ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.

com™  

Like 0 Tweet Share

Search

 
  Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2016 > October 2016 Decisions > G.R. No. 200087, October 12, 2016 - YOLANDA
LUY Y GANUELAS, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.:
 

  Custom Search
Search G.R. No. 200087, October 12, 2016 - YOLANDA LUY Y GANUELAS, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
   
Respondent.

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 200087, October 12, 2016

YOLANDA LUY Y GANUELAS, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

DECISION

BERSAMIN, J.:

This case involves the criminal attempt by the petitioner to smuggle dangerous drugs (shabu) inside a detention facility
to her detained husband by submerging the packets of shabu inside a plastic jar filled with strawberry juice and cracked
ice. The attempt failed because of the alacrity of the lady guard manning the entrance of the jail compound. chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

The Case

Under appeal is the decision promulgated on August 31, 2011,1 whereby the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed in CA-G.R.
CR No. 33057 the judgment rendered on September 18, 2009 by the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 74, in Olongapo
City finding the petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal possession of six heat-sealed transparent plastic
sachets containing methamphetamine hydrochloride (shabu) with a total net weight of approximately 2.60 grams.2

Antecedents

DebtKollect Company, Inc. The Office of the City Prosecutor in Olongapo City initiated the prosecution through the information filed in the RTC
charging the petitioner with violation of Section 11, Article II, Republic Act No. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drugs
Act of 2002), alleging: chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

That on or about the twenty-fifth (25th) day of October 2004, in the City of Olongapo, Philippines and
within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and knowingly have in her effective possession and control six (6) heat-sealed transparent
plastic sachets containing Methamphetamine Hydrochloride otherwise known as 'Shabu' with an
approximate total weight of Two Gram (sic) and Six Tenth (2.6) of a gram which is a dangerous drugs
(sic), said accused not having the corresponding license or prescription to possess said dangerous
drugs, (sic)

CONTRARY TO LAW.3

chanrobleslaw

The CA narrated the factual and procedural antecedents, viz.:

During the trial, the prosecution presented the lone testimony of Jail Officer 3 Myrose Joaquin, while the
accused-appellant testified for the defense.

As part of her testimony, JO3 Joaquin claimed that on 25 October 2004, she was doing her usual duty
ChanRobles Intellectual Property Division as female guard at the gate of the Bureau of Jail Management Bureau Olongapo City. When she
searched the effects of accused-appellant for possible contrabands, her attention was called on the
strawberry juice placed in a white container full of cracked ice inside. When she was asked what was

 
 
 
 
 
 
  October-2016 Jurisprudence               husband but she had seen them in the past inside the jail. She also admitted that there can be no
  
