeals holding Petitioner
guilty of Attempted Murder is hereby MODIFIED. sentences him to suffer the penalty of six (6) months of
arresto mayor, together with the accessory penalties provided by the law, and to pay the costs

• Art. 4(2). CRIMINAL RESPONSIBILITY. — Criminal Responsibility shall be incurred:


xxx xxx xxx
2. By any person performing an act which would be an offense against persons or property, were it not
for the inherent impossibility of its accomplishment or on account of the employment of inadequate or
ineffectual means.
Petitioner contends that, Palangpangan's absence from her room on the night he and his companions
riddled it with bullets made the crime inherently impossible.
• The Revised Penal Code, inspired by the Positivist School, recognizes in the offender his formidability
to punish criminal tendencies in Art. 4(2)
• Legal impossibility occurs where the intended acts, even if completed, would not amount to a crime
• Legal impossibility would apply to those circumstances where
1. the motive, desire and expectation is to perform an act in violation of the law
2. there is intention to perform the physical act
3. there is a performance of the intended physical act
4. the consequence resulting from the intended act does not amount to a crime
o Ex: The impossibility of killing a person already dead
• Factual impossibility occurs when extraneous circumstances unknown to the actor or beyond his
control prevent the consummation of the intended crime – this case
o Ex: man who puts his hand in the coat pocket of another with the intention to steal the latter's wallet
and finds the pocket empty
• United States: where the offense sought to be committed is factually impossible or accomplishment -
attempt to commit a crime; legally impossible of accomplishment - cannot be held liable for any crime
Subject: Criminal Law 1- Impossible Crime (Legal vs. Factual Impossibility)

Ponente: Justice Jose C. Campos Jr.

Doctrine: Factual impossibility occurs when extraneous circumstances unknown to the actor or
beyond his control prevent the consummation of the intended crime.

FACTS: Some time in February of 1979, the petitioner, together with three other armed men, went
to Salvador Mandaya’s house and fired gunshots at his bedroom. Unknown to them, Mandaya was
not in his bedroom, and the house was occupied by his son-in-law and his family.

RTC convicted Intod of attempted. Petioner raised the case to CA but the same affirmed the
decision. Petitioner now contends that he is only responsible for an impossible crime under par. 2,
art. 4 of RPC.

ISSUE: WON is guilty of impossible crime only.

RULING: YES. Legal impossibility would apply to those circumstances where (1) the motive, desire
and expectation is to perform an act in violation of the law; (2) there is intention to perform the
physical act; (3) there is a performance of the intended physical act; and (4) the consequence
resulting from the intended act does not amount to a crime.

On the other hand, factual impossibility occurs when extraneous circumstances unknown to the
actor or beyond his control prevent the consummation of the intended crime. The case at bar
belongs to this category. Petitioner shoots the place where he thought his victim would be, although
in reality, the victim was not present in said place and thus, the petitioner failed to accomplish his
end.

The community suffers from the mere alarm of crime. Again: Where the thing intended (attempted)
as a crime and what is done is a sort to create alarm, in other words, excite apprehension that the
evil; intention will be carried out, the incipient act which the law of attempt takes cognizance of is in
reason committed.

Further, factual impossibility of the commission of the crime is not a defense. If the crime could have
been committed had the circumstances been as the defendant believed them to be, it is no defense
that in reality the crime was impossible of commission.

Petition GRANTED, respondent Court of Appeals holding Petitioner guilty of Attempted Murder is
hereby MODIFIED. Petitioner guilty of an impossible crime and is hereby sentenced to suffer the
penalty of six (6) months of arresto mayor, together with the accessory penalties provided by the
law, and to pay the costs.

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen