People v. Alexander Martinez -a buy bust operation for shabu by Agent Salvo and Captain Maruji -Pelin is the poseur-buyer - he is not the person named in the search warrant, he is Abelardo not Alexander –ARGUMENT INVALID -his identity is established as a peddler of shabu -he was clearly identified by the poseur buyer -Rule 110, Sec 7 of 1985 Rules on CrimPro -less than 200grams of methylampethamine HCl therefore lesser punishment -MARTINEZ is guilty and sentenced to reclusion temporal-perpetua
2. GR No 201620, March 6, 2013
Ramoncita O. Senador v. People and Cynthia Jaime -Senador was charged with estafa -Rita and Cynthia made Senador sell jewelries amounting to 705,685php -Senador paid with a check drawn against closed account -Senador said the person named as offended party in the information is not the same person who made the demand -complaint: Cynthia Jaime -during trial: Rita Jaime RTC: Senador is guilty CA: affirmed ISSUE: WON THERE’S AN ERROR IN DESIGNATION IN THE INFORMATION OF OFFENDED PARTY RULING: -it was a mere formal defect -Senador charged with estafa, crimes against property, does not absolutely require the offended party -what is necessary is the correct identification of the criminal act in the information -if subject matter is generic and error in designation-ACQUITTAL -SENADOR is guilty
3. GR No 122150, March 17, 2003
George Hambon v. CA and Valentino Carantes -for failure of reserving a separate civil action in a criminal case -Hambon filed a complaint for damages against Carantes after the truck was bumped by Carantes resulting Serious PI thru Reckless Imprudence -the criminal case was dismissed RTC: Hambon is entitled to damages CA: Hambon should have made a reservation for civil damages Otherwise they will be deemed to have been instituted in the criminal case. -Hambon was denied Page 2 of 3 Aly’s CrimPro digest-digest 4. GR. No. 179003, January 9, 2013 Antonio Tan v. Yoshitsugu Matsuura -crime of falsification under RPC -there was a pre-signed Deed of Trust that is supposed to be Tan’s possession -Matsuura vehemently denied the charges: its only a scheme resorted to by Tan following their dispute in TF Ventures Inc after Matsuura won against Tan for estafa PROSECUTION: dismissed for lack of probable cause SECRETARY OF JUSTICE: no evidence and insufficient presentation -Tan filed a MR: the deed was not notarized and in different fonts MR: granted to Tan -Matsuura filed for MR and was granted CA: affirmed the PROSECUTION’s decision -Tan filed MR was denied -Tan failed to discharge the burden of proving probable cause SC: -Tan filed to petitions against Matsuura and Cua -alleged intercalations (insertion) on the covered number and font style Rule 131 of Rules of Court, Section 3(d) –presumed that a person takes ordinary Care of his concerns -Tan failed this aspect Art 172 (2) that the alteration or intercalation has changed the meaning of document” -Tan’s denial of appearing to Cua is no merit, he failed to present why it was impossible for him to be at notary office -Tan is denied
5. GR No 199042, Nov 17, 2014
Danilo Villanueva v. People -Villanueva was charged in violation the Comprehensive Dangerous Drug Act -0.63gram of shabu -Complaint was Brian Resco, he was allegedly shot by Villanueva -thru police blotter, Villanueva was invited to police station -body search -recovered plastic sachet from left pocket RTC: guilty CA: affirmed SC: not guilty -he was arrested without warrant VALID WARRANTLESS ARREST: 1.has committed, 2. Has been committed 3.escapee -moving vehicle, plain view, customs search, waiver or consent, stop and frisk, search incidental to a lawful arrest, emergency -consent must be voluntary and unequivocal, there was unlawful search -Villanueva was acquitted
6. GR No. 198389 December 11, 2013
Page 3 of 3 Aly’s CrimPro digest-digest Vivencio Roallos v. People -crime of sexual abuse; acts of lasciviousness -a minor of 15 years old -Roallos is a retired officer of the AFP RTC: guilty beyond reasonable doubt -Roallos filed for MR and denied CA: affirms RTC Roallos claimed: 1. He was charged with 2 crimes 2. he was denied due process during preliminary investigation 3. no warrant of arrest 4. deprived of speedy trial 5. neither A or B signed the information SC: 1. He was charged with acts of lasciviousness in relation to Section 5(b) Article 3, RA 7 610 2. He never protested to the arraignment and actively participated in the trial 3. He must have raised the issue on preliminary investigation earlier 4. The postponement was not prejudicial to Roallos, it was not vexatious, capricious and oppressive 5. A and B executed the complaint -Roallos was denied
7. GR No 88232 February 26, 1990
People v. Hon. Henedino Eduarte 8. Republic v. Asuncion 231 SCRA 211 9. Aducayen v. Flores 51 SCRA 78 10. Cabebe v. Vizcarra GR 95370, March 11, 1982 11. Sanchez v. Demetrou GR No 111771-77, November 9, 1993 12. People v. Eroles GR No 100455, Sept 17, 1993 13. Dela Rosa v. CA GR No 116945, Feb 9, 1966