G.R. No. 201809, October 11, 2016 - H. SOHRIA PASAGI
DIAMBRANG, Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS AND H.
HAMIM SARIP PATAD, Respondent.
G.R. No. 212686, October 05, 2016 - SERGIO R. OSMEÑA III,
Petitioner, v. POWER SECTOR ASSETS AND LIABILITIES
MANAGEMENT CORPORATION, EMMANUEL R. LEDESMA, JR., SPC
POWER CORPORATION, AND THERMA POWER VISAYAS, INC.,
Respondents.
G.R. Nos. 221562-69, October 05, 2016 - COMMO. LAMBERTO R.
TORRES (RET.), Petitioner, v. SANDIGANBAYAN (FIRST DIVISION)
AND PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondents.
A.C. No. 8494, October 05, 2016 - SPOUSES EMILIO AND ALICIA
JACINTO, Complainants, v. ATTY. EMELIE P. BANGOT, JR.,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 210903, October 11, 2016 - PHILIPPINE ECONOMIC
ZONE AUTHORITY (PEZA), Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT
(COA) AND HON. MA. GRACIA M. PULIDO TAN, CHAIRPERSON,
COMMISION ON AUDIT, Respondent.
A.C. No. 4269, October 11, 2016 - DOLORES NATANAUAN,
Complainant, v. ATTY. ROBERTO P. TOLENTINO, Respondent.
G.R. No. 198127, October 05, 2016 - CO IT a.k.a. GONZALO CO
IT, Petitioner, v. ANTHONY CO, MARY CO CHO, PETER CO AND LUCY
SO HUA TAN CO, Respondent.
G.R. No. 167952, October 19, 2016 - GONZALO PUYAT & SONS,
INC., Petitioner, v. RUBEN ALCALDE (DECEASED), SUBSTITUTED BY
GLORIA ALCALDE, REPRESENTATIVE OF THE FARMER‐
BENEFICIARIES, Respondent.
A.C. No. 8168, October 12, 2016 - SPOUSES EDWIN B. BUFFE
AND KAREN M. SILVERIO-BUFFE, Complainants, v. SEC. RAUL M.
GONZALEZ, USEC. FIDEL J. EXCONDE, JR., AND CONGRESSMAN
ELEANDRO JESUS F. MADRONA, Respondent.
G.R. No. 212483, October 05, 2016 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL
BANK, Petitioner, v. VENANCIO C. REYES, JR., Respondent.
G.R. No. 218952, October 19, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. AURELIO GUILLERGAN Y GULMATICO,
Appellant.
G.R. No. 219037, October 19, 2016 - RCBC SAVINGS BANK,
Petitioner, v. NOEL M. ODRADA, Respondent.
G.R. No. 208535, October 19, 2016 - LEO'S RESTAURANT AND
BAR CAFÉ MOUNTAIN SUITE BUSINESS APARTELLE, LEO
Y. LUA AND AMELIA LUA, Petitioners, v. LAARNE C. BENSING,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 216671, October 03, 2016 - JERWIN DORADO,
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
G.R. No. 225044, October 03, 2016 - MANILA DOCTORS
COLLEGE AND TERESITA O. TURLA, Petitioners, v. EMMANUEL M.
OLORES, Respondent.
G.R. No. 205090, October 17, 2016 - GREENSTAR EXPRESS, INC.
AND FRUTO L. SAYSON, JR., Petitioners, v. UNIVERSAL ROBINA
CORPORATION AND NISSIN UNIVERSAL ROBINA CORPORATION,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 221062, October 05, 2016 - ELIZABETH SY-VARGAS,
Petitioner, v. THE ESTATE OF ROLANDO OGSOS, SR. AND ROLANDO
OGSOS, JR., Respondent.
G.R. No. 196134, October 12, 2016 - VALENTIN S. LOZADA,
Petitioner, v. MAGTANGGOL MENDOZA, Respondent.
unusual about the juice, JO3 Joaquin answered that accused-appellant can make the juice inside if she
wanted to. To quell her suspicion, JO3 Joaquin asked accused-appellant if she could transfer it in
another container but accused-appellant refused. JO3 Joaquin insisted, nevertheless. They then went to
the guardhouse and transferred the juice into a bowl. As the ice inside scattered, the illegal drugs were
revealed. Accused-appellant allegedly pleaded for her not to report the matter to the jail warden, but JO3
Joaquin ignored her plea. After bringing accused-appellant to the jail warden, they brought the
confiscated items to the laboratory for examination. The examination revealed that the confiscated
items were positive for methamphetamine hydrochloride.
JO3 Joaquin also identified the accused-appellant in court and the confiscated items and claimed that
they can identify them to be the same items seized from accused-appellant because of the markings
she placed thereon.
On cross-examination, JO3 Joaquin explained that the heat-sealed plastic sachets were wrapped with a
plastic and two (2)-peso coin. She also admitted that she placed accused-appellant on a close watch
because even prior to the incident, accused-appellant would bring with her ready-made juice, making her
think that accused-appellant was peddling illegal drugs inside the prison. Finally, she claimed that she
never had a misunderstanding with accused-appellant prior to the date of the incident.
Accused-appellant, on the other hand, claimed that on 25 October 2004, she was at the BJMP to visit
her husband, Nestor, a prisoner therein. As she was about to go inside the compound, a certain Melda
called her and requested that she give the juice to her husband, a certain Bong, who was also a prisoner
at the BJMP. Accused-appellant initially declined and advised Melda to go personally so she could talk
to her husband. Melda, however, was supposedly in a hurry as she still had to fetch her child. Melda
allegedly also had no identification at that time. Because of Melda's insistence, accused-appellant
acceded to her request and got Melda's plastic box containing a Tupperware and a juice container.
When she was asked who could corroborate this story, accused-appellant claimed that nobody saw
Melda handed (sic) to her the juice container as she had no companion at that time.
Accused-appellant further stated that after receiving Melda's items, she already went inside the
compound and went passed (sic) through the routine security inspection. When JO3 Joaquin
transferred the juice into a bowl, she saw a plastic that contained two (2) coins. Thereafter, JO3 Joaquin
brought her to the office of the BJMP. After a while, she was detained.
On cross-examination, accused-appellant admitted that her husband was convicted of a drug-related
case and that she, herself, was once detained before. She did not know the full name of Melda or her
dispute that the drugs were found in her possession but maintained that the same came from Melda.4
chanrobleslaw
Judgment of the RTC
After the trial, the RTC rendered judgment on September 18, 2009 convicting the petitioner as charged,5 disposing
thusly: chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
WHEREFORE, this Court finds accused Yolanda Luy y Ganuelas guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
violation of Section 11, Article II, R. A. 9165 and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of
imprisonment of twelve (12) years and one (1) day and to pay a fine of P300,000.00 with subsidiary
imprisonment in case of inability to pay the fine. The illegal drug confiscated from the accused is hereby
ordered to be turned over to the Philippine Drug and (sic) Enforcement Agency (PDEA) for disposition in
accordance with law.
SO ORDERED.6
chanrobleslaw
Decision of the CA
The petitioner appealed, but the CA affirmed the conviction through the now assailed decision, holding: chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant Appeal is DENIED. The assailed Decision of the court a
quo is AFFIRMED IN TOTO.
SO ORDERED.7
chanrobleslaw
Issue
In this appeal, the petitioner insists that the CA erred in affirming her conviction despite the failure of the Prosecution to
show that arresting officer JOS Myrose Joaquin had faithfully complied with the requirement on the chain of custody
under Section 21 of R.A. No. 9165; that, accordingly, the packets of shabu presented in court as evidence were not
shown to be the same substances recovered from her; that, moreover, JO3 Joaquin claimed to have brought the
substances herself to the crime laboratory for chemical examination, but did not mention the person who had received
the same from her at the laboratory; and that no inventory of the seized substances was made and no any pictures of
them were taken at the point of arrest.
Ruling of the Court
The appeal lacks merit.
First of all, the factual findings of the trial court, its calibration of the testimonies of the witnesses, and its assessment of
the probative weight thereof, as well as its conclusions on the credibility of the witnesses on which said findings were
anchored are accorded great respect. This great respect rests in the trial court's first-hand access to the evidence
presented during the trial, and in its direct observation of the witnesses and their demeanor while they testify on the
occurrences and events attested to.8 Absent any showing of a fact or circumstance of weight and influence that would
appear to have been overlooked and, if considered, could affect the outcome of the case, the factual findings on and
assessment of the credibility of witnesses made by the trial court are binding on the appellate tribunal.9 Unlike the
appellate court, the trial court has the unique opportunity of such personal observation. The respect for the latter court's
factual findings particularly deepens once the appellate court has affirmed such factual findings, for the latter,
performing its sworn duty to re-examine the trial records as thoroughly as it could in order to uncover any fact or
circumstances that could impact the verdict in favor of the appellant, is then presumed to have uncovered none
sufficient to undo or reverse the conviction. As such, the lower courts' unanimous factual findings are generally binding
upon the Court which is not a trier of facts.10
Upon review, the Court has not found any valid reason to disturb the factual findings of the RTC and the CA.
Secondly, a successful prosecution for the illegal possession of dangerous drugs in violation of Section 11 of R. A. No.
9165 requires that the following essential elements of the offense be established, namely: (1) the accused is in
possession of an item or object identified as a prohibited drug; (2) her possession is not authorized by law; and (3) she
freely and consciously possessed the drug.11
 G.R. No. 171420, October 05, 2016 - AURORA A. SALES,
Petitioner, v. BENJAMIN D. ADAPON, OFELIA C. ADAPON AND
TEOFILO D. ADAPON, Respondent.
G.R. No. 191825, October 05, 2016 - DEE JAY'S INN AND CAFE
AND/OR MELINDA FERRARIS, Petitioners, v. MA. LORINA RAÑESES,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 171865, October 12, 2016 - PHILIPPINE NATIONAL
BANK, Petitioner, v. HEIRS OF BENEDICTO AND AZUCENA ALONDAY,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 191150, October 10, 2016 - NATIONAL ASSOCIATION
OF ELECTRICITY CONSUMERS FOR REFORMS (NASECORE),
REPRESENTED BY PETRONILO ILAGAN, FEDERATION OF VILLAGE
ASSOCIATIONS (FOVA), REPRESENTED BY SIEGFRIEDO VELOSO,
AND FEDERATION OF LAS PIÑAS VILLAGE ASSOCIATIONS (FOLVA),
REPRESENTED BY BONIFACIO DAZO, Pemtitioners, v. MANILA
ELECTRIC COMPANY (MERALCO), Respondent.
G.R. No. 208351, October 05, 2016 - BENJAMIN RUSTIA, JR.,
BENJAMIN RUSTIA, SR., AND FAUSTINO "BONG" RUSTIA,
Petitioners, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
I.P.I. No. 16-243-CA-J, October 11, 2016 - ARTHUR F. MORALES
I, Complainant, v. LEONCIA REAL-DIMAGIBA, JHOSEP Y. LOPEZ,
AND RAMON R. GARCIA, ASSOCIATE JUSTICES, FIFTEENTH
DIVISION, COURT OF APPEALS, MANILA, Respondents.
G.R. No. 215038, October 17, 2016 - NORMA C. MAGSANO,
ISIDRO C. MAGSANO, RICARDO C. MAGSANO, ROQUE C. MAGSANO,
JR., NIDA M. CAGUIAT, PERLITA MAGSANO, AND SALVADOR C.
MAGSANO, Petitioners, v. PANGASINAN SAVINGS AND LOAN BANK,
INC. AND SPOUSES EDDIE V. MANUEL AND MILAGROS C.
BALLESTEROS, SUBSTITUTED BY HER HEIRS: GEMMA C. MANUEL‐
PEREZ, ANGELO JOHNDREW MANUEL, AND RESSY C. MANUEL,
Respondents.
A.C. No. 8638, October 10, 2016 - DATU BUDENCIO E.
DUMANLAG, Complainant, v. ATTY. WINSTON B. INTONG,
Respondent.
G.R. Nos. 177857-58, October 05, 2016 - PHILIPPINE COCONUT
PRODUCERS FEDERATION, INC. (COCOFED), MANUEL V. DEL
ROSARIO, DOMINGO P. ESPINA, SALVADOR P. BALLARES, JOSELITO
A. MORALEDA, PAZ M. YASON, VICENTE A. CADIZ, CESARIA DE
LUNA TITULAR, AND RAYMUNDO C. DE VILLA, Petitioners, v.
REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.; WIGBERTO E.
TAÑADA, OSCAR F. SANTOS, SURIGAO DEL SUR FEDERATION OF
AGRICULTURAL COOPERATIVES (SUFAC) AND MORO FARMERS
ASSOCIATION OF ZAMBOANGA DEL SUR (MOFAZS), REPRESENTED
BY ROMEO C. ROYANDOYAN, Intervenors.; G.R. No. 178193 -
DANILO B. URSUA, Petitioner, v. REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.
A.C. No. 7388, October 19, 2016 - ATTY. RUTILLO B. PASOK,
Complainant, v. ATTY. FELIPE G. ZAPATOS, Respondent.
G.R. No. 220761, October 03, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. EDDIE OLAZO, MIGUEL CORDIS,
CHARITO FERNANDEZ AND ROGELIO LASCONIA, Accused,;
CHARITO FERNANDEZ, Accused-Appellant.
G.R. No. 214875, October 17, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ARIELLAYAG ACCUSED-
APPELLANTS., Respondent.
G.R. No. 219584, October 17, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. PLACIDO GOCO Y OMBROG,
Accused-Appellant.
G.R. No. 192679, October 17, 2016 - ANTONIO ESCOTO,
Petitioner, v. PHILIPPINE AMUSEMENT AND GAMING
CORPORATION, Respondent.
G.R. No. 216023, October 05, 2016 - DR. RESTITUTO C.
BUENVIAJE, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES JOVITO R. AND LYDIA B.
SALONGA, JEBSON HOLDINGS CORPORATION AND FERDINAND
JUAT BAÑEZ, Respondent.
G.R. No. 206691, October 03, 2016 - ATTY. RAYMUND P. PALAD,
Petitioner, v. LOLIT SOLIS, SALVE V. ASIS, AL G. PEDROCHE AND
RICARDO F. LO, Respondents.
G.R. No. 206534, October 05, 2016 - JULIA LIM ROSARIO,
MERCEDES LIM CUSTODIO AS REPRESENTED BY DONNO
CUSTODIO, NORMA LICARDO, AND LEILA ESPIRITU, Petitioners, v.
ALFONSO LIM, Respondent.
G.R. No. 198782, October 19, 2016 - ALLAN BAZAR, Petitioner, v.
CARLOS A. RUIZOL, Respondent.
G.R. No. 191823, October 05, 2016 - DEE JAY'S INN AND CAFE
AND/OR MELINDA FERRARIS, Petitioners, v. MA. LORINA RAÑESES,
Respondent.
G.R. No. 207898, October 19, 2016 - ERROL RAMIREZ, JULITO
APAS, RICKY ROSELO AND ESTEBAN MISSION, JR., Petitioners, v.
POLYSON INDUSTRIES, INC. AND WILSON S. YU, Respondent.
G.R. No. 223561, October 19, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JIMMY PITALLA, JR. Y DIOSA
A.K.A. "BEBE," Accused-Appellant.
G.R. No. 196670, October 12, 2016 - ALLIED BANKING
CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES RODOLFO AND GLORIA
MADRIAGA, Respondents.
G.R. No. 192282, October 05, 2016 - A. NATE CASKET MAKER
AND/OR ARMANDO AND ANELY NATE, Petitioners, v. ELIAS V.
ARANGO, EDWIN M. MAPUSAO, JORGE C. CARIÑO, JERMIE
MAPUSAO, WILSON A. NATE, EDGAR A. NATE, MICHAEL A.
MONTALES, CELSO A. NATE, BENJES A. LLONA AND ALLAN A.
MONTALES, Respondent.
A.C. No. 6767, October 05, 2016 - ELIZABETH RECIO,
Complainant, v. ATTY. JOSELITO I. FANDIÑO, Respondent.
G.R. No. 187544, October 03, 2016 - MARILOU BALASBAS,
FELIPE OLEGARIO, JOSE NARYAEZ, RODOLFO BUMANLAG,*
TEODORO MISIA, MARCELINO VILA, HILARIO ALCALA, MACARIO
The petitioner, whose husband, Nestor, was a detainee in the Olongapo City jail, was caught in the actual illegal
possession of the shabu involved herein as she was entering the gate of the jail compound by JO3 Joaquin, the female
guard, during the latter's routine inspection of her person and personal belongings on October 25, 2004. JO3 Joaquin, as
the designated searcher of female visitors, conducted the search in the presence of other jail guards. Noticing the round
white-colored plastic jar labeled Tang Orange filled with cracked ice and strawberry juice, she insisted that the petitioner
transfer the strawberry juice into another container, but the latter resisted. JO3 Joaquin and a fellow jail guard then
brought the jar inside the guardhouse with the petitioner in tow, and there emptied its contents into a bowl. Upon
removing the cracked ice, the jail guards discovered the plastic material containing two P1 coins inside the jar. At that
point, the petitioner pleaded with them not to report their discovery to the jail warden, but JOS Joaquin ignored her. The
guards immediately haled her before the warden along with the plastic material and its contents. Opening the plastic
material in the presence of the petitioner, they found the six heat-sealed transparent plastic sachets with suspected
shabu inside. Under the circumstances, the petitioner was arrested in flagrante delicto.
At the time of confiscation on October 25, 2004, JO3 Joaquin marked the heat-sealed plastic sachets of shabu with her
initials "MCJ/AO".12 Thereafter, the request for laboratory examination was prepared by P./Chief Insp. Miguel Gallardo
Corpus.13 The request and the substances were delivered to the laboratory by PO1 CM. Ballon. Later on, the PNP Crime
Laboratory Service issued Chemistry Report No. D-0181-2004 (Exhibit C) through P./Sr. Insp. Arlyn M. Dascie, Forensic
Chemist, attesting to the findings on the substances indicating the presence of methylamphetamine hydrochloride, or
shabu.14
The petitioner expectedly denied that the shabu belonged to her. Her sole explanation for why she had the shabu at the
time was that a certain Melda had requested her to bring the jar of strawberry juice inside the jail compound for her
husband, Bong, also a detainee, because Melda had supposedly forgotten to bring her identification card that day, and
because she was then in a hurry to fetch her child.
The RTC after the trial and the CA on appeal rejected the petitioner's denial and explanation. We also reject them now.
Denial, aside from being easily fabricated, has been the common excuse tendered by those arrested and prosecuted for
the illegal possession of dangerous drugs. Under Section 1115 of R.A. Act No. 9165, however, the mere possession of
the dangerous drugs was enough to render the possessor guilty of the offense. Moreover, the denial by the petitioner,
being self-serving and negative, did not prevail over the positive declarations of JO3 Joaquin. In order for the denial to be
accorded credence, it must be substantiated by strong and convincing evidence.16 Alas, the petitioner did not present
such evidence here. As to her explanation, she could have presented Melda herself to corroborate her story. Her word
alone not enough because she had been caught in the actual possession of the shabu during the routinary search at the
gate of the jail compound. As such, we cannot allow her denial to gain traction at all.17
In fine, all the essential elements of illegal possession of dangerous drugs were established. To start with, she was
caught in the voluntary possession of the shabu. And, secondly, she presented no evidence about her being authorized to
possess the shabu. Worthy to reiterate is that her mere possession of the shabu constituted the crime itself. Her animus
possidendi — the intent to possess essential in crimes of mere possession like this - was established beyond reasonable
doubt in view of the absence of a credible explanation for the possession.18
Thirdly, the petitioner insists that the State did not prove the chain of custody of the shabu. In our view, however, her
immediate admission of the possession of the shabu following her arrest in flagranti delicto bound her for, under the
rules on evidence, the act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact was admissible against her.19 Her
admission renders her insistence irrelevant and inconsequential.
Finally, the CA affirmed the penalty fixed by the RTC of 12 years and one day of imprisonment and fine of P300,000.00
with subsidiary imprisonment in case of inability to pay the fine. The affirmance was erroneous for two reasons, namely:
one, the penalty of imprisonment thus imposed was a straight penalty, which was contrary to Section 1 of the
Indeterminate Sentence Law; and, two, mandating the subsidiary imprisonment was legally invalid and unenforceable.
The penalty for the crime committed by the petitioner is provided for in Section 11(3) of R.A. No. 9165, as follows: chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary
Section 11. Possession of Dangerous Drugs. — The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine
ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00) shall
be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law, shall possess any dangerous drug In the
following quantities, regardless of the degree of purity thereof:
cralawlawlibrary
xxxx
(3) Imprisonment of twelve (12) years and one (1) day to twenty (20) years and a fine ranging from
Three hundred thousand pesos (P300,000.00) to four hundred thousand pesos (P400,000.00), if the
quantities of dangerous drugs are less than five (5) grams of opium, morphine, heroin, cocaine or
cocaine hydrochloride, marijuana resin or marijuana resin oil, methamphetamine hydrochloride or
"shabu", or other dangerous drugs such as, but not limited to, MDMA or "ecstasy", PMA, TMA, LSD, GHB,
and those similarly designed or newly introduced drugs and their derivatives, without having any
therapeutic value or if the quantity possessed is far beyond therapeutic requirements; or less than three
hundred (300) grams of marijuana.
chanrobleslaw
Based on the provision, the correct penalty was an indeterminate sentence whose minimum should not be less than the
minimum of 12 years and one day prescribed by Section 11(3), R.A. No. 9165, supra, and whose maximum should not
exceed the maximum of 20 years as also prescribed by Section 11(3), R.A. No. 9165, supra. The imposition of the
indeterminate sentence was required by Section 1 of the Indeterminate Sentence Law, viz.:
Section 1. Hereafter, in imposing a prison sentence for an offense punished by the Revised Penal Code,
or its amendments, the court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence the maximum
term of which shall be that which, in view of the attending circumstances, could be properly imposed
under the rules of the said Code, and the minimum which shall be within the range of the penalty next
lower to that prescribed by the Code for the offense; and if the offense is punished by any other law, the
court shall sentence the accused to an indeterminate sentence, the maximum term of which shall not
exceed the maximum fixed by said law and the minimum shall not be less than the minimum term
prescribed by the same. (As amended by Act No. 4225)
chanrobleslaw
Considering that neither the offense committed nor the imposable penalty was expressly exempt from the coverage of
the Indeterminate Sentence Law pursuant to Section 220 thereof, the imposition of the indeterminate sentence was
mandatory.21 The minimum and the maximum periods had a worthy objective, for, as the Court expounded in Bacar v.
Judge de Guzman, Jr.:22
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
The need for specifying the minimum and maximum periods of the indeterminate sentence is to prevent
the unnecessary and excessive deprivation of liberty and to enhance the economic usefulness of the
accused, since he may be exempted from serving the entire sentence, depending upon his behavior and
his physical, mental, and moral record.
The requirement of imposing an indeterminate sentence in all criminal offenses whether punishable by the
RPC or by special laws, with definite minimum and maximum terms, as the Court deems proper within the
legal range of the penalty specified by the law must, therefore, be deemed mandatory.
chanrobleslaw
To conform with the Indeterminate Sentence Law, therefore, the indeterminate sentence should be 12 years and one day,
as minimum, to 14 years, as maximum.
CORDOVA, SALVADOR ABAIGAR, ATILANO BACUD & LEONIDES
BOLVIDO, Petitioners, v. ROBERTO L. UY REALTY & DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION, Respondent.
G.R. No. 211539, October 17, 2016 - THAMERLANE M. PEREZ,
Petitioner, v. DOMINADOR PRISCILLA RASACEÑA, NAVARRO AND
ADELFA LIM, Respondent.
G.R. No. 179566, October 19, 2016 - SPOUSES LORETO G.
The other error of the lower courts was in imposing subsidiary imprisonment should the petitioner be unable to pay the
fine. The imposition of subsidiary imprisonment, which is a subsidiary personal liability of a person found guilty by final
judgment who has no property with which to meet the fine, is based on and in accord with Article 39 of the Revised Penal
Code, a provision that is supplementary to special laws (like R.A. No. 9165) unless the latter should specially provide the
contrary.23 But subsidiary imprisonment cannot be imposed on the petitioner because her principal penalty, supra, was
higher then prision correccional or imprisonment for six years. In this regard, Article 39 of the Revised Penal Code
relevantly states:
chanRoblesvirtualLawlibrary

