Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
Case Ticklers
PART I
Crimes Against National Security and the Law of
Nations
TREASON
Laurel vs. Misa
That the accused claim that his allegiance as a Filipino
citizen was suspended and that there was a change of
sovereignty over the Phil Islands:
ESPIONAGE
CA 616
PIRACY
People vs.Lol-lo and Saraw
That the accused are claiming that they do not belong
to the Phil territory:
HIJACKING
RA 6235
Crime Against the Fundamental Laws of the State
ARBITRARY DETENTION
Rule 112, sec 6
Rule 113, sec 5
Umil vs. Ramos
People vs Burgos
Rule 126
EO 272
RA 7438
As a continuing crime.
People vs Dasig
SEDITION
People. Cabrera
INCITING TO SEDITION
US vs Tolentino
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
DIRECT ASSAULT
QUASI-RECIDIVISM
People vs. Dionisio
involving
originally
true
and
genuine
documents which have been withdrawn or
demonetized,
or
have
outlived
their
usefulness. The case under consideration
could not come within the second paragraph
of the aforesaid article (By erasing,
substituting , counterfeiting or altering by
any means the figures, letters, words or signs
contained therein) because no figure, letter,
word, or sign contained in Exhibit A has been
erased, substituted, counterfeited or altered.
The forgery consists in the addition of a word
in an effort to give to the present document
the appearance of the true and genuine
certificate that it used to have before it was
withdrawn or has outlived its usefulness.
FALSIFICATION
MUTILATION OF COINS
PD 247
FORGERY
Beradio vs. CA
a.
b.
c.
d.
USURPATION
People vs. Cortez
a.
b.
a.
b.
c.
d.
VAGRANCY
PD 1563
Perez vs. Navarro-Domingo
RA 9208
Crimes Committed by Public Officers
BRIBERY AND CORRUPTION OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS
Manipon vs. Sandiganbayan
1)
2)
3)
4)
RA 3019
Morfe vs Mutuc
PD 46
Republic vs. CA
PD 749
GRAFT AND CORRUPTION
RA 1379
Almeda vs. Perez
PLUNDER
Paymaster case.
In crime of malversation, all that is necessary
for conviction is proof that accountable officer
had received the public funds and that he did
not have them in his possession when
demand therefore was made and he could
not satisfactorily explain his failure so to
account.
An accountable officer may be convicted for
malversation even if there is not direct
evidence of personal misappropriation where
he has not been able to explain satisfactorily
the absence of the funds involved.
Under 217 there is prima facie evidence of
malverdation where the accountable public
officer fails to have duly forthcoming any
public funds with which he is chargeable upon
demand by duly authorized officer.
RA 7080
Estrada vs. Sandiganbayan
Vales case.
The fact that petitioner did not personally use
the missing funds is not a valid defense and
will not exculpate him from his criminal
liability. And as aptly found by respondent
Sandiganbayan, the fact the immediate
superiors of the accused have acquiesced to
the practice of giving out case advances for
convenience
did
not
legalize
the
disbursements.
MALVERSATION
Labatagos vs. Sandiganbayan
HAZING
RA 8049
RAPE
RA 8353
UNINTENTIONAL ABORTION
People vs. Salufrania
Tomboy na nirape.
Absence of injury on victim and absence of
torn dresses and underwear does not negate
truth of rape complaint and credibility of
victims testimony.
Description of a typical Filipina. That a Filipina
could not easily decide to come out in the
open and be subjected to public contempt
and ridicule.
Nahuli
ni
nanay
si
houseboy
na
pinagtangkaang rape-in ang 4-year old na
anak.
Touching when applied to rape cases does not
simply mean mere epidermal contact,
stroking or grazing of organs, aslight brush or
scrape of the penis on the external layer of
the victims vagina, or the mons pubisthere
must be sufficient and convincing proof that
the penis indeed touched the labias or slid
into the female organ and not merely stroked
the external surface thereof, for an accused
to be convicted of consummated rape.
RA 9262
PART II
Crimes Against Personal Liberty and Security
KIDNAPPING AND ILLEGAL DETENTION
People vs. Tomio
RA 7610
Accused
was
charged
with
reckless
imprudence resulting in damage to property
with
multiple
physical
injuries
and
abandonment of ones victim. He files against
double jeopardy.
The articles 365 and 275 are two different
and distinct offenses. Quasi-offense under
365 are committed by means of culpa.
Crimes against Security are committed by
means of dolo.
In 365, failure to lend help to ones victim is
neither an offense by itself nor an element of
the offense therein penalized.
The identity of offenses that must be shown
need not be absolute identity: the first and
second offenses may be regarded as the
same offense where the second offense
necessarily includes the first offense or is
necessarily included in such first offense or
where the second offense is an attempt to
commit the first or a frustration thereof.
For the constitutional plea of double jeopardy
to be available, no all the technical elements
constituting the first offense need be present
a.
b.
c.
a.
b.
c.
GRAVE COERCION
UNJUST VEXATION
People vs. Reyes
Lee vs. CA
ROBBERY IN BAND
People vs. Apduhan
CARNAPPING
HIGHWAY ROBBERY
PD 532
RA 6539
People vs. Puno
People vs. Dela Cruz
CATTLE RUSTLING
PD 533
Taer vs. CA
Ordonio vs. CA
a.
ILLEGAL FISHING
b.
QUALIFIED THEFT
Empelis vs. IAC
FENCING
PD 1612
ESTAFA
A.
a.
b.
c.
PD 330
d.
Manahan vs. CA
ILLEGAL LOGGING
PD 705, sec. 68
Elements of estafa:
that personal property os received in trust,
on commission, for administration or under
any other cic involving the duty to make
delivery of or to return the same, even
though the obligation is guaranteed by a
bond
that there is conversion or diversion of such
property by the person who has so recived it
or a denial on his part that he received it
that such conversion, diversion or denial is to
the injury of another
that there be a demand for the return of the
property.
Although a contract of lease is not fiduciary in
nature, still the clause any other obligation
involving the duty to make delivery of or
return personal properry is borad enough to
include a civil obligation.
Equally essential before the offense of estafa
under 315(b) of the RPC can be considered
committed, is that the refusal or failure to
deliver or return is, in turn, predicated on
Saddul vs. CA
B.
Celino vs. CA
PD 115
Pinaniwalang
may
dwende
at
may
kayamanan.
Art 315, 2(a)Any person who shall defraud
another by any of the means mentioned
herinbelow shall be punished by: xxx2. By
means of any of the ff false pretenses of
fraudulent acts executed prior to or
simultaneously with the commission of the
fraud: (a) By using a fictitious name, or
falsely
pretending
to
possess
power,
influence, qualifications, property, credit,
agency, business or imaginary trasactions; or
by means of other similar deceits.
TRUST RECEIPTS
BIGAMY
SWINDLING BY SYNDICATE
PD 1689
MALICIOUS MISCHIEF
CHILD PROSTITUTION
SLANDER
SLANDER BY DEED
INCRIMINATING AN INNOCENT PERSON
WIRETAPPING
RA 4200
Quasi-Offenses
QUALIFIED SEDUCTION
CRIMINAL NEGLIGENCE
vs.
vs.
vs.
vs.
Sunpongco
Jose
Alburo
Godines
PROSECTION
OF
PRIVATE
OFFENSES