PEOPLE VS.

BASITE, 412 SCRA 558

G.R. No. 150382 October 2, 2003
FACTS:
On 1 September 1996 at around 10:30 in the morning, Sonia Pa-ay, a polio victim nineteen (19)
years old and a student of midwifery at the Cordillera College, Buyagan, La Trinidad, Benguet.
was in Natuel, Buguias, Benguet, on her way to her parents home in Tinoc, Ifugao, to get her
allowance. As she was walking, she met Eddie Basite who was headed towards the opposite
direction. They passed by each other.1vvphi 1. nt A few seconds later, Sonia heard footsteps behind her.
When she looked back she saw Eddie Basite following her. He reached her, held her by both hands
and told her to go down with him. Sonia resisted. But the accused Eddie Basite pulled out a knife
from his waistband thrust it at her neck and threatened to stab her if she continued to resist. He
ordered her to lie down on the ground and out of fear she obeyed.The accused undressed himself
and forcibly removed Sonias pants and underwear. He placed himself on top of her, inserted his
penis into her vagina and made a push and pull movement. Sonia felt pain in her vagina. She
resisted but the accused threatened to stab her. When he was through with the sexual assault, he
warned her not to relate the incident to anyone or else he would stab her. Sonia pleaded with the
accused to allow her to go home. Upon seeing that the accused had laid down his knife beside her
head while he was putting on his clothes, Sonia grabbed the knife and stabbed him on the left
shoulder. Wounded, the accused ran away.

ISSUE:
Whether or not Eddie Basite was convicted of simple rape and should have considered the
mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender in his favor..
FACTS:
Accused-appellant finally contends that the trial court should have considered the mitigating
circumstance of voluntary surrender in his favor. He explains that he voluntarily surrendered to then
Barangay Captain Gilbert Sacla, and willingly went with him and complainants relatives to the police
station in Abatan. A surrender to be voluntary must be spontaneous, showing the intent of the
accused to submit himself unconditionally to the authorities, either because he acknowledges his
guilt, or he wishes to save them the trouble and expense necessarily incurred in his search and
capture. If none of these two (2) reasons impelled the accused to surrender, because his surrender
was obviously motivated more by an intention to insure his safety, his arrest being inevitable, the
surrender is not spontaneous.
The conduct of accused-appellant after the commission of the offense, of running away after having
been stabbed by private complainant and of fleeing from complainants relatives when they tried to
bring him to the authorities, do not show voluntary surrender as contemplated under the law. It
appears that accused-appellant willingly went to the police authorities with Gilbert Sacla only to
escape the wrath of private complainants relatives who were pursuing him and who appeared to be
thirsting for his blood.
In the instant case, the guilt of accused-appellant Eddie Basite has been proved beyond reasonable
doubt. Paragraph 1 of Art. 335 of The Revised Penal Code punishes with reclusion perpetua an
accused who has carnal knowledge of a woman with the use of force or intimidation. The use of a
deadly weapon, which would otherwise have qualified the crime, is not alleged in the Information,
hence even if proved, may not be appreciated against accused-appellant.



LUCES VS. PEOPLE, 395 SCRA 524
G.R. No. 149492 January 20, 2003


FACTS:
That on or about the 11th day of November 1997, in the Municipality of Patnongon, Province of
Antique at 6:30 in the evening, Dante Reginio, Nelson Magbanua, and the victim, Clemente Dela
Gracia, were on their way to the house of Didoy Elican. As they were walking along the road at La
Rioja, Patnongon, Antique, they met petitioner who collared the victim, saying, "Get it if you will not
get it tonight, I will kill you."Thereafter, petitioner immediately stabbed the victim on the chest with a
"Batangueo" knife. The place was illuminated by a street light 3 to 4 arms length away from the
petitioner, enabling Dante Reginio to easily recognize the latter who happened to be his barangay
mate. The victim was rushed to the hospital while the petitioner fled from the crime scene.
The examination conducted by Dr. Deogracias P. Solis on the cadaver of the victim revealed that the
latter sustained injuries and wound stab. Cause of death was shock cardiogenic due to above-
described wound.


ISSUE:
Whether or not the accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of Homicide and in the
absence of any aggravating or mitigating circumstance.

HELD:
The Court finds the accused Joel Luces guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of Homicide
and in the absence of any aggravating or mitigating circumstance to offset each other. The court
sustain the conclusion of the trial court that petitioners act of hiding from the authorities when he
learned that he was a suspect in the killing of the victim is inconsistent with his plea of innocence.
Jurisprudence has held that the flight of an accused, in the absence of a credible explanation, would
be a circumstance from which an inference of guilt may be established "for a truly innocent person
would normally grasp the first available opportunity to defend himself and to assert his innocence.