NICOLAS AND LOLITA SARIGUMBA, Petitioners, v. AGRARIAN

REFORM BENEFICIARIES ASSOCIATION (ARBA), AND FARMERS Article 39. Subsidiary penalty. — If the convict has no property with which to meet the fine mentioned in
ASSOCIATION OF DAVAO CITY KMPI, FELIPE RAMOS, HILARIO the paragraph 3 of the next preceding article, he shall be subject to a subsidiary personal liability at the
PASIOL, ROGELIO ASURO, ARTURO ATABLANCO, RODRIGO rate of one day for each eight pesos, subject to the following rules: cralawlawlibrary

ATABLANCO, BONIFACIO ATIMANA, PATRICIO AVILA, CRISANTO

BACUS, ERNESTO DONAHAN, SR., NESTOR LOCABERTE, MANILO xxxx
REYES, ANDRES SAROL, SHERLITO TAD-I, ANTONIO TANGARO,
OLIGARIO TANAGARO,* CRISITUTO TANGARO,** FELICIANO
TANGARO, GODOFREDO NABASCA, WENNIE ALIGARME, PEDRO 3. When the principal imposed is higher than prision correctional, no subsidiary imprisonment shall be
TATOY, JR., FELIPE UMAMALIN, PEDRO TATOY, SR., ANTONIO imposed upon the culprit.
YANGYANG, ROMEO GANTUANGCO, VICTOR ALIDON, JAIME TATOY
AND JESUS TATOY, JR., Respondents. xxxx
G.R. No. 208410, October 19, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MARY JOY CILOT Y MARIANO
chanrobleslaw

AND ORLANDO BRIGOLE Y APON, Accused-Appellants.
G.R. No. 168134, October 05, 2016 - FERRO CHEMICALS, INC.,
Petitioner, v. ANTONIO M. GARCIA, ROLANDO NAVARRO, JAIME Y.
GONZALES AND CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES OF THE PHILIPPINES,
INC., Respondents.; G.R. NO. 168183 - JAIME Y. GONZALES,
Petitioner, v. HON. COURT OF APPEALS AND FERRO CHEMICALS,
INC., Respondents.; G.R. NO. 168196 - ANTONIO M. GARCIA,
Petitioner, v. FERRO CHEMICALS, INC., Respondent.
G.R. Nos. 188642 & 189425, October 17, 2016 - AGDAO
RESIDENTS INC., THE DIRECTORS LANDLESS LANDLESS
ASSOCIATION, BOARD OF OF AGDAO ASSOCIATION, INC., IN THEIR
PERSONAL CAPACITY NAMELY: ARMANDO JAVONILLO, MA.
ACELITA ARMENTANO, ALEX JOSOL, ANTONIA AMORADA, JULIUS
To repeat, the RTC's imposition of subsidiary imprisonment "in case of inability to pay the fine" of P300,000.00 was
invalid and legally unenforceable.
In view of the foregoing, the petitioner is ordered to suffer the modified penalty of an indeterminate sentence of 12 years
and one day, as minimum, to 14 years, as maximum, and to pay a fine of P300,000.00, without subsidiary imprisonment
in case of her insolvency.
WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the decision promulgated on August 31, 2011 in CA-G.R. CR No. 33057 subject to the
MODIFICATION that the penalty of the petitioner is the indeterminate sentence of 12 years and one day, as minimum, to
14 years, as maximum, and to pay a fine of P300,000.00 without subsidiary imprisonment in case of her insolvency; and
ORDERS the petitioner to pay the costs of suit.
SO ORDERED. ChanRoblesVirtualawlibrary

