Crim 9.29.

2018

5 People v YamID 6 People v Valledor 7 People v Bellonio

 Jerry and Julius while running an errand  Suddenly entered room of 4 people working  Ramy decided to buy cigarettes from a
passed by resp house. around a table. store only a few meters away
 After greetimg, yamid sunsheathed bolo  Particularly attacked rogers, hit in forearm  Ramy decided to buy cigarettes from a
 They ran, yamid followed, got caught of then Elsa with a knife store only a few meters away
Jerry killed then sucked blood  Then stabbed another one on the way out  Jennifer said that he and Ramy sat and
 Danilo went to look, struck in head and  Diagnosed with psychosis with schizophrenia, talked on the bench
fell, then struck own stomach of yamid has had meds thoracin for 2 months.  Without saying a word and without
 Dcsd argue due to land dispute  At the day, there was no thoracin and def was warning, the accused delivered a
 Def claims schizophrenia. Fantasy from seen doing not so normal stuff stabbing blow with a dagger which was
reality wih hallucinations ISSUE concealed in his hand
ISSUE:  Was he insane during crime?  Fatal blow
Insanity during crime? DECISION  Dr says sufferimg from schizophrenia
 No med cert of insanity  Was aware of his actioms as he ISSUE
 No enough evidence specifically attacked hose poeple, the was he insane during crime?
 Difference of mental weakness, 2 nearer to the door was unharmed DECISION
eccentricity and depression from  Motive of revenge  Must prove (1) he did not act with
insanity  A man may act crazy but it does not complete absence of the power to
 Even though sucking blood is not necessarily and conclusively prove discern; (2) he was not deprived of
normal, it doesnt prove insanity that he is legally so insane reason; and (3) he was not totally
 Should show insanity during crime deprived of his will.
but not enough evidence Guilty of mirder, attempted murder and frustrated  the accused is tried on the issue of
DECISION: murder. sanity alone and if found to be sane,
Guilty of homicide a judgment of conviction is rendered
without any trial on the issue of guilt
as he had already admitted
committing the crime
 No schizo during childhood, hid
knife, deliberate killing at bench
stabbed from back