Anent the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, the Court of Appeals erred in appreciating
the same in favor of the petitioner. To benefit an accused, the following requisites must be proven,
namely: (1) the offender has not actually been arrested; (2) the offender surrendered himself to a
person in authority; and (3) the surrender was voluntary. A surrender to be voluntary must be
spontaneous, showing the intent of the accused to submit himself unconditionally to the authorities,
either because he acknowledges his guilt, or he wishes to save them the trouble and expense
necessarily incurred in his search and capture. Voluntary surrender presupposes repentance. In
People v. Viernes, we held that going to the police station to clear ones name does not show any
intent to surrender unconditionally to the authorities. "Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code imposes
the penalty of reclusion temporal for homicide. Considering that there was neither mitigating nor
aggravating circumstance present in the commission of the crime, the penalty has to be imposed in
the medium period.








PEOPLE vs. VICENTE, 405 SCRA 40
[G.R. No. 137296. June 26, 2003]

SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J .:

FACTS:
That on or about May 30,1998 in the evening thereof, at barangay Gueguesangen, Mangaldan,
Pangasinan, the accused, armed with a bladed weapon, with intent to kill, with treachery and evident
premeditation, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously, attack and stab MANUEL C.
QUINTO, JR., causing his death shortly thereafter due to CARDIORESPIRATORY ARREST
SECONDARY TO HYPOVOLEMIC SHOCK DUE TO A STAB WOUND as per Certificate of Death
issued by Dr. Ophelia Rivera, M.D., Rural Health Officer, Mangaldan, Pangasinan, to the damage
and prejudice of the legal heirs of said deceased Manuel C. Quinto, Jr. and other consequential
damages relative thereto.

ISSUES:
1. Whether or not the accused is entitled to the mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense.
2. Whether or not treachery should be considered as a qualifying aggravating circumstance of the
incident.

FACTS:
In self-defense, the burden of proof rests upon the accused. His duty is to establish self-defense by
clear and convincing evidence, otherwise conviction would follow from his admission that he killed the
victim. Here, appellant miserably failed to discharge such burden.
The trial court also held that the crime committed by appellant is qualified by treachery. There is
treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means, methods or
forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution without risk to
himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.
Treachery is present in this case. The fact that the attack is frontal does not negate the finding of
treachery. Even a frontal attack can be treacherous if sudden and unexpected and the victim is unarmed.
Here, the victim was suddenly stabbed when he was extending his hand to the appellant. With his
mindset, the victim could not have any inkling that there was danger to his life when he approached
appellant.
In People vs. Tobias we held that what is decisive is that the execution of the attack made it
impossible for the victim to defend himself or retaliate. In this case, the suddenness of the attack
deprived the victim of the opportunity to repel it or defend his person. There being treachery, appellants
conviction of murder is in order.












People vs. Oco, 412 SCRA 190
[G.R. Nos. 137370-71. September 29, 2003]

FACTS:
That on or about the 24
th
day of November, 1997 at about 9:30 oclock in the evening, in the
City of Cebu, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said
accused, riding on two motorcycles, conniving and confederating together and mutually
helping one another, together with Peter Doe, John Doe and Jane Doe, whose cases will
be separately considered as soon as procedural requirements are complied with, armed
with unlicensed firearms, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, with intent
to kill, and with treachery and evident premeditation and abuse of superior strength, attack,
assault and use personal violence upon one Alden Abiabi by shooting him with the use of
said unlicensed firearms, hitting him on the different parts of his body, thereby inflicting
upon the latter mortal wounds which were the direct and immediate cause of his death
thereafter.
ISSUES:
1. Whether or not appellants conviction does not only result conspiracy but from his
own act of shooting Abiabi and Damuag.
2. Whether or not evident premeditation is present thus making the accused guilty for
murder.

HELD:
There was no evidence presented to show that the offenses were committed with the
aid of armed men. Aid of armed men or persons affording immunity requires that the
armed men are accomplices who take part in minor capacity, directly or indirectly.
1
We
note that all four accused were charged as principal. The remaining suspects --- John
Doe, Jane Doe and Peter Doe--- were never identified and charged. Neither was proof
adduced as to the nature of their participation.
There was also a paucity of proof to show that evident premeditation attended the
commission of the crimes. For this circumstance to be appreciated, there must be
proof, as clear as that of the killing, of the following elements: (1) the time when the
offender determined to commit the crime; (2) an act indicating that he clung to his
determination; and (3) sufficient lapse of time between determination and execution to
allow himself time to reflect upon the consequences of his act. Evident premeditation
must be based on external facts which are evident, not merely suspected, which
indicate deliberate planning. There must be direct evidence showing a plan or
preparation to kill, or proof that the accused meditated and reflected upon his decision
to kill the victim. No such evidence was presented to prove the presence of this
circumstance.
Like any other common criminal, the appellant could have opted to go on hiding. But



he chose to surrender himself to the authorities and face the allegations leveled against
him. True, he did not admit his complicity to the crimes charged against him but he
nonetheless spared the government of time and expense. For this, he should be
credited with the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender.
The presence of treachery qualified the killing of Abiabi to Murder punishable by
reclusion perpetua to death under Art. 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by
This is an Automatic Review of the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City,
Branch 7, in Criminal Cases Nos. CBU- 46172-73 finding appellant Raul Boy Usher
Oco guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crimes of murder and frustrated murder, and
imposing the supreme penalty of death.












































People vs. Mallari, 404 SCRA 170
G.R. No. 145993, J une 17, 2003

404 SCRA 170 Criminal Law - Aggravating Circumstance Use of Motor Vehicle
FACTS: On July 7, 1996 at 4 pm, Joseph Galang admonished Mallari for driving so fast
in front of the farmers house. Mallari got irked and challenged Galang into a fist fight.
Galang did not accede and apologized instead. At about 6:30 pm, Mallari returned and
tried to stab Galang but Galang was able to run. Mallari boarded his truck and drove
after Galang until he was able to catch up with him. He bumped him and crushed
Galangs head. Galang voluntarily surrendered. He was convicted for murder and was
sentenced to death.
ISSUE: Whether or not evident premeditation is attendant.
HELD: No. Evident premeditation and treachery was not proven to be present.
However, Mallaris use of a motor vehicle which is his truck qualifies him for the crime of
murder. He used his truck in killing Galang. Voluntary surrender is to be appreciated in
favor of Mallari. He is sentenced to reclusion perpetua.

















People vs. Astudillo, 401 SCRA 24
GR No. 141518, April 29, 2003


FACTS:
Brothers Clarence, Crisanto and Hilario Astudillo, went to house of Alberto Damian who
was celebrating the eve of his birthday. Clarence greeted Alberto and thereafter asked
the victim, Silvestre Aquino, who was one of the visitors, to go with him. Silvestre
acceded and the two walked towards Floras' Store, where they were later joined by
Crisanto and Hilario. While at the store, Crisanto and Silvestre had an argument.
Prosecution eyewitnesses Manuel Bareng and Eduardo Bata, 12 and 11 years of age,
respectively, were selling balut in front of Floras' Store. They saw Clarence stab
Silvestre with a bolo while Crisanto and Hilario held him by the wrists. Clarence
delivered several stab blows at the back and on the chest of the victim until the latter fell
to the ground. Thereafter, the three appellants fled on board a tricycle. Silvestre was
rushed to the Municipal Health Office of Bangued, Abra, where he was pronounced
dead on arrival.

ISSUE:
Whether or not appellants acted in self-defense.

RULING: The trial court correctly rejected the appellants' self-defense theory. It is
evident that appellants' collective and individual act of holding the victim's wrists and
delivering several stab blows demonstrated the existence of their common design to kill
the victim. Direct proof of an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and the
decision to commit it is not necessary. Conspiracy, as in the instant case, can be
inferred from the acts of the three appellants which clearly manifest a concurrence of
wills and a common intent or design to commit a crime.
As regards the generic aggravating circumstance of use of motor vehicle, the trial court
erred in appreciating the same inasmuch as the prosecution failed to show that the
tricycle was deliberately used by the appellants to facilitate the commission of the crime
or that the crime could not have been committed without it. The use of motor vehicle is
not aggravating where the use thereof was merely incidental.
The mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender was correctly appreciated in favor of
appellants. To benefit an accused, the following requisites must be proven, namely: (1)
the offender has not actually been arrested; (2) the offender surrendered himself to a
person in authority; and (3) the surrender was voluntary. A surrender to be voluntary
must be spontaneous, showing the intent of the accused to submit himself
unconditionally to the authorities, either because he acknowledges his guilt, or he
wishes to save them the trouble and expense necessarily incurred in his search and
capture.
In the case at bar, appellants voluntarily surrendered to the authorities on the same
night of the incident when they learned that the authorities were looking for them. What
matters is that they spontaneously, voluntarily and unconditionally placed themselves at
the disposal of the authorities. This act of respect for the law indicates a moral
disposition favorable to their reform.
Under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659,
Murder is punishable by reclusion perpetua to death. With no generic aggravating
circumstance and one generic mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, the
penalty imposable on the appellants, in accordance with Article 63 (3) of the Revised
Penal Code, should be the minimum period, which is reclusion perpetua.

People vs dela Cruz, 416 SCRA 24
G.R. No. 140513, November 8, 2003

FACTS: On December 25, 1996, Timgas joined a cockfight. He let his brother-in-law de
la Cruz install the gaff on his game cock. Unknown to Timgas, de la Cruz betted against
his cock. When Timgas cock won, he was advised to collect the bet from his brother-in-
law, feeling betrayed he challenged de la Cruz into a fist fight. Cooler heads parted the
two. Later de la Cruz returned with a bolo and hacked to death Timgas.
ISSUE: Whether or not evident premeditation is present thus making de la Cruz guilty
for murder.
HELD: No. The following were not shown to concur on the part of de la Cruz:
a.) Time when he decided to commit the crime,
b.) An overt act showing that de la Cruz clung to his determination to commit the
crime,
c.) Lapse of a sufficient period of time as to that would allow de la Cruz to reflect
upon the consequences of his act.
In this case, de la Cruz killed Timgas no later than when the fistfight was over. No
sufficient time lapsed for him to plan the killing of Timgas. Therefore, hes only guilty of
homicide.