ALINSUB, POMPENIANO ESPINOSA, JR., SALCEDO DE LA CRUZ,

CLAUDIO LAO, CONSORCIO DELGADO, ROMEO CABILLO, RICARDO Leonardo-De Castro, (Acting Chairperson), Perlas-Bernabe, and Caguioa, JJ., concur.
BACONG, RODOLFO GALENZOGA, BENJAMIN LAMIGO, AND Sereno, C.J., on leave.
ASUNCION A. ALCANTARA, Petitioners, v. ROLANDO MARAMION,
LEONIDAS JAMISOLA, VIRGINIA CANOY, ELIZABETH GONZALES,
CRISPINIANO QUIRE-QUIRE, ERNESTINO DUNLAO, ELLA
DEMANDANTE, ELLA RIA DEMANDANTE, ELGIN DEMANDANTE, Endnotes:
SATURNINA WITARA, VIRGILIO DAYONDON, MELENCIA
MARAMION, ANGELICA PENKIAN, PRESENTACION TAN, HERNANI
GREGORY, RUDY GIMARINO, VALENTIN CAMEROS, RODEL 1Rollo,pp. 18-26; penned by Associate Justice Rodil V. Zalameda, with the concurrence of Associate
CAMEROS, ZOLLO JABONETE, LUISITO TAN, JOSEPH QUIRE-QUIRE, Justice Amelita G. Tolentino (retired) and Associate Justice Normandie B. Pizarro.
ERNESTO DUNLAO, JR., FRED DUNLAO, LIZA MARAMION, CLARITA
ROBILLA, RENATO DUNLAO AND PRUDENCIO JUARIZA, JR., 2 Id. at pp. 28-35; penned by Acting Presiding Judge Clodualdo M. Monta.
Respondents.; G.R. NOS. 188888-89 - ROLANDO MARAMION,
LEONIDAS JAMISOLA, VIRGINIA CANOY, ERNESTINO DUNLAO,
ELLA DEMANDANTE, ELLA RIA DEMANDANTE, ELGIN 3 Id. at 19.
DEMANDANTE, SATURNINA WITARA, MELENCIA MARAMION, LIZA
MARAMION, ANGELICA PENKIAN, PRESENTACION TAN, AS 4 Id. at 19-22.
SUBSTITUTED BY HIS LEGAL HEIRS: HERNANI GREGORY, RUDY
GIMARINO, RODEL CAMEROS, VALENTIN CAMEROS, VIRGILIO
DAYONDON, PRUDENCIO JUARIZA, JR., ZOILO JABONETE, LUISITO 5 Supra note 2.
TAN, ERNESTINO DUNLAO, JR., FRED DUNLAO, CLARITA ROBILLA,
AND RENATO DUNLAO, Petitioners, v. AGDAO LANDLESS 6Rollo, p. 22.
RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION, INC., THE DIRECTORS LANDLESS
BOARD OF OF AGDAO RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION, INC., IN THEIR
7 Id. at 26.
PERSONAL CAPACITY, NAMELY: ARMANDO JAVONILLO, MA.
ACELITA ARMENTANO, ALEX JOSOL, ANTONIA AMORADA, JULIUS
ALINSUB, POMPENIANO ESPINOSA, JR. JACINTO BO-OC, 8Gulmatico v. People, G.R. No. 146296 October 15, 2007 536 SCRA 82, 95; People v. De Guzman, G.R.
HERMENIGILDO DUMAPIAS, SALCEDO DE LA CRUZ, CLAUDIO LAO,
CONSORCIO DELGADO, ROMEO CABILLO, RICARDO BACONG,
Mo. 177569, November 28, 2007, 539 SCRA 306, 314; People v. Cabugatan, G.R. No. 172019, February
RODOLFO GALENZOGA, BENJAMIN LAMIGO, ROMEO DE LA CRUZ, 12, 2007, 515 SCRA 537, 547.People v. Taan, G.R. No. 169432, October 30, 2006, 506 SCRA 219, 230;
ASUNCION ALCANTARA AND LILY LOY, Respondents. Perez y. People, G.R. No. 150443, January 20, 2006, 479 SCRA 209, 219-220; People v. Tonog, Jr., G.R. No.
144497, June 29, 2004, 433 SCRA 139, 153-154; People v. Genita, Jr., G.R. No. 126171, March 11, 2004,
G.R. No. 183416, October 05, 2016 - PROVINCIAL ASSESSOR OF 425 SCRA 343, 349; People v. Pacheco, G.R. No142887, March 2, 2004, 424 SCRA 164, 174; People v.
AGUSAN DEL SUR, Petitioner, v. FILIPINAS PALM OIL PLANTATION, Abolidor, G.R. No. 147231, February 18, 2004, 42 3 SCRA 260, 265-266; People v. Santiago, G.R. No.
INC., Respondent.
137542-43, January 20, 2004, 420 SCRA 248, 256.
G.R. No. 212980, October 10, 2016 - BUENAVISTA PROPERTIES,
INC., AND/OR JOSEPHINE CONDE, Petitioners, v. RAMON G. 9People v. Taan, G.R. No. 169432, October 30, 2006, 506 SCRA 219, 230; Bricenio v. People, G.R. No.
MARIÑO, REPRESENTED BY ATTY. OSWALDO F. GABAT AS 157804, June 20, 2006, 491 SCRA 489, 495-496.
ATTORNEY-IN-FACT AND COUNSEL VICE ATTY. AMADO DELORIA,
FORMER ATTORNEY-IN-FACT AND COUNSEL, Respondent. 10People v. Prajes, G.R. No. 206770, April 2, 2014, 720 SCRA 594, 601, citing People v. Vitero, G.R. No.
G.R. No. 203610, October 10, 2016 - REPUBLIC OF THE 175327, April 3, 2013, 695 SCRA 54, 64-65.
PHILIPPINES AND HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
COORDINATING COUNCIL (HUDCC), Petitioners, v. GONZALO 11People v. Dela Cruz, G.R. No. 182348, November 20, 2008, 571 SCRA 469, 474-475.
ROQUE, JR., MANUELA ALMEDA ROQUE, EDUVIGIS A. PAREDES,
MICHAEL A. PAREDES, PURIFICACION ALMEDA, JOSE A. ALMEDA, 12Rollo, p. 80.
MICHELLE A. ALMEDA, MICHAEL A. ALMEDA, ALBERTO DELURA,
AND THERESA ALMEDA, Respondent.
13 Id. at 58.
G.R. No. 199271, October 19, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JEHAR REYES, Accused- 14 Id. at 59.
Appellant.