Guilty of murder
 8 People v Taneo 9 People v doquena 10 People v Navarro
 Potenciano Taneo, went to sleep and  accused-appellant, who is a minor killed  Luisa# Navarro# 13# years# old# who#
while sleeping, he suddenly got up, left Juan Ragojos by stabbing him in the breast was#
the room bolo in hand with a knife, was 13yo approached# by# agents# of# the# Price#
 he wounded her in the abdomen.  Threw ball to deceased which hit stomach Enforcement#
Potenciano Taneo attacked Fred Tanner then got mad, chased and slapped Division#of#PRISCO#asking#frot#he#price
and Luis Malinao and tried to attack his  Withthreatening attitude accused #of#one#tin#of#
father after which he wounded himself. confronted again bt was punched in Hershey’s# Cocoa.# She# was# arrested#
Potenciano's wife who was then seven mouth. after# allegedly#
months pregnant, died  Deceased was bigger than accused, so he selling#cocoa#11#cents#more#that#ceilin
 defendant had a quarrel over a glass of found a knifee and struck the deceased g#price.#Found#
"tuba" with Enrique Collantes and with it guilty# of# violating# E.O.# 447# in#
Valentin Abadilla, who invited him to  7th grade pupil in the intermediate school connection# with# Sec#
come down to fight of the municipality of Sual, Pangasinan, 12#of#RA#5096 Anti6
 The defendant states that when he fell and as such pupil, he was one of the Profiteering#law#and#was#sent#to#
asleep, he dreamed that Collantes was brightest in said school and was a captain the#custody#of#Phil.#Training#School#for
trying to stab him of a company of the cadet corps #Girls
 he fancied seeing his wife really wounded  acted with discernment and was  Yes.#Nothing#in# the#law# says# that#
and in desperation wounded himself. As conscious of the nature and consequences RPC#is# not#
his enemies seemed to multiply around of his act suppletory#to#their#provisions#(Art10)W
him, he attacked everybody that came his  discernment that constitutes an exception hile#intent#is#immaterial#in#crimes#mala
way. to the exemption from #prohibita,#
 defendant not only did not have any criminal liability of a minor under f if teen the# circumstances,# which# exempt#
trouble with his wife, but that he loved years of age but over nine, who commits from# criminal#
her dearly. Neither did he have any an act prohibited by law, is liability,#are#based#on#lack#of#intelligenc
dispute with Tanner and Malinao, or have his mental capacity to understand the dif f e,#intent#and#
any motive erence between right and wrong spontaneity.#In#the#language#of#art#12#
 lack of a motive for committing a criminal  behaviour of said minor, not only bef ore (3),#state#has#the# burden# of# proving#
act does not necessarily mean that there and during the commission of the act, but that# the# minor# acted# with#
are none, but that simply they are not also af ter and even during the trial discernment.# Discernmentbeing# more#
known to us, than#
 The doctor stated that considering the  Guilty of homicide mere#understanding#is#the#mental#capa
circumstances of the case, the defendant city#to#understand# the# difference#
acted while in a dream, under the between# right# and# wrong.# # In#
influence of an hallucination and not in his the#instant# case,# accused# did# not#
right mind. fully# grasp#the#
 defendant is not criminally liable for the importance#of#the#question#and#there#
offense with which he is charged, and it is was#no#record#that# she# was a#
ordered that he be confined in the merchant.# Such#
Government insane asylum minor,#over9but#less#than#15#is#not#cri
minally#responsible
 11 Jose v people 12 People v Jacinto 13 People v arpon
 sell and deliver to other person  f eloniously had carnal knowledge with one  Henry Arpon y Juntilla guilty beyond
METHAMPHETAMINE HYDROCHLORIDE AAA, a f ive-year old minor child. reasonable doubt of one (1) count of
(or shabu)  She usually calls him kuya, At the store, he statutory rape and seven (7) counts of
 nformation was that a big time group of saw appellant place AAA on his lap, buyimg rape against the private complainant
drug pushers from Greenhills will deliver cigs AAA
100 grams of shabu at Chowking  They walked towards the rice f ield near the  In one afternoon when she was only
Restaurant house of spouses Alejandro and Gloria eight years old, she stated that the
 Buy bust op in laguna, successful, arrested Perocho [the Perochos].23 There he made accused-appellant raped her inside their
after exchange her lie down on harrowed ground house.
 Alvin Jose, on its finding that he was only  def ense of alibi cannot prevail over the  for five times on different nights
thirteen (13) years old when he victim’s positive identif ication, youth and  .minority of the victim and the fact that
committed the crime immaturity are normally badges of truth and the accused appellant is the uncle of the
 Article 12 of the Revised Penal Code, a honesty victim
minor over nine (9) and under fifteen (15)  the Court of Appeals correctly considered  What the law punishes in statutory rape
years of age at the time of the commission Republic Act No. is carnal knowledge
of the crime is exempt from criminal 9344 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of  the victim, as to her body and facial
liability unless he acted with discernment 2006) despite the commission of the crime features, was indeed a minor
 presumed lacking the mental element of a three (3) years bef ore it was enacted on 28  In the instant case, the accused-
crime the capacity to know what is wrong April 2006 appellant testified that he was born on
as distinguished from what is right or to  allows the retroactive application of the Act February 23, 1982 and that he was only
determine the morality of human acts to those who have been convicted and are 13 years old when the first incident of
 accused Zarraga called the petitioner to serving sentence at the time of the ef f rape allegedly happened in 1995
bring out and hand over the shabu ectivity of this said Act, and who were below  For the second and third counts of rape
wrapped in plastic and white soft paper. the age of 18 years at the time of the that were committed in the year 1999,
 . Aside from bringing out and handing commission of the of f ense the accused-appellant was already 17
over the plastic bag to accused Zarraga,  choosing an isolated and dark place to years old. We likewise find that in the
the petitioner merely sat inside the car perpetrate the crime, to prevent detection[;] said instances, the accused-appellant
and had no other participation and (2) boxing the victim xxx, to weaken her acted with discernment
whatsoever def ense" are  the accused-appellant had to threaten
 Conspiracy presupposes capacity of the indicative of then seventeen (17) year-old AAA in an effort to conceal his dastardly
parties to such conspiracy to discern what appellant’s mental capacity to f ully acts only proved that he knew full well
is right from what is wrong understand the consequences that what he did was wrong
 petitioner is ACQUITTED of his unlawf ul action  Exempted from first charge, uilty of
 qualif ied rape is AFFIRMED qualified rape on 2nd and 3rd,