G.R. No. 211977, October 12, 2016 - MARIANO LIM, Petitioner, v.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
G.R. No. 222419, October 05, 2016 - RAMIL R. VALENZUELA,
Petitioner, v. ALEXANDRA MINING AND OIL VENTURES, INC. AND
CESAR E. DETERA, Respondent.
G.R. No. 197557, October 05, 2016 - MAUREEN P. PEREZ,
Petitioner, v. COMPARTS INDUSTRIES, INC., Respondent.
G.R. No. 212562, October 12, 2016 - AVELINO ANGELES Y
OLANO, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.
A.M. No. MTJ-10-1755, October 18, 2016 - WILFREDO F.
TUVILLO, Complainant, v. JUDGE HENRY E. LARON, RESPONDENT.;
A.M. NO. MTJ-10-1756 - MELISSA J. TUVILLO A.K.A MICHELLE
JIMENEZ, Complainant, v. JUDGE HENRY E. LARON, Respondent.
15 Section 11. Possession of Dangerous Drugs. - The penalty of life imprisonment to death and a fine
ranging from Five hundred thousand pesos (P500,000.00) to Ten million pesos (P10,000,000.00) shall
be imposed upon any person, who, unless authorized by law, shall possess any dangerous drug in the
following quantities, regardless of the degree of purity thereof:
x x x x.
16Portuguez v. People, G.R. No. 194499, January 14, 2015, 746 SCRA 114, 125, citing People v. Gonzaga,
G.R. No. 184952, October 11, 2010, 632 SCRA 551, 569.
17People v. Garcia, G.R. No. 200529, September 19, 2012, 681 SCRA 465, 477.
18People v. Bontuyan, G.R. No. 206912, September 10, 2014, 735 SCRA 49, 61.
19 Rule 130 of the Rules of Court provides: cralawlawlibrary

G.R. No. 215802, October 19, 2016 - RIZALINA GEMINA,

ROSARIO ACANTILADO, JUANITA REYES, EFREN EUGENIO,
ROMELIA EUGENIO, AMADOR EUGENIO, JR., ANTONIO EUGENIO,
LERMA E. RIBAC, ELVIRA E. SIMEON AND TOMAS EUGENIO, ALL
REPRESENTED BY CANDIDO GEMINA, JR., Petitioners, v. JUANITO
EUGENIO, LOLITA EUGENIO-SEV1LLA, BONIFACIO EUGENIO,
ELEONOR EUGENIO, JOSE EUGENIO, AND THE SPOUSES LAUREL
AND ZENAIDA MARIANO, Respondents.
Section 26. Admissions of a party. - The act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact may
be given in evidence against him. (22)
20 Section 2. This Act shall not apply to persons convicted of offenses punished with death penalty or
life imprisonment; to those convicted of treason, conspiracy or proposal to commit treason; to those
convicted of misprision of treason, rebellion, sedition or espionage; to those convicted of piracy; to
those who are habitual delinquents; to those who shall have escaped from confinement or evaded
 G.R. No. 224889, October 19, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MC HENRY SUAREZ Y ZURITA,
JOHN JOSEPH RAVENA Y ACOSTA AND JOHN PAUL VICENCIO Y
BARRANCO, Accused-Appellants.
G.R. No. 193321, October 19, 2016 - TAKENAKA CORPORATION-
PHILIPPINE BRANCH, Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE, Respondent.
G.R. No. 172948, October 05, 2016 - PHILIPPINE ASSOCIATED
SMELTING AND REFINING CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. PABLITO O.
LIM, MANUEL A. AGCAOILI, AND CONSUELO M. PADILLA,
Respondents.
G.R. No. 219558, October 19, 2016 - HEIRS OF JOHNNY AOAS,
sentence; to those who having been granted conditional pardon by the Chief Executive shall have
violated the terms thereof; to those whose maximum term of imprisonment does not exceed one year;
nor to those already sentenced by final judgment at the time of approval of this Act, except as provided
in Section 5 hereof. (As amended by Act No. 4225, Aug. 8, 1935)
21Argoncillo v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 118806, July 10, 1998; 292 SCRA 313, 331; Bacar v. De
Guzman, Jr., A.M. No. RTJ-96-1349, April 18, 1997, 271 SCRA 328, 339; People v. Lee, Jr., No. L-66859,
September 12, 1984, 132 SCRA 66, 67.
22 Supra, at 340.
23 Article 10 of the Revised Penal Code states:
cralawlawlibrary

REPRESENTED BY BETTY PUCAY, Petitioners, v. JULIET AS-IL,

Respondent.
G.R. No. 217455, October 05, 2016 - OYSTER PLAZA HOTEL,
ROLITO GO, AND JENNIFER AMPEL, Petitioners, v. ERROL O.
MELIVO, Respondent.
Article 10. Offenses not subject to the provisions of this Code. — Offenses which are or in the future may
be punishable under special laws are not subject to the provisions of this Code. This Code shall be
supplementary to such laws, unless the latter should specially provide the contrary.

G.R. No. 195295, October 05, 2016 - REPUBLIC OF THE

PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. SANDIGANBAYAN, FOURTH DIVISION,
FERDINAND "BONGBONG" R. MARCOS, JR., MA. IMELDA "IMEE" R.
MARCOS-MANOTOC, GREGORIO MA. ARANETA III, AND IRENE R. Back to Home | Back to Main
MARCOS ARANETA, Respondents.
 
G.R.No. 204261, October 05, 2016 - EDWARD C. DE CASTRO AND
MA. GIRLIE F. PLATON, Petitioners, v. COURT OF APPEALS, QUICK SEARCH
NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, SILVERICON, INC.,
AND/OR NUVOLAND PHILS., INC., AND/OR RAUL MARTINEZ,
RAMON BIENVENIDA, AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF
NUVOLAND, Respondents.

G.R. No. 201074, October 19, 2016 - SPOUSES RAMON SY AND

1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908
ANITA NG, RICHARD SY, JOSIE ONG, WILLIAM SY AND JACKELINE 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916
DE LUCIA, Petitioners, v. WESTMONT BANK (NOW UNITED
OVERSEAS BANK PHILIPPINES) AND PHILIPPINE DEPOSIT 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924
INSURANCE CORPORATION, AS ASSIGNEE OF UNITED OVERSEAS 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932
BANK PHILIPPINES, Respondents.
1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940
G.R. No. 203072, October 18, 2016 - DEVELOPMENT ACADEMY
OF THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. CHAIRPERSON MA. GRACIA M. 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948
PULIDO TAN, COMMISSIONER JUANITO G. ESPINO, JR., 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956
COMMISSIONER HEIDI L. MENDOZA, AND COMMISSION ON AUDIT,
Respondents. 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964

G.R. No. 220383, October 05, 2016 - SONEDCO WORKERS FREE 1965 1966 1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972
LABOR UNION (SWOFLU) / RENATO YUDE, MARIANITO REGINO, 1973 1974 1975 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980
MANUEL YUMAGUE, FRANCISCO DACUDAG, RUDY ABABAO,
DOMINIC SORNITO, SERGIO CAJUYONG, ROMULO LABONETE, 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988
GENEROSO GRANADA, EMILIO AGUS, ARNOLD CAYAO, BEN
GENEVE, VICTOR MAQUE, RICARDO GOMEZ, RODOLFO GAWAN, 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996
JIMMY SULLIVAN, FEDERICO SUMUGAT, JR., ROMULO AVENTURA, 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
JR., JURRY MAGALLANES, HERNAN EPISTOLA, JR., ROBERTO
BELARTE, EDMON MONTALVO, TEODORO MAGUAD, DOMINGO 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
TABABA, MAXIMO SALE, CYRUS DIONILLO, LEONARDO JUNSAY, 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018    
JR., DANILO SAMILLION, MARIANITO BOCATEJA, JUANITO
GEBUSION, RICARDO MAYO, RAUL ALIMON, ARNEL ARNAIZ,
REBENCY BASOY, JIMMY VICTORIO BERNALDE, RICARDO BOCOL,
JR., JOB CALAMBA, WOLFRANDO CALAMBA, RODOLFO CASISID,
JR., EDGARDO DELA PENA, ALLAN DIONILLO, EDMUNDO EBIDO,
JOSE ELEPTICO, JR., MARCELINO FLORES, HERNANDO
FUENTEBILLA, SAUL HITALIA, JOSELITO JAGODILLA, NONITO
JAYME, ADJIE JUANILLO, JEROLD JUDILLA, EDILBERTO NACIONAL, Main Indices of the Library ---> Go!
SANDY NAVALES, FELIPE NICOLASORA, JOSE PAMALO-AN,
ISMAEL PEREZ, JR., ERNESTO RANDO, JR., PHILIP REPULLO,
VICENTE RUIZ, JR., JOHN SUMUGAT, CARLO SUSANA, ROMEO
TALAPIERO, JR., FERNANDO TRIENTA, FINDY VILLACRUZ, JOEL
VILLANUEVA, AND JERRY MONTELIBANO, Petitioners, v.
UNIVERSAL ROBINA CORPORATION, SUGAR DIVISION-SOUTHERN
NEGROS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (SONEDCO), Respondent.

G.R. No. 174964, October 05, 2016 - SANGGUNIANG

PANLALAWIGAN OF BATAAN, Petitioner, v. CONGRESSMAN
ENRIQUE T. GARCIA, JR., MEMBERS OF THE FACULTY, CONCERNED
STUDENTS AND THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE BATAAN
POLYTECHNIC STATE COLLEGE, Respondents.

G.R. No. 218902, October 17, 2016 - HELEN EDITH LEE TAN,
Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

G.R. No. 221773, October 18, 2016 - RG CABRERA

CORPORATION, INC., Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC
WORKS AND HIGHWAYS, AND COMMISSION ON AUDIT,
Respondents.

G.R. No. 209086, October 17, 2016 - ANGELITO R. PUBLICO,

Petitioner, v. HOSPITAL MANAGERS, INC., ARCHDIOCESE OF
MANILA - DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE TRADENAME AND STYLE
OF "CARDINAL SANTOS MEDICAL CENTER", Respondents.

G.R. No. 199480, October 12, 2016 - PEOPLE OF THE

PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. TESS S. VALERIANO, Respondent.

A.C. No. 7927, October 19, 2016 - SANDY V. DOMINGO,

Complainant, v. ATTY. PALMARIN E. RUBIO AND ATTY. NICASIO T.
RUBIO, Respondents.

G.R.No. 213939, October 12, 2016 - LYLITH B. FAUSTO,

JONATHAN FAUSTO, RICO ALVIA, ARSENIA TOCLOY, LOURDES
ADOLFO AND ANECITA MANCITA, Petitioners, v. MULTI AGRI-
FOREST AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COOPERATIVE
(FORMERLY MAF CAMARINES SUR EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE,
INC.), Respondent.

G.R. No. 200087, October 12, 2016 - YOLANDA LUY Y

GANUELAS, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.

 
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™  RED
 
  Copyright © 1998 - 2019 ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions