TITLE V – CRIMES RELATIVE TO OPIUM dried marijuana.

In support of his
AN OTHER PROHIBITED DRUGS appeal, BARITA denies any participation
ABELLA: ARUTA to CACAO case in the alleged sale of marijuana. He
claims that no buy-bust operation and
that he was frame-up.
 R.A. 9165 otherwise known
as “The Comprehensive ISSUE:
Dangerous Drugs Act of
2002” WON the accused contention of being
framed up is correct.
PEOPLE vs ARUTA
HELD:
FACTS:  Accused-appellants’ defense of “frame-
Lt. Abello assembled a team after was up” does not convince the court for his
tipped off by his informant that a certain innocence. There is no evidence which
“Aling Rosa” carries a large volume of difficult to prove and is a common and
marijuana. Then after, upon inspection, standard line of defense in most
the bag was found to contain dried prosecutions arising from violations of
marijuana leaves and the accused the Dangerous Drugs Act.  The burden
violated the Dangerous Drugs Act of of proof always lies to the accussed.
1972.
ISSUE: PEOPLE v. CHEN TIZ CHANG
WON the warrantless search resulting to
the arrest of accused-appellant violated FACTS:
the latter’s constitutional rights. Chen Tiz Chang and Chen Jung San,
challenged the decision of RTC in
HELD:
finding them guilty of illegal
Yes. The accused cannot be said to be possession and sale of shabu and
committing a crime.  Neither was she sentencing each of them to two counts
about to commit one nor had she just of reclusion perpetua.                    
committed a crime. there was no legal
basis for the NARCOM agents to effect a
ISSUE:
warrantless search of accused-
WON the accused is guilty.
appellant’s bag, there being no probable
cause and the accused-appellant not
having been lawfully arrested.  HELD:
YES. In a prosecution for illegal
possession of dangerous drugs, it must
PEOPLE vs ANGELES be shown that
(1) the accused is in possession of an
FACTS: item or an object identified to be a
ISSUE: prohibited or a regulated drug,
(2) such possession is not authorized by
HELD:
law and
(3) the accused freely and consciously
possessed the said drug.
PEOPLE v. DIOLO BARITA
Here, the prosecution witnesses were
FACTS: able to establish these elements along
with their personal knowledge and
Barita was charged with selling and evidences.
delivering more or less 2,800 grams of
PEOPLE vs ONG (1) that the transaction or sale took
place;
FACTS:
(2) that the corpus delicti or the illicit
Upon a tip, that a certain William Ong is
drug was presented as evidence; and (3)
conducting illicit drug activities. As per
that the buyer and seller were identified.
order of Chief Inspector Ferro, a team of
eight decided to conduct a buy-bust All of the elements were present.
operation. Thereafter, the accused was
PEOPLE vs YANG
arrested. However, he contended that
the arraignment was improper. FACTS:
ISSUE: Upon an eyewitness positively pointed
the accused as the suspect in the "buy-
WON the arraignment is incorrect and
bust" operation, Yang was immediately
should be acquitted?
arrested for selling and distributing
HELD: drugs. Accused contended after
arraignment that his arrest was invalid,
YES. the prosecution evidence about the
and that he must be acquitted.
buy-bust operation is incomplete. The
witness’ confidential information who ISSUE:
had sole knowledge of how the alleged
WON the accused is correct.
illegal sale of was given by SPO1
Gonzales who had no personal HELD:
knowledge of the same and not part of
the buy-bust operation. NO. The proper time for questioning the
validity of his arrest should have been
before arraignment. It is too late for
appellant to complain about the
PEOPLE VS ZERVOUKALOS
warrantless arrest after a valid
FACTS: information had been filed, the accused
arraigned, trial commenced and
ISSUE:
completed, and a judgment of conviction
HELD: rendered.
-----------------------------------------------

PEOPLE vs ADAM  R.A. No. 9165 (Cases of

acquittal: based on non-
FACTS: compliance with the chain
of custody)
A buy-bust operation was conducted
after a tip of an infrmant, and the
PEOPLE vs CACAO
accused was caught selling shabu and
was arrested for violating R.A 9165. The FACTS:
accused contended that the shabu was
implanted and he was framed up. PO2 Mangapit frisked the accused and
recovered from him one plastic sachet
ISSUE: containing shabu. The Philippine
National Police (PNP) laboratory
WON the accused should be acquitted?
conducted an examination on the
HELD: specimen recovered from appellant and
his companion which tested positive for
NO. For a successful prosecution of an
shabu. However, Cacao contends that
offense of illegal sale of dangerous
the prosecution is improper.
drugs, the following essential elements
must be proven: ISSUE:
WON the prosecution failed to the shabu presented in court. This
satisfactorily establish that the item discrepancy and the gap in the chain of
presented in court was the same item custody immediately affect proof of the
confiscated from Cacao. corpus delicti without which the accused
HELD: must be acquitted.

YES. There is no evidence to prove that From the constitutional law point
what was turned over to the evidence of view, the prosecution’s failure to
custodian and later presented in court establish with moral certainty all the
was the same substance recovered from elements of the crime and to identify the
petitioner. The failure to establish the accused as the perpetrator signify that it
failed to overturn the constitutional
chain of custody is fatal to the
presumption of innocence that every
prosecution’s case.
accused enjoys in a criminal
AMPARADO: KAMAD to prosecution. When this happens, as in
OBMIRANIS CASE this case, the courts need not even
consider the case for the defense in
People vs. Kamad deciding the case; a ruling for acquittal
must forthwith issue.
G.R. No. 174198               January 19,
2010
People vs. Frondozo
Facts: G.R. No. 177164               June 30, 2009
The accused, not being lawfully Facts:
authorized to possess or otherwise use That on or about the 27th day of
any dangerous drug and without the March, 2003 in Caloocan City, the
corresponding license or prescription, accused without authority of law, did
then and there willfully, unlawfully and
did then and there willfully, unlawfully
feloniously sell and deliver to PO1
and feloniously give away, distribute and ABNER BUTAY who posed, as buyer of
sell to a customer for P300.00 pesos one METHAMPHETAMINE
(1) small heat sealed transparent plastic HYDROCHLORIDE (SHABU) weighing
sachet containing crystalline substance 0.02 gram drug, without the
(shabu) weighing 0.20 gram, which corresponding license or prescription
when examined were found positive for therefore, knowing the same to be such.
Methamphetamine Hydrochloride Issue:
(shabu), a dangerous drug, in violation Whether or not the accused is
of the above-cited law. guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
violation of RA 9165.
Issue: Ruling:
Whether or not the accused is No. Jurisprudence clearly sets the
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of essential elements to be established in
violation of Section 5, Article II of RA the prosecution for illegal sale of
dangerous drugs, viz.: (1) the
9165 for the illegal sale of 0.20 gram of
transaction or sale took place, (2)
shabu. the corpus delicti or the illicit drug was
presented as evidence, and (3) the buyer
Ruling: and seller were identified. In this case,
the arresting officers failed to strictly
No. The court held that the
comply with the procedures for the
discrepancy in the prosecution evidence custody and disposition of confiscated
on the identity of the seized and dangerous drugs as prescribed by Rep.
examined shabu and that formally Act No. 9165. The arresting officers did
offered in court cannot but lead to not mark the shabu immediately after
serious doubts regarding the origins of they arrested Frondozo.
 Finally, the presumption of Garcia, we said that the presumption
regularity in the performance of official only arises in the absence of contrary
duty relied upon by the lower courts details in the case that raise doubt on
cannot by itself overcome the the regularity in the performance of
presumption of innocence nor constitute official duties. Where, as in the present
proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt. case, the police officers failed to comply
As a rule, the testimony of police officers with the standard procedures prescribed
who apprehended Frondozo is accorded by law, there is no occasion to apply the
full faith and credit because of the presumption.
presumption that they have performed
their duties regularly. However, when
the performance of their duties is People vs. Robles
tainted with irregularities, such G.R. No. 177220               April 24, 2009
presumption is effectively destroyed.
Facts:
The corpus delicti in this case does not
exist. That on or about the 5th day of
July 2002, in the City of Parañaque, the
accused give away, distribute and sell to
People vs. Partoza a customer for P100.00 pesos one (1)
G.R. No. 182418               May 8, 2009 small heat sealed transparent plastic
sachet containing crystalline substances
Facts: (shabu), weighing 0.09 gram, which
That on or about the 2nd day of when examined were found positive for
November 2002, in the Municipality of Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride
San Mateo, Province of Rizal, the (shabu) and that on or about the 5th day
accused, not being authorized by law, of July 2002, the accused have in his
did then and there willfully, unlawfully possession and under his control and
and knowingly have in his possession, custody one (1) heat sealed transparent
direct custody and control one (1) heat- plastic sachet containing white
sealed transparent plastic sachet of crystalline substance which when
white crystalline substance weighing examined was found to be positive for
0.04 gram, which substance, after Methylamphetamine Hydrochloride
confirmatory test, was found positive to (shabu), weighing 0.16 gram,.
the test of Methamphetamine Issue:
Hydrochloride, a dangerous, popularly
known as "shabu" a dangerous drug, in Whether or not the accused is
violation of the above-cited law. guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
violation of RA 9165.
Issue:
Ruling:
Whether or not the accused is
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of No. The Court finds that the
violation of RA 9165. prosecution failed to clearly establish
the chain of custody of the seized plastic
Ruling: sachet containing shabu subject of the
No. The evidence of the alleged sale. PO2 Besoña and PO3
prosecution did not reveal the identity of Malicse did not adequately
the person who had the custody and explain how the corpus delicti
safekeeping of the drugs after its transferred hands from the time it was
examination and pending presentation supposedly confiscated from appellant
in court. The failure of the prosecution to the time it was presented in court as
to establish the chain of custody is fatal evidence.
to its cause. All told, the identity of the Additionally, the Court notes
corpus delicti in this case was not further that nothing on record shows
proven beyond reasonable doubt. compliance by the buy-bust team with
The courts below heavily relied the procedural requirements of Section
on the testimony of PO3 Tougan and in 21, paragraph 1 of Article II of R.A. No.
the same breadth, banked on the 9165 with respect to custody and
presumption of regularity. In People v. disposition of confiscated drugs. The
failure of the police to comply with the Petitioners Carino and Andes
procedure in the custody of seized drugs were apprehended on two separate but
raises doubt as to their origins, and related incidents on 20 June 2003 at the
negates the operation of the corner of G. Araneta and E. Rodriguez
presumption of regularity accorded to Avenues in Quezon City. The
police officers. apprehending officers were allegedly
members of the Central Police District
(CPD)-Galas Police Station 11 and were
Sales vs. People part of the eight-man team5 that was
G.R. No. 182296               April 7, 2009 dispatched by the police district
authorities to conduct the "Oplan Sita"—
Facts:
an operation which had for its object the
That on or about the 5th day of suppression of rampant robbery in the
November, 2002 in Quezon City, vicinity. It was in the course of this
Philippines, the said accused, not being operation that both petitioners were
authorized by law to sell, dispense, arrested without a warrant for allegedly
deliver, transport or distribute any having in their possession plastic
dangerous drug, did then and there sachets containing shabu.
willfully and unlawfully sell, dispense,
Issue:
deliver, transport, distribute or act as
broker in the said transaction, zero point Whether or not the accused is
one four (0.14) gram of white crystalline guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
substance containing violation of RA 9165.
methylamphetamine hydrochloride, a Ruling:
dangerous drug.
No. The Court grants the petition.
Issue:
All told, in view of the deviation
Whether or not the accused is of the apprehending officers from the
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of mandated conduct of taking post-seizure
violation of RA 9165. custody of the dangerous drug in this
Ruling: case, there is no way to presume that the
members thereof had performed their
No.
duties regularly. And even assuming that
It is essential that the prohibited we can confidently rely on the credibility
drug confiscated or recovered from the of the prosecution witnesses in this case,
suspect is the very same the evidence would still fall short of
substance offered in court as exhibit; satisfying the quantum of evidence
and that the identity of said drug be required to arrive at a finding of guilt
established with the same unwavering beyond reasonable doubt because the
exactitude as that requisite to make a evidence chain failed to conclusively
finding of guilt. connect petitioners with the seized
The Court finds that neither was drugs in a way that would establish that
physical inventory nor photograph of the specimens are one and the same as
the sachet and buy-bust money taken in that seized in the first place and offered
the presence of petitioner, or her in court as evidence.
representative or counsel, a
representative from the media and the
People vs. Garcia
Department of Justice, as required by
law, was taken. No justification G.R. No. 173480               February 25,
whatsoever was proffered by the 2009
apprehending team for its failure to Facts:
observe the legal safeguards.
That on or about the 27th day of
February 2003, in the Municipality of
Cariño vs. People Navotas, Metro Manila, the accused,
being a private person, and without
G.R. No. 178757               March 13, 2009
authority of law, did then and there,
Facts: willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously sell
and deliver for consideration in the That on or about May 18, 2004,
amount of ₱200.00 to poseur-buyer one in the City of Manila, Philippines, the
(1) piece of printed paper with markings said accused, not having been
‘RGR-1’ containing the following: one (1) authorized by law to sell, trade, deliver
small brick of dried suspected Marijuana or give away to another any dangerous
fruiting tops with a net weight 11.02 drug, did then and there willfully,
gram[s] and Thirteen (13) small white unlawfully and knowingly attempt to sell
paper[s] with markings ‘RGR-RPI’ or offer for sale one (1) transparent
through ‘RGR-RP13,’ respectively, which plastic sachet containing TWO POINT
substance, when subjected to chemistry EIGHT ZERO ZERO (2.800) grams of
examination gave positive result for white crystalline substance known as
Marijuana, a dangerous drug. "SHABU" containing
Issue: methylamphetamine hydrochloride, a
dangerous drug.
Whether or not the accused is
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Issue:
violation of RA 9165. Whether or not the accused is
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
violation of RA 9165.
Ruling:
Ruling:
No. After due consideration, the court
resolve to ACQUIT Ruiz, as the No. The appeal has to be granted.
prosecution’s evidence failed to prove All told, in view of the deviation by the
his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. buy-bust team from the mandated
Specifically, the prosecution failed to conduct of taking post-seizure custody
show that the police complied with of the dangerous drug in this case, there
paragraph 1, Section 21, Article II of R.A. is no way to presume that the members
No. 9165, and with the chain of evidence thereof had performed their duties
requirement of this Act. regularly. The Court cannot indulge in
In a prosecution for the illegal sale of a the presumption of regularity of official
prohibited drug, the prosecution must duty if only to obliterate the obvious
prove the following elements: (1) the infirmity of the evidence advanced to
identity of the buyer and the seller, the support appellant's conviction.
object, and the consideration; and (2) The rule, in a constitutional
the delivery of the thing sold and the system like ours, is invariable regardless
payment therefor. All these require of the reputation of the accused because
evidence that the sale transaction the law presumes his innocence until the
transpired, coupled with the contrary is shown. In dubio pro reo.
presentation in court of the corpus When moral certainty as to culpability
delicti, i.e., the body or substance of the hangs in the balance, acquittal on
crime that establishes that a crime has reasonable doubt inevitably becomes a
actually been committed, as shown by matter of right.
presenting the object of the illegal
transaction. In the present case, the
object is marijuana which the BALANI: BONDAD to
prosecution must present and prove in RESURRECCION CASE
court to be the same item seized from
the accused. It is in this respect that the
prosecution failed. BONDAD vs. PEOPLE
G.R.No. 173804, December 10,
People vs. Obmiranis 2008
G.R. No. 181492             December 16, Facts:
2008
Appellant was apprehended in a buy
Facts: bust operation wherein
Methamphetamine Hydrochloride,
placed inside a Vicks container, was station. He did not mark the seized
found within his person. Appellant items immediately after he arrested
claims that there was failure to follow appellant in the latter’s presence. He
the requirements of Sec. 21 of R.A. No. also did not make an inventory and take
9165, hence, it compromised the a photograph of the confiscated
integrity and evidentiary value of the materials in the presence of appellant.
allegedly seized items. Other than the three policemen, there
were no other people who participated
Issue: in the alleged buy-bust operation. There
Whether or not there was a violation of was no representative from the media
Sec. 21 of R.A. No. 9165? and the Department of Justice, or any
elected public official who participated
Ruling: in the operation and who were supposed
Yes. In the present case, by PO2 Dano’s to sign an inventory of seized items and
claim, he immediately marked the seized be given copies thereof. None of the
items which were brought to the Crime statutory safeguards were observed.
Laboratory for examination. By his PEOPLE vs ORTEZA
admission, however, he did not conduct
an inventory of the items seized. Worse, G.R.No. 173051, July 31, 2007
no photograph of the items was taken. Facts:
There was thus failure to faithfully
follow the requirements of the law. Gerardo Orteza was charged with
violation of R.A. No. 9165 after he was
IN FINE, as the failure to comply with apprehended during a buy-bust
the aforesaid requirements of the law operation wherein a sachet of
compromised the identity of the items methamphetamine hydrochloride was
seized, which is the corpus delicti of recovered from him. In his defense,
each of the crimes charged against Orteza argues that there was a violation
appellant, his acquittal is in order. in the procedure for the handling of
PEOPLE vs. GERALDINE MAGAT evidence as stated in Section 21 of R.A.
G.R. No. 179939, September 29, No. 9165.
2008 Issue:
Facts: Whether or not Orteza’s contention is
Appellant was apprehended during a meritorious.
buy bust operation wherein multiple Ruling:
sachets were found on her person. The
authorities then brought appellant to the Yes there appears to be nothing in the
police station where they booked her. records showing that police officers
PO1 Santos marked the plastic sachets complied with the proper procedure in
containing shabu with his initials "PCS" the custody of seized drugs as specified
and the letters "A" and "B" for in People v. Lim,29 i.e., any
examination. The plastic sachets were apprehending team having initial
examined at the PNP Crime Laboratory control of said drugs and/or
Office; the examination yielded positive paraphernalia should, immediately after
for methamphetamine hydrochloride. seizure or confiscation, have the same
physically inventoried and
Issue: photographed in the presence of the
Whether or not the procedures stated in accused, if there be any, and or his
Section 21 of R.A. No. 916524 were representative, who shall be required to
complied with. sign the copies of the inventory and be
given a copy thereof. The failure of the
Ruling: agents to comply with the requirement
No. PO1 Santos admitted that he marked raises doubt whether what was
the two plastic sachets containing white submitted for laboratory examination
crystalline substance in the police and presented in court was actually
recovered from appellant. It negates the
presumption that official duties have
been regularly performed by the police
officers.
------------------------------------------------
  RA 9165 (Cases of
conviction even if there
is no compliance with the PEOPLE, vs. DANILO CRUZ
chain of custody rule) G.R.No. 185381, December 16,
2009
PEOPLE VS DE LEON
Facts:
G.R. No. 186471, January 25, 2010
Appellant is charged with the violation
Facts: of R.A. 9165 after he was apprehended
during a buy-bust operation. PO3 Arago,
De leon was charged with violation of the poseur-buyer inscribed his signature
Section 11 [Possession], Article II of RA and the appellant’s initials "DCC" on the
9165. After a buy-bust operation was sachet given him by appellant, while
conducted, he was caught in the act of PO2 Aguinaldo inscribed those found in
selling a sachet of a crystalline substance appellant’s pockets as "DCC-1" and
with another sachet being found in his "DCC-2” which all tested positive for
person after he was apprehended. Methamphetamine Hydrochloride or
Afterwards, appellant was brought to the shabu.
police station for investigation. PO2
Collado then placed his initials on the Appellant asserts that the police officers
sachet he found on appellant. The failed to properly make an inventory of
evidence was subsequently turned over the shabu allegedly recovered from him.
to the police investigator, PO1 Estrelles, Further, he argues that they also failed
who prepared a request for its to photograph or mark the shabu
laboratory examination which yielded immediately after the alleged buy-bust
positive results for Methylamphetamine operation in his presence, or his counsel,
Hydrochloride, a dangerous drug. a representative from the media, a
representative from the Department of
Issue: Justice, or any elected public official.
Whether or not the prosecution failed to Issue:
prove the chain of custody of the alleged
confiscated items from the accused- Whether or not the accused is guilty for
appellant. violation of RA 9165 despite the failure
of the prosecution to overthrow the
Ruling: constitutional presumption of innocence
No. A close examination of the law in his favor.
reveals that it admits of certain Ruling:
exceptions. Thus, contrary to the
assertions of appellant, Sec. 21 of the Yes. It is very clear from the language of
foregoing law need not be followed as an the law that there are exceptions to the
exact science. Non-compliance with Sec. requirements. Therefore, contrary to
21 does not render an accused’s arrest appellant’s assertions, Sec. 21 need not
illegal or the items seized/confiscated be followed with pedantic rigor. What is
from him inadmissible.18 What is essential is "the preservation of the
essential is "the preservation of the integrity and the evidentiary value of the
integrity and the evidentiary value of the seized items, as the same would be
seized items, as the same would be utilized in the determination of the guilt
utilized in the determination of the guilt or innocence of the accused.”
or innocence of the accused."
In the case at bar, there was substantial
compliance with the law and the
integrity of the drugs seized was
In the instant case, there was substantial preserved. The chain of custody of the
compliance with the law and the drugs subject matter of the case was
integrity of the drugs seized from established by the testimonies of the
appellant was preserved. The chain of witnesses as not to have been broken.
custody of the drugs subject matter of
the case was shown not to have been
broken.
PEOPLE vs. GRACE VENTURA y After he was arrested during a buy-bust
NATIVIDAD operation, multiple sachets of shabu
were recovered in his possession as well
G.R. No. 184957, October 27, 2009 as several drug paraphernalia from
Facts: within his residence. In his defense
appellant argues that the prosecution
Accused was charged with violation of did not strictly comply with the
RA 9165 following his arrest at a buy- procedures laid down in Section 21,
buys operation wherein he was caught Article II of Republic Act No. 9165.
selling crystalline substances to the
poseur-buyer. After frisking the accused, Issue:
PO2 Sarmiento recovered from him the Did the trial court err in disregarding
marked money used for the buy-bust the prosecution’s failure to comply with
operation. The police asset also handed the procedures laid down in RA 9165?
to PO2 Sarmiento the shabu he bought
from accused-appellant which Ruling:
subsequently tested positive for
Methylamphetamine hydrochloride, a No. The law excuses non-compliance
dangerous drug. At the heart of the under justifiable grounds. However,
defense argument is that the court failed whatever justifiable grounds may excuse
to account for the chain of custody of the the police officers involved in the buy-
evidence. bust operation in this case from
complying with Section 21 will remain
Issue: unknown, because appellant did not
question during trial the safekeeping of
Whether or not the defense’ contention the items seized from him.
is meritorious.
Indeed, the police officers’ alleged
Ruling: violations of Sections 21 and 86 of
No non-compliance with the stipulated Republic Act No. 9165 were not raised
procedure, under justifiable grounds, before the trial court but were instead
shall not render void and invalid such raised for the first time on appeal. In no
seizures of and custody over said items, instance did appellant least intimate at
for as long as the integrity and the trial court that there were lapses in
evidentiary value of the seized items are the safekeeping of seized items that
properly preserved by the apprehending affected their integrity and evidentiary
officers. value. Objection to evidence cannot be
raised for the first time on appeal; when
All documentary, testimonial, and object a party desires the court to reject the
pieces of evidence, including the evidence offered, he must so state in the
markings on the plastic sachet form of objection. Without such
containing the shabu, prove that the objection, he cannot raise the question
substance tested by the forensic chemist, for the first time on appeal.
whose laboratory tests were well-
documented, was the same as that taken
from accused-appellant. In the case at PEOPLE vs. RESURRECCION
bar, the evidence clearly shows that
accused-appellant was involved in the G.R.No. 186380, October 12, 2009
buy-bust operation. Having been caught
in flagrante delicto, accused-appellant’s Facts:
participation cannot be doubted. Appellant is charged with violation of
PEOPLE vs. ALFREDO LAZARO Section 15 of RA 9165. He was arrested
during a buy-bust operation wherein he
G.R. No. 186418, October 16, 2009 was caught selling multiple sachets of
shabu to the poseur-buyer. Accused, in
Facts: his defense, argues that the first link in
Accused was charged with the violation the chain of custody was not established
of Sections 5, 11, and 15 of RA 9165. by the prosecution. Accused-appellant
points to the failure of the buy-bust
team to immediately mark the seized doubt that the drugs seized from
drugs as a cause to doubt the identity of appellant were the same ones examined
the shabu allegedly confiscated from in the crime laboratory. Plainly, the
him. prosecution established the crucial link
Issue: in the chain of custody of the seized
shabu from the time they were first
Whether or not the accused can be held
criminally liable. discovered until they were brought for
examination. This Court finds, as did the
Ruling: trial court and the CA, the accounts of
Accused is criminally liable, to be able to the arresting/entrapping police officers,
create a first link in the chain of custody, as to what occurred in the evening of
then, what is required is that the May 28, 2004, credible. For, aside from
marking be made in the presence of the the presumption that they – the police
accused and upon immediate
operatives – regularly performed their
confiscation. "Immediate confiscation"
has no exact definition. Thus, in People duties, we note that these operatives, as
v. Gum-Oyen, testimony that included prosecution witnesses, gave consistent
the marking of the seized items at the and straightforward narrations of what
police station and in the presence of the transpired on May 28, 2004.
accused was sufficient in showing
compliance with the rules on chain of People v. Gum-Oyen
custody. Marking upon immediate
confiscation contemplates even marking G.R. No. 182231, April 16, 2009
at the nearest police station or office of
the apprehending team. Facts:
Appellant raised a lone assignment of
error' "the trial court gravely erred in
CATUNGAL: TEODORO to convicting accused-appellant of the
RAFAEL case crime charged despite the failure of the
People vs Teodoro prosecution to establish the identity of
G.R. No. 185164, June 22, 2009 the corpus delicti."
Facts:
Appellant claims that the prosecution Issue:
failed to establish the evidence’s chain of Whether or not the conviction of the
custody because the buy-bust team accused was proper.
failed to strictly comply with Section
2124 of RA 9165 and Section 2 of Held:
Dangerous Drugs Board Resolution No. The prosecution’s evidence sufficiently
1.25 He adds that the policemen’s failure established the unbroken chain of
to abide by these provisions casts doubt custody of the seized drugs beginning
on the admissibility of the evidence from the entrapment team, to the
adduced against him. investigating officer, to the forensic
chemist whose laboratory tests were
Issue: well-documented, up to the time there
Whether or not the chain of custody was were offered in evidence. The chain-of-
properly established. custody rule requires that the admission
of an exhibit be preceded by evidence
Held: sufficient to support a finding that the
Contrary to what appellant wants to matter in question is what the
portray, the chain of custody of the proponent claims it to be. The arresting
seized prohibited drugs was shown not officers also strictly complied with the
to have been broken. There can be no guidelines prescribed by law regarding
the custody and control of the seized the appellant was not fatal because the
drugs. There was testimony regarding prosecution was able to preserve the
the marking of the seized items at the integrity and evidentiary value of the
police station and in the presence of said illegal drugs. PO2 Brubio was able
appellant. Likewise there was mention to put the necessary markings on the
that an elected official was present sachet of shabu bought from appellant,
during the inventory. In addition, it for identification purposes, immediately
appears on record that the team after the consummation of the drug sale.
photographed the contraband in He personally delivered the same
accordance with law. Absent any specimen to the PNP Crime Laboratory
indication that the police officers were for chemical analysis on the same day
ill-motivated in testifying against the entrapment was conducted. Lastly,
appellant, full credence should be given PO2 Brubio was able to identify the said
to their testimonies. In sum, contrary to markings in court.
appellant’s lone argument, the People vs Macatingag
prosecution established the corpus G.R. No. 181037
delicti with moral certainty. Finally, it Facts:
bears underscoring that appellant Appellant avers that the trial court and
himself admitted that he was carrying the Court of Appeals gravely erred in
marijuana at the time of his arrest and giving undue credence to the
even though he knew it was against the testimonies of the police officers and in
law to so possess it in any amount. upholding the presumption of regularity
in the performance of their official
People v. Llamado functions. He also assails the validity of
G.R. No. 185278, March 13, 2009 his arrest because the police officers
Facts: were not armed with any warrant when
Accused-appellants hinge their appeal he was arrested. Finally, he assails the
on the alleged failure of the police to propriety of the chain of custody of the
comply with the procedure in the shabu allegedly seized from him due to
custody of seized prohibited and the non-observation of Section 21,
regulated drugs as embodied in Sec. Article II of R.A. No. 9165.
21(a) of the Implementing Rules and
Regulations of RA 9165. They alleged Issue:
that there was no conclusive evidence to Whether or not the evidence is enough
prove that the substances seized from to convict the accused.
accused-appellants were the same
substances subjected to examination Held:
and presented in court. The integrity of the evidence is
presumed to be preserved unless there is
Issue: a showing of bad faith, ill will, or proof
In essence, accused-appellants question that the evidence has been tampered
the chain of custody over the alleged with. Appellant in this case has the
confiscated prohibited drugs and burden to show that the evidence was
Melchor’s conviction for illegal tampered or meddled with to overcome
possession of shabu. a presumption of regularity in the
handling of exhibits by public officers
Held: and a presumption that public officers
The failure on the part of the police properly discharge their
officers to take photographs and make duties._Appellant failed to discharge
an inventory of the drugs seized from such burden.
 these rules. For evidence to be
This Court has held that non-compliance inadmissible, there should be a law or
with Section 21, Article II of R.A. No. rule which forbids its reception.
9165 will not render an accused’s arrest Nothing in the law, however, will bring
illegal or the items seized/confiscated about the non-admissibility of the
from him inadmissible. What is of confiscated and/or seized drugs due to
utmost importance is the preservation of non-compliance with Section 21 of
the integrity and the evidentiary value of Republic Act No. 9165.
the seized items, as the same would be
utilized in the determination of the guilt TITLE VI – CRIMES AGAINST
or innocence of the accused. PUBLIC MORALS

People vs del Monte  Article 195. Acts

G.R.No. 179940, April 23, 2008 punishable in gambling
and betting (P.D. 1602 –
Facts: Gambling Law)
Appellant anchors his appeal on the
arresting policemen’s failure to strictly People vs Punto
comply with Section 21 of Republic Act 68 Phil 481
No. 9165. He claims that pictures of him
together with the alleged confiscated Facts:
shabu were not taken immediately upon The accused was prosecuted in the Court
his arrest as shown by the testimony of of First Instance of Laguna for a
the lone prosecution witness. He adds violation of article 195 of the Revised
that PO1 Tolentino and PO1 Antonio Penal Code, as amended by
Barreras, the police officers who had Commonwealth Act No. 235.
initial custody of the drug allegedly
seized and confiscated, did not conduct Issue:
a physical inventory of the same in his The appellant challenges the
presence as shown by their joint constitutionality of Commonwealth Act
affidavit of arrest. No. 236, amendatory to article 195 of the
Revised Penal Code on the ground that
Issue: the penalty is cruel and unusual (par. 18,
Whether or not the trial court gravely sec. 1, art. III).
erred in finding the accused-appellant
guilty of the offense charged despite the Held:
inadmissibility of the evidence against The punishment provided, far from
him for failure of the arresting officers to being cruel and unusual, is motivated by
comply with SECTION 21 OF R.A. 9165 a wholesome purpose, namely, to
effectuate early repression of an evil
Held: that, in the opinion of the Legislature,
In non-compliance with Section 21 of undermines the social, moral, and
said law, particularly the making of the economic growth of the nation, and is." .
inventory and the photographing of the . best calculated to answer the ends of
drugs confiscated and/or seized, will not precaution necessary to deter others
render the drugs inadmissible in from the commission of like
evidence. Under Section 3 of Rule 128 offenses, . . .’’ (Jackson v. U. S. [C. C. A.,
of the Rules of Court, evidence is Alaska, 1900], 102 Fed., 473, 488).
admissible when it is relevant to the
issue and is not excluded by the law or U.S. vs Salaveria
39 Phil 102 These defendants were charged with a
Facts: violation of Act No. 1757. The complaint
The municipal council of Orion, Bataan, presented against them contained the
enacted, on February 28, 1917, an following accusations.
ordinance which, among other things,
prohibited the playing of panguingue on "That on or about the afternoon of
days not Sundays or legal holidays August 1 of the present year, 1911, and in
The justice of the peace of Orion, when the jurisdiction of this municipality of
this ordinance went into effect, was Iloilo, Philippine Islands, the said
Prudencio Salaveria, now the defendant accused, Cayetano Rafael, Perseveranda
and appellant. Notwithstanding his Lopez, Victor Discipulo, Victoriano
official station, on the evening of March Rafael and Guillermo Juanesa did
8, 1917, not a Sunday or a legal holiday, intentionally, maliciously and criminally
seven persons including the justice of play, making bets in money, the game of
the peace and his wife were surprised by chance called monte; in violation of the
the police while indulging in a game of law."
panguingue in the house of the justice of
the peace. The chief of police took Issue:
possession of the cards, the counters Whether or not the betting and
(sigayes), a tray, and P2.07 in money, gambling was sufficiently established to
used in the game. convict the accused.

Issue: Held:
Whether or not the accused should be It will be noted that the appellants claim
punished under the maximum penalty. that the lower court committed an error
in deciding that the defendants were
Held: guilty of playing the prohibited game of
The culprit in this case is himself a monte "con apuestas de dinero." The
member of the Judiciary. Instead of appellant has evidently overlooked
enforcing the law, he has scorned it. His section 7 of Act No. 1757, which
example to the people of Orion has been provides, among other things, that —
pernicious in its influence. If gambling is
to be suppressed, not only the weak and "The playing at and conducting of any
ignorant must be punished, but those game of monte . . . is hereby prohibited,
with full knowledge of the law and the and any person taking any part
consequences of violation. We would therein . . . shall be punished as
accordingly suggest to Courts of First provided in section 3 hereof."cralaw
Instance that in all cases arising under virtua1aw library
the Gambling Law or ordinances, except
for unusual circumstances, a prison While it may be true, generally that
sentence should be imposed, if persons who play the game of monte
permitted by the law or ordinance. We play for money, yet, nevertheless, the
further suggest that, where the use of money in the game is not a
defendant has been found guilty and is a necessary element in the crime
man of station, he be given the described or defined by the law. It seems
maximum penalty. that the purpose of the law was to
prohibit absolutely the game of monte in
U.S. vs Rafael, 23 Phil 184 the Philippine Islands. The mere fact
that money was or was not used in no
Facts: way constitutes an element of the crime.
 The El Debate, a newspaper, published
CERNA: PALMA to KOTTINGER an announcement thay it was awarding
case prizes aggregating P 18,000 to the
winners in two guessing contests:
US vs Palma (1) for the nearest approximate guesses
Facts: as to the total number of votes that will
be cast for any of the winning candidates
Francisco Palma was arrested for illegal for Carnival Queen in the provinces or in
gambling. He contends that he was a Manila; and
bystander and did not even make bets
during said gambling. (2) for the nearest approximate guesses
as to the total number of votes that the
Issue: Queen-elect will receive for the Carnival
WON Mr. Palma should be convicted of Queenship. To enter the contest, one
illegal gambling must subscribe to the El Debate
newspaper.
Held:
Issue:
No. Mere bystanders or spectators in a
gambling game is not criminally liable, WON this can be considered a lottery
because he doses not take part therein, Held:
directly or indirectly. The las does not
make the mere presence in a gambling There was lottery. The argument that
house an offense. there was no consideration for the
reason that each subscriber to the El
US v Filart Debate received the full value of his
Facts: money by receiving the paper every day
for the period he subscribed, is tenable
Filart et.al sold tickets to people for a only as respect those persons who would
chance to win a car. This was done subscribe to the paper regardless of the
without any permit or whatsoever. inducement to win prize. The position is
fallacious, as to other persons who
Issue:
subscribed merely to win a prize.
WON act committed can be considered
US v Jose
as lottery
Facts:
Held:
Jose and Bo owned a mercantile firm, in
Yes. Lottery is defined as a scheme for
which Macao lottery tickets were seized.
the distribution of prizes by chance
Jose contended that he had no
among persons who have paid, or agreed
knowledge of the existence of tickets, Bo
to pay, a valuable consideration for the
corroborated such claim.
chance to obtain a prize. As seen, the act
has all the necessary elements of lottery- Issue:
consideration, chance, and prize. If the
scheme is such that human reason, WON Jose is guilty of possession?
foresight, sagacity, or design cannot Held:
enable one to know or determine the
result until the same has been No. Although the possession of said
accomplished, then it is lottery. tickets is prima facie evidence of an
intent to sell, distribute- defendant
El Debate v Topacio successfully established of him not
Facts: knowing of the existence of tickets
within his premises. Animus Possidendi
and said presumption is destroyed and wearing their tribal/cultural attire,
defendant acquitted. where some were naked from the waist
up.
US v Reyes
Issue:
Facts:
WON possessed photographs were
Counterfeiting of tickets do not give rise
obscene
to the evil sought to be eradicated. The
Supreme Court has not decided on the Held:
lottery tickets' genuineness. The
No. The word "obscene" ands the term
defendant was still convicted of
"obscenity" may be defined as meaning
possession of such tickets.
something offensive to chastify, decency,
US v Samaniego et.al or delicacy. "Indeceny" is an act against
behavior and a just delicacy. The test
Facts:
ordinarily followed by the courts in
Defendants privately had carnal determining whether a particular
knowledge, despite being legally married publication or other thing is obscene
to another. within the meaning of the statutes, is
whether the tendency of the matter
Issue: charged as obscene, is to deprave or
WON defendanta are guilty of Grave corrupt those whose minds are open to
Scandal such immoral influences and into whose
hands a publication or other article
Held: charged as being obscene may fall.
No. The act should be committed in Another test of obscenity is that which
public places or within the public shocks the ordinary and common sense
knowledge or view. If no publicity was of men as an indecency.
done, no scandal exists. The test of obscenity is this: Where the
US vs Catajay tendency of the matter charged as
obscene is to deprave and corrupt those
Facts: whose minds are open to such immoral
Defendant attempted to rape a woman influences, and into whose hands a
at night, in a private house, where only a publication of this sort may fall;" and
few persons were present. where "it who suggest to the minds of
the young of either sex, or even to
Issue: persons of more advanced years,
thoughts of the most impure and
WON defendant is guilty of grave
libidinous character. The pictures are
scandal
not obscene.
Held:
No. When act is committed at night, in a ----------------------------------------------
private house, and at a time when no
CULLO: GO PIN to BAES case
one was present except the accused, the
mistress of the house, and one servant-
these circumstances do not constitute
PEOPLE V GO PIN
the degree of publicity which is an
essential element of the crime. (GR No. L-7491, Aug 08, 1955 )
US vs Kottinger
Facts: FACTS:

Defendant was accused of possessing Go Pin was a Chinese Citizen who

photographs of Non-christian Filipinos exhibited his films and sculpturesat
Globe Arcade, City of Manila. It was ISSUE:
alleged that the said films and sculptures
were indecent or/and immoral. As such, Whether or not the accused
he was charged with a violation of violated Act 519.
Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code. RULING:
Go Pin did not deny the nudity of such
films but he claimed that the slight Yes.
nudity was made for the sake of art and In the case of Gavin vs. The State (96
should not be considered as offensive. Miss., 377), the court said that:
ISSUE: Whether or not Go Po violated "In vagrancy, the offense consists in
Article 201 of the Revised Penal Code. general worthless-ness; that is to say, in
RULING: being idle, and, though able to work,
refusing to do so, and living without
Yes. labor, or on the charity of others."
As a general rule, if nude pictures were Philippine Vagrancy Act (Act No. 519),
made for art, there would be no offense which provides that:
committed. However, in this case the
films and sculpture were not exactly
used for art’s sake but for commercial "Every person having no apparent
purposes. means of subsistence, who has the
The persons who went to see those physical ability to work, and who
pictures and paid entrance fees for the neglects to apply himself or herself to
privilege of doing so, were not exactly some lawful callings is a vagrant."
artists and persons interested in art and It is apparent that a 33-year old able-
who generally go to art exhibitions and bodied man was living under the charity
galleries to satisfy and improve their of his mother. The Supreme Court that
artistic tastes, but rather people desirous there being no apparent lawful calling or
of satisfying their morbid curiosity and occupation, who makes no effort to
taste, and lust, and for love for support himself is a vagrant. In this
excitement, including the youth who case, frequenting cockpits and gambling
because of their immaturity are not in a places cannot is not an apparent mean
position to resist and shield themselves of supporting himself.
from the ill and perverting effects of
these pictures.
------------------------------------------------ U.S V. HART
 Article 202. Vagrants and FACTS:
prostitutes.
HART, NATIVIDAD and MILLER
PEOPLE V. MOLINA were charged with violating Act 519. It
was alleged that the 3 were vagrants as
FACTS: they were loitering in and gambling
Valeriano Molina was convicted around the city. It was established
for violation Opium Law. After his however that the 3 have their own
release in 1910, he had been engaged in means of living but were well known
no lawful occupation, and was without gamblers. The Attorney-General argued
apparent means of support other than that "visible means of support" as used
that supplied by his mother. He spent in that clause does not apply to "every
his time loitering about the streets and person found loitering about saloons or
frequenting cockpits and other gambling dram shops or gambling houses," but is
houses. Thus, an information was filed confined entirely to "or tramping or
against Molina for violating Act 519 for straying through the country." It is
vagrancy. The accused testified that he insisted that had it been intended for
was indeed supported by her mother "without visible means of support" to
and worked on her property. qualify the first part of the clause, either
the comma after gambling
houses would have been ommitted, or  Article 203. Who are
else a comma after country would have public officers
been inserted.
MANIEGO V. PEOPLE
ISSUE:
FACTS:
Whether an accused with visible
means of support may be convicted of The herein accused is a laborer
vagrancy. who is in charge of issuing summons
and subpoenas under the sala of a
RULING: certain judge in the City of Manila.
According to the complainant, the
No. Here, the Supreme Court
accused offered him to fix his penalty by
held that it is necessary for a person to
paying 10 pesos instead of paying the
be without any means of support for him
full amount of 15 pesos. However, as a
to be labeled as vagrant, as opposed to
defense, the accused denied the
the Attorney-General’s contention. The
allegation and stated that he cannot be
Supreme Court used statutory
considered as a public officer or
construction as basis and ruled that the
employee since he was a mere laborer by
classifications cannot be further divided
appointment he may not be convicted,
as it is already separated by semicolons.
because the preparation of motions for
In this case, the defendants were dismissal is not surely the official
earning a living by legitimate methods in function of a laborer
a degree of comfort higher than the
ISSUE:
average. Accused were acquitted.
Whether or not the accused was a
public officer or employee.
U.S. V. CRUZ
RULING:
FACTS:
Although originally appointed as
In 1917, The herein defendant a mere laborer, this defendant was on
was a cochero who solicited an several occasions designated or given
American soldier to go with him in his the work to prepare motions for
rig to find a prostitute. An information dismissal. He was consequently
was filed against the accused for having temporarily discharging such public
violated Section 733 of the Revised functions. And as in the performance
Ordinances of the City of Manila. thereof he accepted, even solicited, a
monetary reward, he is certainly guilty
ISSUE: as charged.
Whether the accused was a -----------------------------------------------
vagrant as defined by the said
ordinance.  Article 204. Knowingly
rendering unjust judgment
RULING:
GOTAMCO v. CHAN SENG
Yes. Section 733 of the Revised
Ordinances of the city of Manila FACTS:
includes as a class of individuals who
Antonio Tampoco died in 1920
shall be deemed to be vagrants, any
leaving a will to his children. At that
person who "acts as pimp or procurer."
time, all his children were minors so the
The words quoted are defined and
court appointed commissioners for the
construed in the decision.
for the estate of the deceased. The
commissioners were allowed by the
court to publish notice to the crediors to
TITLE VII – CRIMES COMMITTED file for claims. Subsequently, an
BY PUBLIC OFFICERS allowance for claim was presented by
the commissioners. However, the claims
were discovered to be fraudulent as it
was only taken from the books of the law and for not being supported by the
deceased. Thus, the lower courts denied evidence.
the claim leading to the case at hand.
ISSUE:
U.S. v. GACUTAN
Whether or not the claim may be
granted. FACTS:

RULING: Gacutan, the accused, was, on the

2d of October, 1913, convicted of bribery
No. A judgement is the final in the Court of First Instance of
consideration and determination of a Cagayan, it having been found that
court of competent jurisdiction upon the he accepted from Pascua a carabao as a
matters submitted to it, in an action or bribe in consideration of which he
proceeding. agreed to and subsequently did decide a
criminal case then pending before him
In this case, there was no claim made, against Pagulayan and in favor of the
filed or presented by anyone. Legally people without regard to the evidence
speaking, the allowance of the claim upon which the same was founded.
would be like rendering a judgement
without filing of a complaint, or even the ISSUE:
making or presentment of a claim. To
legalize the allowance of the claim with Whether or not the judgement
all of the formalities and requisites of a rendered is unjust.
final judgment, would be a travesty upon RULING:
justice. 
No. it does not appear that the
accused knowingly rendered an unjust
STA. MARIA v. UBAY judgment even if we concede that the
judgment was unjust. The mere fact that
FACTS: the court may not have had jurisdiction
of the subject matter of the action does
The complainant alleges that the not necessarily establish the fact that his
respondent Judge promulgated a judgment was unjust.
decision in Civil Case C-2052 contrary to
the decisions of the Supreme Court The -----------------------------------------------
complainant states that the respondent
Judge, "in awarding to the plaintiffs (in  Article 205. Judgment
Civil Case C-2052) in toto  what they rendered through
prayed for in their complaint and negligence
amended complaint did so in bad faith EVANGELISTA v. BAES
and with full knowledge that said
plaintiffs are not entitled thereto.  FACTS:

ISSUE: Ferardo Basuan, one of the

plaintiffs in CAR Case No. 1438, failed to
Whether or not the judge is guilty appear at the pre-trial, but Paciano
of rendering unjust judgement. Basuan, his co-plaintiff, appeared. For
RULING: failure of Ferardo to appear, Judge Baes
No. In order that a judge may be ordered the dismissal of the entire case,
held liable for knowingly rendering an thus affecting also Paciano, which
unjust judgment, it must be shown should not have been the case. The
beyond doubt that the judgment is transcript of the stenographic notes
unjust in the sense that it is contrary to taken at the pre-trial indicates that the
law or is not supported by the evidence, hearing of the case had been postponed
and the same was made with conscious several times at the behest of the
and deliberate intent to do an injustice. plaintiffs; that they were previously
The rule requires that the judgment warned that the pre-trial would proceed
should be unjust for being contrary to whether they had a lawyer or not; that
despite this warning, Paciano appeared Judge Rubio to be unfair to Atty.
without counsel. Yaranon. The latter may have a different
view of his case, but mere error of
ISSUE: judgment, assuming its existence, and
Whether or not Hon. Baes is the Court held that here there was none,
guilty of violating Art. 205 of the RPC. cannot serve as basis for a charge of
knowingly rendering an unjust
RULING: judgment, there being no proof or even
No. Although there may be abuse allegation of bad faith.
of discretion in issuing an order, it does -----------------------------------------------
not necessarily follow that there is bad  Article 206. Unjust
faith or that said abuse of discretion interlocutory order
signifies ignorance of the law on the part
of a judge. Abuse of discretion signifies KAPISANAN NG MGA
ignorance of the law on the part of a MANGGAGAWA SA MANILA
judge. Abuse of discretion by a trial RAILROAD COMPANY, YARD
court does not necessarily maen ulterior CREW UNION etc.
motive, arbitrary conduct or willful
disregard of litigant’s right. FACTS:
On March 7, 1955, the
KAPISANAN filed a petition praying
ECHIVERE: RUBIO to GIMINEA that it be certified as the exclusive
case bargaining agent in the Manila Railroad
Company. A decision was promulgated,
YARANON vs RUBIO in which the Court of Industrial
Relations found three unions
FACTS: appropriate for purposes of collective
Administrative complaint against bargaining, to wit: (1) The unit of
Judge Antonio Rubio of the Municipality locomotive drivers, firemen, assistant
of Inopacan Leyte for alleged (1) firemen and motormen-otherwise
incompetence and/or ignorance of the known as the engine crew unit: (2) the
law and (2) delaying justice.  unit of conductors, assistant conductors,
Atty. Pedro H. Yaranon filed a charge of unit agents, assistant route agents and
estafa with Judge Rubio's court against train posters, otherwise known as the
the spouses Florderico Puzon and train crew unit, and (3) the unit of all
Vitaliana Mandac Puzon, his tenants or the rest of the company personnel,
overseers. except the supervisors, temporary
Atty. Yaranon said tenants with having employees, the members of the Auditing
failed to account for agricultural items Department, the members of the
given to them in trust. After due trial security guard and professional and
wherein the only witness of Atty. technical employees, referred to by the
Yaranon was himself, Judge Rubio respondent court as the unit of the rest
acquitted the accused. of the employees.

ISSUE: The Court of Industrial Relations,

WON JUDGE RUBIO IS GUILTY OF through the Hon. Arsenio Martinez,
RENDERING AN UNJUST Associate Judge, handed down an order,
JUDGMENT. dated June 8, 1959, which orders a
plebiscite to be conducted among the
RULING: NO. employees in the three proposed groups,
The Supreme Court held that, namely: the Engineering Department,
absent any evidence of ill-motive or the Station Employees and the Yard
improper consideration, the same Crew Personnel shall vote, in a secret
cannot by itself prove the charge laid ballot to be conducted by this Court, on
against Judge Rubio. The decision the question of whether or not they
discusses creditably the evidence of the desire to be separated from the unit of
parties and no indication therein of any the rest of the employees being
untoward factor that could have induced represented by the Kapisanan.
ISSUE: WON the orders are and, if so, the acquittal of the accused in
interlocutory in nature. the other case was perhaps due to the
RULING: YES. lack of proof of his guilt as an incendiary
The test in determining whether and to the fact that the acts charged do
an order or judgment is interlocutory or not constitute a crime. Therefore, upon
final is "Does it leave something to be this hypothesis, and because the alleged
done in the trial court with respect to the incendiary was acquitted, it is neither
merits of the case? If it does, it is proper nor possible to convict the
interlocutory; if it does not, it is final”. defendant, Mendoza, as accessory after
Having in view the avowed purpose of the fact, of Bernabe Mangunay, who was
the orders in question, one should not acquitted of the said crime of arson.
stretch his imagination far to see that
they are clearly interlocutory, as PEOPLE v. NICOLAS L. MINA
they leave something more to be done in FACTS:
the trial court and do not decide one way Nicolas Mina being the chief of
or the other the petitions of the police of the municipality of Asingan,
respondent unions. Pangasinan, in breach of his official
duty, maliciously defaulted in the
----------------------------------------------- prosecution and punishment of the
 Article 208. Prosecution violators of the law prohibiting and
of offenses; negligence penalizing the game of chance called
and tolerance ’Jueteng,’ in that he failed to file the
THE UNITED STATES vs. VICENTE corresponding criminal action against
MENDOZA Juan Lazo who was caught possessing
jueteng lists and other objects relating to
FACTS: said game, and tolerated and permitted
About 8 o'clock in the evening of said Juan Lazo to continue acting as
August 1, 1910, Bernabe Mangunay, jueteng collector.
approached the house of Mateo del
Rosario to ask for something to eat. As ISSUE:
he was then carrying a papaya firebrand WON NICOLAS MINA IS
and got too close to the house, the eaves GUILTY?
thereof caught fire and its nipa roof
immediately started to burn, a large part RULING: YES.
of it being consumed. On the following The evidence consists of sworn
day the owner of the house, Mateo del statements of Luciano de Guzman and
Rosario, reported the occurrence to Canuto de Leon who declared that they
Vicente Mendoza, the lieutenant of the saw the arrest of Juan Lazo and heard
barrio, and accused Bernabe Mangunay MINA say to him that he would be
of starting the fire. Mendoza thereupon released on condition that he would
ordered the junior lieutenant, Candido accompany MINA to the place where
Yabut, to summon the accused. But Jueteng was being played and would
when the latter appeared, said Mendoza help in the arrest of the bankers and
took no action whatever, nor did he even collectors thereof. This evidence, if
report the facts to the proper higher admitted, far from justifying the conduct
authority, but, on the contrary, of the defendant, would have further
permitted the incendiary to return demonstrated his guilt, for the reason
home. that there is no law empowering him to
release a violator even if the latter agrees
ISSUE:
to aid him in the capture of other
WON Mendoza is guilty of neglect of culprits.
duties of his office for maliciously failing
to move the prosecution and
punishment of the delinquent. BEATRIZ RAMOS VDA. DE
RULING: NO. BAGATUA, ET AL vs PEDRO A.
REVILLA etc.
In the case at bar there are FACTS:
indications that the fire was accidental
 On June 29, 1954, the Bagatuas, fights, neither day being authorized by
together with their spouses and their law for such purposes.
mother Beatriz Ramos, executed a
public instrument which was duly ISSUE: WON MALABANAN is guilty of
registered, wherein they sold and dereliction of the duties of his office.
conveyed ownership unto Burgos
Pangilinan of a part of the lot with an RULING: NO.
area of 3,358 square meters in The Supreme Court found
consideration of the sum of P6,000. On MALABANAN not guilty of a violation of
June 21, 1956, however, Rodrigo article 208 but guilty of a violation of
Bagatua, acting for himself and on article 199, paragraph 1, of the Revised
behalf of his sisters, accused Burgos L. Penal Code.
Pangilinan of estafa before the City -----------------------------------------------
Attorney of Quezon City for having  Article 209. Betrayal of
allegedly induced them to sign papers trust by an attorney or
supposedly necessary for the subdivision solicitor
of their lot, but one of which turned out
to be a deed of sale. PEOPLE vs. SANDIGANBAYAN
The Assistant City Attorney of Quezon FACTS:
City, conducted a preliminary Honrada was the Clerk of Court and
investigation which lasted for several Acting Stenographer of the First
days. The Assistant City Attorney, in a Municipal Circuit Trial Court, San
memorandum addressed to the City Francisco-Bunawan-Rosario in Agusan
Attorney recommended the dismissal of del Sur. Paredes was successively the
the complaint for lack of merit. Provincial Attorney of Agusan del Sur,
Accordingly, the complaint was then Governor of the same province, and
dismissed. is at present a Congressman. Sansaet
was a practicing attorney who served as
ISSUE: WON REVILLA AND LOMBOS counsel for Paredes in several instances
in dismissing the complaint committed a pertinent to the criminal charges
grave abuse of discretion. involved in the present recourse.
RULING: NO.
A fiscal's failure to give credence ISSUE:
or weight to the testimony of witnesses WON the projected testimony of
or otherwise appreciate the evidence Sansaet, as proposed state witness, is
presented in a preliminary investigation, barred by the attorney-client privilege.
unless patently capricious or arbitrary,
cannot be taken as an abuse of RULING: NO.
discretion, for he must have formed his The application of the attorney-
impression after observing and client privilege, however, the period to
evaluating the demeanor and conduct of be considered is the date when the
a witness testifying before him. privileged communication was made
by the client to the attorney in relation
PEOPLE vs. MALABANAN to either a crime committed in the past
FACTS: or with respect to a crime intended to
In July, 1933, MALABANAN was be committed in the future. In other
the municipal president of the of San words, if the client seeks his lawyer's
Juan, Province of Batangas, and was advice with respect to a crime that the
engaged in raising funds for the former has theretofore committed, he is
construction of a ward in the provincial given the protection of a virtual
hospital for tubercular patients. confessional seal which the attorney-
Notwithstanding all his efforts to secure client privilege declares cannot be
contributions, he was unable to broken by the attorney without the
approximate the quota which had been client's consent. The same privileged
set for his town by the provincial confidentiality, however, does not attach
authorities, and he therefore on July 22, with regard to a crime which a client
and July 29, organized and held cock- intends to commit thereafter or in the
future and for purposes of which he determine the information to be filed
seeks the lawyer's advice. and cannot be controlled by the
offended party.
------------------------------------------------
 Article 210. Direct
Bribery UNITED STATES VS. GIMENEA
FACTS:
PEOPLE vs. SOPE Francisco Gimenea, sergeant, of
FACTS: the Constabulary had an arrangement
Juliana Chan, testified that at with an old man to allow him to escape
about six o'clock in the evening of April from the hospital. One evening when
8, 1945, when she was on her way home Perez and his brother-in-law arrived at
after selling a ring in a Bambang market, the hospital with their father's supper,
a calesa suddenly stopped in front of the old man told them that the matter
her, from which the appellants Sope had been arranged and that they were to
pointed his revolver to her, while Cruz give Gimenea P10.
poked her back with a hard object. The
other accused, Tomas Dimalanta, ISSUE: WON GIMENEA IS GUILTY
remained in the calesa. Cruz ordered her OF THE CRIME OF DIRECT BRIBERY.
to board the rig, which she did, followed
by him. Sope did not join them but RULING: YES.
stayed behind. To constitute the crime of bribery
as provided in this article, four things
Cruz and Dimalanta pretended to be are necessary: (1) That the defendant be
peace officers who had apprehended her a public officer according to the meaning
because they had found her violating the of this term in article 401; (2) that he
law, pointing to her a bag in the rig has received either personally or
which they themselves had brought through another gifts or presents or
along, by which they meant that she was accepted offers or promises; (3) that
unlawfully dealing in U.S. Army goods. such reception of gifts or presents or
The calesa was ordered to stop at acceptance of offers or promises has
Herbosa Street in front of the Victory been for the purpose of executing a
Cafe where the two accused even asked crime; and (4) that the act constituting
the complainant to take coffee with the crime relates to the exercise of the
them. But all the time they kept office which the public officer
intimidating and threatening her if she discharges.
did not give them money. As a result of All these concur in the present
their concerted action, she finally gave case.
them P200.
FULGERAS: RICHARD to
SORIANO case
ISSUE: WON Sope and Cruz is guilty
of the crime of Direct Bribery.
U.S. VS RICHARD
RULING: NO.
The Court held that, what is clear 6 PHIL 545
and uncontradicted by the facts of this Issue: Whether the accused is guilty of
case is that it was the prosecuting direct bribery.
attorney's office that took charge of the
investigation and filing of the charges Facts: S. A. Reich and one Rosenburg,
for robbery, and nothing like having so his partner, imported from China in the
framed her accusation as to make the summer of 1903, 41 mules, which they
crime committed by the accused appear accepted at the time they bought them to
to the robbery instead of bribery could sell to the Insular Government of the
be attributed to the offended party. It is Philippines. Reich drew a check for 500
very logical that the prosecuting pesos to the order of I. Becck and
attorney, being the one charged with the delivered it to the latter. Beck notified
prosecution of offenses, should be Mehan, the superintendent of city
transportation, that he had this check Facts: Damaso Jader, as cabeza de
for him, but Mehan refused to receive it. barangay and teniente of the barrio of
Prior to the arrival of the animals in the town of Candelaria, accepted cocks,
Manila, Beck had a talk with Mehan in hens, bamboo, and other articles under
which he asked Mehan to receive a promise to relieve the persons from
thousand pesos and distribute it among whom he had obtained them of the
the employees who would have to do obligation to perform certain duties
with the purchase of the animals. Mehan which they as citizens were required to
rejected this proposition and told Beck perform.
that he, Beck, had better drop the
matter. Ruling: No. A municipal official who
demands and exacts gifts from persons
Ruling: No. A defendant cannot be under promise to relieve them from
convicted of bribery under the certain obligations to the municipality is
provisions of article 381 of the Penal guilty of estafa and not of bribery.
Code unless there is evidence to show a
promise, express or implied, on his part ----------------------------------------------
to do an unlawful act in consideration of  Article 211. Indirect
money previously paid to him or of Bribery
offers or promises previously made to
him. FORMILLEZA VS
SANDIGANBAYAN, 159 SCRA 1
PEOPLE VS ABESAMIS, 93 PHIL
712 Issue: Whether the accused is guilty of
direct bribery.
Issue: Whether the accused is guilty of
direct bribery. Facts: Petitioner Leonor Formilleza has
been with the government service for
Facts: The said accused being then the around 20 years. She was the personnel
Justice of the Peace of Echague and supervisor of the regional office of the
Angadanan, Isabela, and as such is a National Irrigation Administration
public officer, demand and receive from (NIA). Her duties include the processing
Marciana Sauri the amount of P1,100, of the appointment papers of employees.
with the agreement that he would
dismiss the case for Robbery in Band
with Rape against Emiliano Castillo, son On the other hand, a certain Mrs.
of said Marciana Sauri. Estrella Mutia was an employee of the
Ruling: No. The crime charged does NIA from February, 1978 up to March,
not come under the first paragraph. To 1985. Her appointment was coterminous
fall within that paragraph the act which with a project of the NIA. Mrs. Mutia
the public officer has agreed to perform testified that she took steps to obtain
must be criminal. To dismiss a criminal either a permanent or at the least a
complaint, as the accused is alleged to renewed appointment; that when she
have agreed to do in the present case, approached the regional director about
does not necessarily constitute a the matter she was advised to see the
criminal act, for the dismissal may be petitioner who was to determine the
proper, there being no allegation to the employees to be appointed or promoted;
contrary. and that the petitioner refused to attend
to her appointment papers unless the
U.S. VS NAVARRO, 3 PHIL 633 latter were given some money.
FACTS: Ruling: No. The respondent court ruled
ISSUE: that the crime committed by the
petitioner was not Direct Bribery as
HELD: defined in Article 210 of the Revised
Penal Code cited in the Information but
U.S. VS JADER, 1 PHIL 297
Indirect Bribery as defined under Article
Issue: Whether the accused is guilty of 211 of the same code.
estafa
POZAR VS CA, 132 SCRA 729
Issue: Whether the accused is guilt of The offense of direct bribery is not the
Article 211. offense charged and is not included in
the offense charged which is violation of
Facts: The accused, being an applicant R.A.3019 sec.3 (b). Petitioner is guilty of
for probation after he was convicted of direct bribery under Art.210 of the RPC.
an offense gave to the complainant, the
City Probation Officer 100php which GUERERO: MEJORDA to LISING
would have held the officer liable for case
bribery.
Ruling: No. the procedure for
processing the petitioner’s application Mejardo Vs Sandiganbayan
for probation in the Poblacion Office at
Angeles City was not precise, explicit Facts:
and clear cut and since the accused Arturo A. Mejorada was a public officer who
petitioner is a foreigner and quite
is a right-of-way agent in the Office of the
unfamiliar with the probation rules and
Highway District Engineer. Petitioners
procedures.
asked for the damages. Mejorada required
CABRERA VS PAJARES, 142 SCRA the claimants to sign blank copies which
127 turns out to be fraudulent. The amount paid
is higher than which he indicates on his
Issue: Whether the accused is guilty of
indirect bribery. official inventory.

Facts: Complainant was the defendant Issue: Whether or not the crime is
in a Civil Case which respondent Judge corruption of public officials.
was trying. According to the
complainant, he was advised by his Held: No. There were two elements
counsel to accommodate any request for necessary in corruption of public officials.
money from the respondent so that he First, that the offender offers something to
would not be unduly hard on the the public officer in exchange of something
complainant. and that the public officer be guilty of direct
or indirect bribery. Neither of the two
Ruling. Yes. Evidences show that the elements were satisfied in this instant case.
respondent judge is guilty of indirect It was Mejardo's will to commit fraud and
bribery.
no one induced nor offered him something
----------------------------------------------- to commit such.

 Article 212. Corruption

of public officials
Luciano vs Estrella
SORIANO VS SANDIGANBAYAN,
131 SCRA 184 Facts:
Issue: Whether or Not the investigation Jose Gutierrez and Franco C. Gutierrez,
conducted by the petitioner can be being the owner, manager and/or
regarded as contract or transaction representatives of the JEP Enterprises,
within the purview of .RA.3019 being private persons, did knowingly induce
Facts: Tan was accused of qualified or cause public officials and officers
theft. The petitioner, who was an Asst. including city Mayor Estrella, to enter into a
Fiscal, was assigned to investigate. In contract or transaction with the JEP
the course of the investigation, Enterprises, for the delivery and installation
petitioner demanded Php.4000 from by the JEP Enterprises to the Municipal
Tan as price for dismissing the case. Government of Makati, Rizal of fifty-nine
Ruling: No. The petitioner stated that (59) units of traffic deflectors through a
the facts make out a case of direct sham bidding. In exchange, public officials
bribery under Art.210 of the RPC and will get an amount equivalent to 10% of the
not a violation of R.A. 3019 sec.3 (b). total payment.
Issue: Whether or not there is corruption sham bidding. In exchange, public officials
of public officials. will get an amount equivalent to 10% of the
total payment.
Held: Yes. The SC held that they knowingly
induced public officials to enter into a Issue: Whether or not there is a corruption
contract favorable to them. The elements of public officials.
necessary are all satisfied which are:
offender makes promises and that public Held: Yes. The SC held that they knowingly
officers be liable for direct or indirect induced public officials to enter into a
bribery. contract favorable to them. The elements
necessary are all satisfied which are:
offender makes promises and that public
officers be liable for direct or indirect
Trieste, Sr. vs Sandiganbayan bribery
Facts: People Vs Albano
Municipal Mayor and member of the Facts:
Committee on Award of the Municipality of
Numancia, Aklan, has administrative City Mayor and City Vice Mayor of General
control of the funds of the municipality and Santos City, taking advantage of their
whose approval is required in the positions as City Mayor and City Vice
disbursements of municipal funds, have Mayor, use the names of 327 employees of
entered into a contract the purchase of the city government of General Santos City,
construction materials from Trigen Agro- fraudulently procure and purchase 1,635
Indusrial Development Corporation in sacks of rice in bulk by using their own
exchange of a promise that they will be money and after obtaining said 1,635 sacks
given additional materials for their personal of RCA rice at a price very much lower than
usage despite the need of a bidding. the prevailing price in the open market for
the same quality of rice, dispose the same
Issue: Whether or not there is corruption illegally to persons other than the said 327
of public officials. employees of the city government. Bernabe
persuades Mayor Antonio C. Acharon to
Held:
make a fraudulent official procurement of
Yes. It is clear that the private company has rice from the RCA and accused City Mayor
offered promises to the Municipal Mayor Antonio C. Acharon allowed himself to be so
and the member of the committee to give persuaded in exchange of a great amount
additional materials for their personal usage upon the full disposal of rice.
in exchange of the assurance that they will
Issue: Whether or not there is corruption
be purchasing to the said company.
of public official.

Held: Yes. There is corruption of public

Luciano Vs Provincial Governor official. Bernabe clearly induced and
pesuaded City Mayor Acharon to
Facts: fraudulently procure and purchase sacks of
rice in bulk in exchange of a great amount.
Jose Gutierrez and Franco C. Gutierrez,
The elements of giving a promise or in
being the owner, manager and/or
exchange of something is satisfied as well as
representatives of the JEP Enterprises,
the element that the public officer is guilty
being private persons, did knowingly induce
of direct or indirect bribery.
or cause public officials and officers to enter
into a contract or transaction with the JEP
Enterprises, for the delivery and installation
by the JEP Enterprises to the Municipal Deloso Vs Sandiganbayan
Government of Makati, Rizal of fifty-nine
Facts:
(59) units of traffic deflectors through a
DELOSO, a public officer being then the No. While respondent spouses had
Municipal Mayor of the Municipality of acquired properties and constructed a
Botolan, Zambales, taking advantage of his house the costs of which were
public and official position, give disproportionate to their combined
unwarranted benefits to Daniel Ferrer thru incomes from their employment in the
manifest partiality and evident bad faith in government, it had been proved that
the discharge of his official functions by such were financed through a donation
issuing to him a tractor purchased by the and loans
Municipality of Botolan thru a loan financed
by the Land Bank of the Philippines for
lease to local farmers at reasonable cost, Almeda, Sr. vs Perez, etc and
without any agreement as to the payment of Republic, 5 SCRA 970
rentals. Facts:
Issue: Whether or not there is corruption Almeda acquired cash and properties
of public officials. from unknown source amounting to
P121,407.98 during his incumbency as
Held: Assistant Director of NBI. This violated
RA 1379, otherwise known as Anti-Graft
No. In order to corrupt a public official two Law. OSG amended the petition and
elements must be satisfied. First, that the added other counts and items of alleged
offender promises something to a public unlawful acquisitions and
officer in exchange of the commission of the disbursements thus increasing the cash
felony and second, that the public officer is from unexplained sources to
guilty of direct or indirect bribery. In this P208,682.45 from Almeda’s salary and
instant case neither of the two elements other lawful income of only 59,860.97.
were satisfied. No one offered something to Almeda contends that the new charges
Mayor Deloso nor he is guilty of bribery. have already been investigated and
dismissed; also the respondents were
LEDESMA: REPUBLIC to not given a new preliminary
DACUYCUY case investigation with respect to additional
charges. Under RA 1379, the offense
being criminal in nature, the petition
Republic vs. IAC, 172 SCRA 296 may not be amended as substance
without respondent’s consent.
Facts:
Issue: Is the contention meritorious?
Petition charged Simplicio Berdon, an
Assistant Staff Civil Engineer assigned Ruling:
to Regional Office No. VII of the Bureau The courts find no merit that the new
of Public Highways in Cebu City, with counts were already dismissed since
having acquired unexplained wealth in there is no resolution of said
violation of Republic Act No. 1379. It investigating fiscals. Further, the courts
alleged that during the period from 1963 find no merit in respondent’s contention
to 1969 he and his wife Gaudiosa that the amended petition should not be
Mangubat Berdon purchased parcels of admitted since this is a civil case and the
land and constructed a house, the rules respecting amendments in civil
purchase prices and costs of which were cases and not of information in criminal
not commensurate to their incomes, cases should govern the admission of
savings or declared assets. amendments in this case.
Issue: Cabal vs Kapunan, Jr., 6 SCRA
Whether or not the subject properties 1059
were unlawfully acquired. Facts:
Ruling: Col. Jose C. Maristela of the Philippine
Army filed with the Secretary of Nation
Defense a letter-complaint charging
petitioner Manuel Cabal, then Chief of Ruling:
Staff of the Armed Forces of the
Philippines, with "graft, corrupt The judgment of the Court a quo, in so
practices, unexplained wealth, conduct far as it pronounces the acquisitions of
unbecoming of an officer and gentleman property by the appellants illegal in
dictatorial tendencies, giving false accordance with Republic Act No. 1379
statements that the investigation being and imposes a lien thereon in favor of
conducted by the Committee above the Government in the sum of
referred to is administrative, not P80,000.00 is REVERSED AND SET
criminal, in nature. The investigative ASIDE, but is AFFIRMED in all other
Committee considered petitioner herein respects.
to take the witness stand and be sworn  Article 213. Frauds
to as witness for Maristela, in support of against the public
his aforementioned charge of treasury and similar
unexplained wealth. offenses.
Issue: Ganaden vs Bolasco, 64 SCRA 50
Whether or not the right against self- Facts:
incrimination was violated.
Counsel for plaintiff in Civil case 711-0
Ruling: gave respondent 12.60 pesos for sheriff's
The purpose of the charge against fee for service of the complaint and
petitioner is to apply the provisions of summons thereof upon the defendants.
Republic Act No. 1379, as amended, Respondent received said amount before
which authorizes the forfeiture to the the summons to be served were
State of property of a public officer or delivered to him for service, in spite of
employee which is manifestly out of the standing instructions from the clerk
proportion to his salary as such public of court and provincial sheriff not to
officer or employee and his other lawful accept any payment if no official receipts
income and the income from are available. Respondent did not issue
legitimately acquired property. Such the official receipt even after he had
forfeiture has been held, however, to received thereafter the booklet of official
partake of the nature of a penalty. receipt.
Respondent also received, again without
issuing the corresponding official
receipt, 50.00 pesos from plaintiff for
Katigbak vs Solicitor General, 180
service of a writ of execution issued in
SCRA 540
connection with the civil case.
Facts:
Petition filed against Alejandro Issue:
Katigbak, his wife, Mercedes, and his
Whether or not respondent committed
son, Benedicto, seeking the forfeiture in
illegal exaction penalized by paragraph
favor of the State of the properties of
2(b) of article 213 of the Revised Penal
Alejandro Katigbak allegedly gotten by
Code.
him illegally, in accordance with R.A.
No. 1379. Said properties were allegedly
acquired while Katigbak was holding Ruling:
various positions in the government, the
last being that of an examiner of the YES. The respondent has failed to issue
Bureau of Customs; and title to some of receipts for money collected by him
the properties were supposedly recorded officially. His act and/or omission are
in the names of his wife and/or son. patent violation of law. They disturb the
ethics of public life and vitiate the
Issue: integrity of the court personnel as well
as the court itself. All elements
Whether or not the forfeiture of the
necessary in the commission of the
properties in favor of the state shall be
crime were satisfied.
granted.
 notwithstanding the repeated requests
made by the 23 taxpayers who were still
without cedulas, he failed to either
U.S. vs Lopez, et al., 10 Phil 480 obtain them cedulas or return the
Facts: money.

Issue: Issue: Whether or not the accused is

Ruling: guilty of estafa.

People vs Policher, 60 Phil 771 Ruling:

Yes the accused is guilty of estafa. All the
Facts:
elements are of Article 214 are present.
The appointed treasurer of a municipal He is a public officer. He takes
district and as such was in charge and advantage of his official position. He
responsible, among other official duties, commits any of the frauds or deceits
for the issuance of cedula certificates in enumerated in Arts. 315 to 318.
said municipal district of Kolambugan, Dacuycuy is guilty of Estafa punishable
voluntarily, unlawfully and feloniously, under Article 315 of the Revised Penal
and with grave abuse of his official Code.
position and with intent to gain and of
prejudicing and defrauding certain
------------------------------------------------
people, falsified cedula certificates, by
erasing the names written thereon of MILITAR: TORRIDA to
persons to whom said cedula certificates PARUNGAO case
had originally been issued so as to
reissue them, in order to appropriate for  Article 214. Other
himself the proceeds of this reissuance Frauds.
of the cedula certificates in question.
US VS. TORRIDA, 23 PHIL 193

Issue: Facts:

Whether or not the accused has Apellant, as councilman, directed his

committed fraud against the public subordinates that the death of all large
treasury and similar offenses? animals must be reported by the owners
Ruling: to him. Appellant informed the owners
that they must pay a fine of P5 for each
The crime committed by the appellant is
not the complex crime of estafa through animal as these fines are to be remitted
falsification but nine falsifications of to the municipality. There being no
official or public documents, as are the provision by the municipality as to the
cedulas, and malversation. collection of these fines, the act
U.S. vs Dacuycuy, 9 Phil 88 constitutes estafa.

Facts: Issue: WON appellant suffers a penalty

Justo Dacuycuy, a municipal councillor, of temporary special disqualification as
was enjoying a vacation at the barrio of imposed in Article 214.
Oangagan when the 39 individuals,
upon being informed through the Ruling:
accused that cedulas had been received
at the municipality, delivered to him the Yes. It was on account of his being
sum of P39, asking him to obtain an councilman that the parties believed
equal number of cedulas. The accused, that he had the right to collect fines and
however, after receiving the money, it was for this reason that they made
limited himself to taking out 16 cedulas
payments. The accused took advantage
for as many taxpayers, and appropriated
the balance of P23, and, of his public position to deceive and
defraud the injured parties out of the CABELLO VS. SANDIGANBAYAN,
money which they paid him. Hence, the 197 SCRA 94
disqualification mentioned in Article 214
is part of the penalty imposed. Facts:

----------------------------------------------- Accused was found guilty of the crime of

malversation of public funds penalized
 Article 216. Possession of under Article 217. He contends that he
prohibited interest by a public cannot be convicted of intentional
officer malversation since there is no evidence
showing that he appropriated the funds
US VS. UDARBE, 28 PHIL 382 for his personal use. He theorizes that an
accused charged with intentional
malversation cannot be convicted
Facts: through negligence.

Defendant was appointed as municipal Issue: WON accused is correct with his
president and while under his contentions.
presidency, he approved and passed the
leasing of fishponds. When the auction Ruling:
or bidding for the different sections of No. the court found the petitioner’s
fishponds, the accused participated and contention devoid of merit. According to
presided over the auction and took part Art. 217, malversation may thus be
in the bidding, where he was adjudicated committed either through a positive act
as the highest bidder. The said of misappropriation of public funds or
defendant, while still being municipal property or passively through negligence
president, held the said fishpond even by allowing another to commit such
though the case was on trial. misappropriation. An accountable
Issue: WON accused is liable for officer may be convicted of malversation
possession of prohibited interest. even if there is no direct evidence of
misappropriation and the only evidence
Ruling: is that there is a shortage in the officer’s
accounts which he has not been able to
Yes. A municipal mayor who took direct explain satisfactorily.
part in the lease of municipal fishponds
to himself may be held liable under Art. MADARANG VS.
216 (1), it being his official duty to SANDIGANBAYAN, 355 SCRA 525
intervene in behalf of the municipality in
the contract of lease of the fishponds. Facts:
Actual fraud is not necessary, the act is Madarang, a barangay captain, was
punished because of the possibility that charged before the Sandiganbayan with
the officer may place his own interest the crime of malversation. Brgy. Captain
above that of the government he Madarang and Mrs. Dora Lim executed
represents. a lease agreement over a portion of
------------------------------------------------ property. Mrs. Lim paid a monthly
rental of P300 for a period of over 20
 Article 217. Malversation years. Madarang as public officer, is
of public funds or accountable for the public funds of
property P20,700 that is received by him as
payment for the lease rentals. He
contends that he could not be held guilty
of malversation when all the elements No. The evidences presented against
are not attendant. petitioner were insufficient to support
conviction. Prosecution opted not to
Issue: WON Sandiganbayan erred in present a single witness and relied on
convicting him of the crime of the prima facie evidence of conversion
malversation. or presumption of malversation. Mere
Ruling: absence of funds is not sufficient proof
of conversion. Hence, Agullo was
Yes, the court finds the petition with acquitted.
merit. The first 3 elements of
malversation are present, lacking any DUMAGAT VS.
evidence of shortage, taking SANDIGANBAYAN, 160 SCRA 483
appropriation or conversion by Facts:
petitioner or loss of public funds, there
is no malversation. The peteitioner was Dumagat was assigned in different
able to present enough evidence that he stations of NFA. She was under a spot
did not use the funds for personal use. audit examination in one of her assigned
No malice or fraud can be imputed to stations, wherein they have found she
him. Hence, the court acquitted incurred shortage. Despite complying
Madarang for insufficiency of proof. with the shortage, a complaint was filed
against her. The Sandiganbayan found
AGULLO VS. SANDIGANBAYAN, her guilty for the offense of malversation
361 SCRA 556 of public funds under Article 217 (4).
Facts: Issue: WON she is guilty of
Petitioner Elvira Agullo, Disbursing malversation of public funds.
Officer of MPWH in Leyte, was found Ruling:
guilty of the crime of malversation of
public funds under Art. 217 (4) by No. Sandiganbayan failed to consider
Sandiganbayan. In her defense, she the fact that the audit examination was
suffered a stroke which resulted of the done in one of her assigned stations, and
shortage of the amount that had been not in her official station. dumagat had
subject for audit. She encashed the other vaults in different stations, and
checks amounting to P26,076.87. After those were not made part of the audit
which, she decided to go home for she report. the ruling that the prima facie
felt dizziness, chest pain and nausea. presumption under Article 217 does not
The following morning, she insisted to apply in this case, hence the petitioner
go to work despite her condition since it was acquitted.
was payday. On her way to the office,
she collapsed and lost consciousness and DE GUZMAN VS.
later found herself in a hospital bed. The SANDIGANBAYAN, 119 SCRA 337
Sandiganbayan held her defense as Facts:
without bases since no evidence has
been presented linking the loss of the Arturo De Guzman, a Travelling
government funds with the alleged Collector under the Department of
sudden heart attack of the petitioner. Finance. Audit examiner found
discrepancy after conducting a
Issue: WON petitioner s liable for preliminary investigation against him.
malversation of public funds. Upon the demand letter issued against
Ruling: him, petitioner assured that he had no
more existing accountabilities since he Petitioner filed motion of
ceased to make collections due to his reconsideration which was denied,
pending promotion. For failure of the hence this petition for review.
petitioner to account and explain the
shortage, a case was filed and
subsequently convicted him of Issue: WON Sandiganbayan can
malversation of public funds. convict him, in the same criminal case,
Issue: WON petitioner is liable for for illegal use of public funds.
malversation of public funds.

Ruling: Ruling:
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the No. A comparison of the two articles
decision of the Sandiganbayan reveals that their elements are entirely
convicting petitioner of the crime of distinct and different from each other.
Malversation of Public Funds pursuant In malversation, the offender
to Art. 217. The court opines that, in misappropriates public funds for his
malversation, all that is necessary to own personal use or allows any other
prove is that the defendant received in person to take such public funds for the
his possession public funds, that he latter’s personal use. Technical
could not account for them and did not malversation is not included in nor does
have them in possession and that he it necessarily include the crime of
could not give a reasonable excuse for malversation of public funds charged in
the disappearance of the same. An the information. Since the acts
accountable public officer may be constituting the crime of technical
convicted of Malversation even if there malversation were not alleged in the
is no direct evidence of information, he cannot reluctantly be
misappropriation and the only evidence convicted of technical malversation.
is that there is a shortage in his
accounts, which he has not been able to MANLAPIG: VELASQUEZ to
explain satisfactorily. SENDAYDIEGO case

The United States vs Velasquez

PARUNGAO VS.
SANDIGANBAYAN, 197 SCRA 173
Issue: Whether or not the judgement
Facts:
requiring the return of the P597 be
Oscar Purangao, municipal treasurer, stricken from the decision.
was charged with malversation of public
funds for allegedly misappropriating the
Facts: The case is a motion for a
fund he received from the MPWH for modification of the decision of the court
the concreting of Barangay Jalung Road wherein accused and appellant after
in Porac, Pampanga. In his defense, having been convicted of the crime of
petitioner accounted that it was misappropriation of public funds, and
disbursed for materials and the labor was sentenced by this court to indemnify
payrolls of the different barangays in the the province in the sum of P597, which
is the money misappropriated by the
municipality. Sandiganbayan rendered
accused.
decision acquitting the petitioner of the
crime charged but convicting him of the
crime of illegal use of public funds.
Held: No. Precisely the same kind of Issue: Whether or not defendant was
case has already been decided by this found guilty of misappropriating the
court. In the case of United States vs public’s money?
Meneses, the accused misappropriated
P2,713.68 belonging to the Province of
Albay and was sentenced by the court to Facts: The accused, being the justice of
8 years imprisonment, payment of fine peace of the municipality of Camiling
and to indemnify the province in the province of Tarlac, presented to the
sum of P2,713.00. According to the SC, treasury for the purpose of settlement
this was a sound decision imposing such his accounts for fees, fines and costs
penalty and found no error in the collected by him for some months of the
proceedings to the rights of the accused. year 1908. After the treasurer examined
Therefore, the sentence imposed is the accounts, she discovered that the
hereby affirmed. accused was lacking the sum of P57.50
which thereupon the latter paid
immediately. After the treasurer
US vs Togonon reexamined the accounts few days
afterwards, it was discovered that the
accused was still lacking the sum of
Issue: Whether or not the alleged P166. The accused immediately paid
constitutes a violation of Act. No. 1740. over that.

Facts: The accused in this case in the Held: Yes. All public officials who have
months of October, November and in their hands public money owe a duty
December 1907, being at the time the to the Government, namely, the duty to
municipal president of the town of pay over, not a portion, but all of said
corella, Province of Cebu, received from money. He stood by and saw the
W. Jayne Fosbury, superintendent of receiving official make a clerical mistake
schools, the sum of P60 as rent for a in calculating the accounts. This willfully
house owned by the municipality. It was fails to live up to his know duty and
the duty of Pedro Togonon to take obligation to the public as he
charge of the amound received and to appropriated such money to his own
deposit the same as required by law, but use. The fact that he later repaid all this
he has willfully and unlawfully refused money, granted him minimum penalty.
nad failed to account for it. Therefore, accused’s judgement is
modified and sentenced to 2 months of
imprisonment and to pay the costs of
Held: Yes. It being charged in the this action.
complaint that the accused, by reason of
his office as municipal president,
received money that belonged to and United States vs. Lafuente
was owing the municipality, it is
properly alleged that he received and
kept it in his possession by reason of his Issue: Whether or not the defendant
office. The unlawful personal use made has committed the crime of
of the money so received comes within misappropriation of public funds and
the meaning of, and the penalty imposed Act. No. 1740.
for, the crime of malversation as defined
in section 1 of Act. No. 1740. Therefore,
trial should proceed in accordance with Facts: The municipal council of Loon,
the law. Bohol, enacted an ordinance providing
that fishing privileges should be sold at
public auction. Accordingly, an auction
Unites States vs Sagun for the sale of fishing privileges was
conducted with the assistance of the
municipal treasurer, secretary and
councilor. The municipal secretary, the to collect fees. Therefore, judgment is
accused, acted as secretary of the reversed.
committee. When the auction was over,
bidders were told to deposit the amount
with the secretary. The complainants did United States vs Solis
not receive the licenses for which the
money was paid, nor was their money
returned to them, mor was it placed in Issue: Whether or not the accused is
the municipal treasury. guilty of malversation.

Held: Yes. At the auction, the accused- Facts: Juan Solis was a duly appointed
defendant was acting in his official employee in the office of the municipal
capacity as municipal secretary and as a treasurer in Zamboanga, wherein his
member of the committee. The money duties were to brand cattle and to
was deposited with him under the register such brands in the proper
authority of law. The bidders should registry. While acting as employee, he
have received their licenses but instead received payments from different
the defendant embezzled the money for persons but retained and appropriated
his personal use. Clearly, these facts by him for his own use.
make up the crime of misappropriation
of public funds. He is to indemnify the
municipality with P53.22, or to suffer
Held: Yes. First, he was a public official,
subsidiary imprisonment and to pay the
and second, had received public funds
costs of both instances. The right to
by reason of his duties as such public
indemnification exists in
official. The evidence clearly shows that
misappropriation of public funds cases.
the accused here while in employment of
as municipal treasurer did receive P215
which belonged to the municipal
United States vs Radaza treasurer. The lower court found him
guilty.

Issue: Whether or not appellant is

guilty of the crime of Act. No. 1740. United States vs Webster

Facts: The appellant, Leoncio Radaza Issue: Whether or not the accused is
was tried, convicted and sentenced to 1 guilty of the crime of malversation.
year imprisonment and to pay a fine of
P5 for the crime of malversation of
public funds. It was said that in the
Facts: The accused-defendant in this
barrio of La Paz, Leyte, Francisco Tirado
case is in charge of Government Forage
paid to the appellant the sum of P5 for
in Manila who was directly responsible
the privilege of slaughtering a carabao.
to the US Government. Upon requisition
The appellant represented himself as in
forwarded by the division quartermaster
charge of the collection of these fees but
he issued his orders to the forage
failed to issue a receipt and converted
master. The forage master has no
the amount to his own use.
authority to receive money from the
quartermaster’s office. The forage
master delivered the orders without
Held: No. The real crime committed by orders from quartermaster and with
the appellant is that of estafa and not which the Government received no pay.
malversation of public funds. The
appellant was not an officer or employee Held: No. The person is guilty of theft.
at that time, neither took charge of the An official having only a qualified charge
P5 by reason of his office as councilor. It of property without the right to part with
was not in his duty to have the authority physical possession of it unless upon
written orders from his immediate (NARIC) and charged with penalty
superior, shall be accountable for it to under Article 217 par. 4.
the Government, and improperly
disposing of it without orders, is guilty In his appeal, he contended that,
of theft. fact disclosed in the information that
P12,656.83 of the funds malversed
belonged to the NARIC, which is a
People vs Sendaydiego private organization. Thus, penalty
under par. 3 of Article 217 must be
followed.
Issue: Whether or not there is a
complex crime of falsification and ISSUE: WON his contention is correct.
malversation.
HELD: NO. The contention is without
merit. Even supposing that funds
Facts: Sendaydiego is a provincial belonging to the NARIC are not public
treasurer. Through 6 falsified vouchers
presented by Samson, a hardware funds, they become impressed with that
employee, in the former’s office, 55k was character when they are entrusted to a
taken from the provincial budget. public officer for his official custody.
During the pendency of the case,
Sendaydiego died. It was proven that People vs Angco, 103 Phil 33
Samson signed the voucher giving rise to
presumption that he also authored FACTS:Accused, being then Traveling
them. Sales Agent of the Philippine Charity
Sweepstakes Office in Tuguegarao,
Cagayan, embezzle the amount of
Held: No. There was no complex crime P3,960.95 to his own personal use and
of falsification and malversation. benefit, to the damage and prejudice of
Falsification is not indispensable with the aforesaid Philippine Charity
malversation. Each voucher is a separate
Sweepstakes Office.
act of falsification and each
corresponding amount of money taken He insists that as the
is a separate act of malversation. Thus,
malversation was committed while he
he was sentenced guilty of 12 criminal
cases. Despite being a private individual, was a travelling sales agent in Cagayan,
Samson is still liable as a principal to as charged in the information, and that
malversation. as it is not charged that the fund or part
thereof was malversed in Manila, the
Court of First Instance of Manila has no
MONDEJAR: AQUINO to jurisdiction over the case.
BASCARPA case
ISSUE: WON his contention is correct.

HELD: NO. Since he is a Travelling

People vs Aquino, 94 Phil 805 Sales Agent of the Philippine Charity
FACTS: Accused Leon Aquino was Sweepstakes Office, he has the
charged with malversation of public obligation of turning over the proceeds
funds for having misappropriated public of the sale of said tickets to the
funds amounting to P20,944.27 Treasurer of the Philippine Charity
entrusted to his care in his capacity as Sweepstakes Office in Manila. The crime
municipal treasurer and postmaster of committed is malversation defined and
Mabini, Pangasinan, and ex-officio in- punished in article 217, No. 2, of the
charge of the properties and funds of the Revised Penal Code.
National Rice and Corn Corporation
People vs Mariño, 55 Phil 537 authorities and delivered to him for
safe-keeping. However, this same opium
FACTS: pipe was found in the possession of
ISSUE: Primo Valconcha, who was a trusted
employee and clerk in the office of the
HELD: defendant. The defendant was
thereupon charged with a violation of
U.S. vs Calimag, 12 Phil 687
Act No. 1740 and found guilty.
FACTS: Accused was municipal
ISSUE: WON accused is guilty of a
treasurer of the town of Solana, Cagayan
violation under Act No. 1740.
and also deputy provincial treasurer,
receiving as salary for the former HELD: NO. Act No. 1740 is designed to
position P25 per month and for the protect the Government from loss of its
latter P10 per month. Thereafter, the funds and property through the acts of
district auditor examined the books and its agents which are prompted either by
cash of the accused, and informed him corrupt motives or neglect or disregard
that there was a difference between the of duty. Conviction must rest upon the
amount for which accused was personal use, abstraction, or
responsible and the amount counted by misappropriation by another person
said district auditor of P49.04. Accused through the defendant’s abandonment
said that it was for the reason that he of the property or because of his fault or
had to advance his salary of P10 a month negligence.
from July to November, P50. The
auditor then told him to get the money In the case at bar, accused put it
and within ten minutes returned with in his own office and this office was kept
P50. locked, only himself and his trusted
employee Medina having keys. Medina
ISSUE: WON a fine necessary when was given a key to the office for an
money misappropriated is returned. important purpose but accused does not
contribute to the misconduct. Thus, the
HELD: YES. The defendant was
Court held that they cannot reach the
convicted in the court below of a
conclusion that he was criminally
violation of Act No. 1740 and sentenced
negligent in caring for the opium pipe.
to two months’ imprisonment. It was
proven at the trial that the defendant People vs Tolentino, 69 Phil 715
had no authority to pay himself his
salary of P10 a month as deputy to the FACTS:
provincial treasurer, and it must be ISSUE:
considered that he had made personal
use of the funds of the Government. HELD:

Supposed that the money Javier, et al., vs People, 105 Phil

misappropriated is returned, a fine shall 1294
still be incurred by the accused as
provided for in Art. 392 of RPC. FACTS: Petitioner was appointed to the
Governing Board of the Book Suppliers
U.S. vs Garces, 31 Phil 637 Association of the Philippines (BSAP).
Part of her functions is to attend book
FACTS: The defendant in this case was fairs to establish linkages with
municipal treasurer of the town of international book publishing bodies.
Misamis. An opium pipe and other Thereafter, she was issued by the Office
prescribed articles were found by the
of the President a travel authority to  Article 218. Failure of
attend the Madrid International Book accountable officer to
Fair in Spain and she was paid render accounts
₱139,199.0010 as her travelling
UNITED STATES vs.
expenses. Unfortunately, petitioner was
MAGDALENO SABERON
not able to attend the scheduled
international book fair. Petitioner failed 19 Phils. 391
to return the money as prescribed in the
policy. Thus, auditor filed a case of Facts:
malversation of public funds.
Magdaleno Saberon, being, as he was, a
She averred that she is not a public public officer, inasmuch as he was the
officer or employee and that she belongs municipal treasurer of Talisay and
to the Governing Board only as a private deputy to the provincial treasurer of
sector representative by advancing their Cebu in the said municipality, and
interest as participant in the having charge, by reason of his office as
government's book development policy. such municipal treasurer of the said
municipality of Talisay, of public funds,
ISSUE: WON her contention is correct. or property, and having been required
by the provincial treasurer of Cebu an
HELD: NO. Revised Penal Code defines
officer authorized by law, to render
a public officer as any person who, by
account of the funds in his possession as
direct provision of the law, popular
such municipal treasurer of Talisay and
election, popular election or
deputy of the said provincial treasurer,
appointment by competent authority,
did, maliciously and with criminal
shall take part in the performance of
intent, fail to render an account of the
public functions in the Government of
disposition of the sum of one thousand
the Philippine Islands, or shall perform
two hundred and seventy-five pesos and
in said Government or in any of its
sixteen centavos (P1,275.16) which was
branches public duties as an employee,
missing from the cash which should
agent, or subordinate official, of any
have been on hand under his charge.
rank or classes, shall be deemed to be a
public officer. Verily, she is a public Issue:
officer who takes part in the
performance of public functions in the Whether or not the accused is guilty
government whether as an employee, under Article 218 of the Revised Penal
agent, subordinate official, of any rank Code?
or classes.
Ruling: YES.
Bacsarpa, et al., vs CA, 99 Phil 112
The reason for this is that Act No. 1740,
FACTS: in so far as its provisions bearing on this
point are concerned, does not so much
ISSUE: contemplate the possibility of
malversation as the need of enforcing by
HELD:
a penal provision the performance of the
----------------------------------------------- duty incumbent upon every public
employee who handles government
SAMONTE: SABERON to LAGATA
funds, as well as every depositary or
case
administrator of another’s property, to
render an account of all he receives or
has in his charge by reason of his them without the order of the court
employment. because on November 12, 1951, the
complaint was sworn to before the
----------------------------------------------- municipal mayor. It was to be presented
 Article 220. Illegal use to the Justice of the Peace, but the latter
of public funds or was absent.
property Issue:
US. VS. EJERCITO Whether or not the accused is liable
6 PHILS. 80 under Article 223 of the Revised Penal
Code
Facts:
Ruling: NO.
Feliciano Ejercito was the duly qualified
acting Municipal Treasurer of the town The original complaint for Illegal
of Irosin, Sorsogon. Upon examination Possession of Firearms in Criminal Case
of his accounts by Provincial Board, He No. 2580 was filed on December 19,
was found to be short of 1,167.07 pesos. 1951 although the six accused were
Included was 253.45 pesos disbursed by arrested without warrant on November
the accused for payments which were 12, 1951 at about 9:30 in the evening.
subsequently disallowed by the The fact therefore is clear that on
Provincial Treasurer on the ground that November 13, 1951 when these six
they were illegal. persons were allegedly released by the
accused, there was no pending charge
Issue: against them.

Whether or not the accused is guilty

under Article 220 of the Revised Penal
Code? US VS. BANDINO

Ruling: YES. 29 PHILS. 459

The accused used the funds (253.45 Facts:

pesos) appropriated for the salaries of The provincial fiscal, on July 30, 1913,
teachers and other municipal employees filed an information wherein he charged
for other public purpose. There is the said Leon Bandino with the
detriment and hindrance to the public aforementioned crime, alleging that the
service. accused, a municipal policeman having
----------------------------------------------- under his care and guard one Juan
Lescano, who was serving a sentence in
 Article 223. Conniving the municipal jail , with great
with or consenting to carelessness and unjustified negligence,
evasion. grant him permission to go and buy
some cigarettes near the place where he
PEOPLE VS. LANCANAN was held in custody; that the prisoner,
95 PHILS. 375 taking advantage of the confusion in the
crowd there, fled from the custody of the
Facts: accused.

The accused, then the the Chief of Police Issue:

entrusted with the custody or charge and
vigilance of persons detained, released
Whether or not the accused is guilty The accused, Ignacio Lagata, a
under Article 223 of the Revised Penal provincial guard of Catbalogan, Samar,
Code? was in charge of 6 prisoners (Jesus,
Tipace, Eusebio, Mariano, Labong &
Ruling: NO. Abria) assigned to work in the capitol
In the existence and commission of the plaza of Samar.Lagata ordered the
crime of faithlessness in the custody of prisoners to go to the nursery to pick up
prisoners, it is essential that there gabi. Not long afterwards, they were
should have been, on the part of the called to assemble. Epifanio Labong was
custodian, connivance in the escape of missing so Lagata ordered the 5
the prisoner. If the public officer remaining prisoners to go look for him.
charged with guarding the fugitive did But the said prisoner was nowhere to be
not connive with him, then he did not found.
violate the law and is not guilty of the Issue:
crime of faithlessness in the discharge of
his duty to guard the prisoner. Whether or not the accused Lagata is
guilty under Article 224 of the Revised
---------------------------------------------- Penal Code?
 Article 224. Evasion Ruling: YES.
through negligence
Considering that the place was grassy
PEOPLE VS. GUIAB and tall talahib was growing therein, the
G.R. NO. 39631, MAY 21, 1934 height of which could conceal persons in
standing position, appellant must have
Facts: seen immediately that it was a choice
place for any prisoner that may want to
The accused was the policeman assigned
escape. Such negligence of appellant is
to guard the prisoners when he fell
punishable, under article 224 of the
asleep which resulted to the escape of
Revised Penal Code
the prisoners he was supposed to guard.

Issue:
SALMAN: REMOCAL to CASTRO
Whether or not the accused is guilty case
under Article 224 of the Revised Penal
Remocal vs People, 71 Phil 429
Code?
Facts:
Ruling: YES.
On May 5, 1939, between 12 and 3 p.m.,
The accused is guilty of the felony under one Fernando Tolentino, a prisoner in
article 224 of the Revised Penal Code the municipal jail of Guimba, Nueva
because his duty is to guard the Ecija, requested the petitioner Pedro
Remocal, the only police officer on duty,
prisoners but due to his negligence, by
to allow him to go to the toilet for
falling asleep, the prisoners escaped. personal necessity. The request was
granted and petitioner unlocked the jail
and let the prisoner out for the toilet.
PEOPLE VS. LAGATA Thereafter, when petitioner was about to
lock up back the prisoner, the latter
83 PHILS. 159 asked again permission to fetch water
from a nearby well. Petitioner told him
Facts: to wait for another policeman, and at
this juncture the telephone rang
repeatedly. Petitioner, instead of locking which had been entrusted to him by
up back the prisoner in jail, told the reason of his office, with the purpose of
latter to keep close to him while he not paying or reimbursing a certain sum
answered the telephone call. The latter, for which he was in duty bound to
taking advantage of the situation, ran reimburse the municipal treasury, said
away and escaped. sum consisting in per diems illegally
collected, with grave injustice to the
Issue: public interests as well as to the persons
Whether or not petitioner may properly interested in said municipal pay roll, in
be held guilty of negligence in the violation of article 360 of the Penal Code
custody of the escaped prisoner. Issue:
Ruling: Whether or not accused is guilty of the
Yes, the petitioner is found guilty of the crime of Removal, concealment or
crime of Evasion through negligence. destruction of documents
The court does not agree with the
contention of the petitioner that his
order to the prisoner to keep close to Ruling:
him while he was answering the
telephone call was sufficient precaution No. A document is a writing or
under the circumstances. The adequate instrument by which a fact may be
precaution which should have been proven and affirmed. The writing here in
taken by him was to have locked up the question proves nothing and confirms
prisoner before answering the telephone nothing; it is not a document but merely
call. There was nothing in that call a draft of one. Until approved or
necessitating preference to petitioner's certified to by one or more of the proper
official duty of locking up back the officials, it would not be entitled to filing
prisoner in jail postponing the answer to in any public office or archive and might
such call was safest way. be disapproved or even destroyed by the
official whose approval was necessary to
----------------------------------------------- give it effect, without giving rise to
criminal liability on his part. Counsel for
the defendant argues that there in the
present case was no destruction of the
alleged document in so far as it, with
 Article 226. Removal, slight repairs, might have been made
concealment or serviceable. Hence, the defendant will
destruction of documents. stand acquitted of the offense charged in
People vs Camacho, 44 Phil 484 the information.

Facts:
On or about the 30th day of June, 1920, People vs Agnis, 47 Phil 945
in the town of Bayambang, Province of Facts:
Pangasinan, the municipal treasurer of
said municipality sent by means of a While the accused was on May 9, 1921,
messenger to the herein accused, discharging the function of his office as
Eusebio C. Camacho, as municipal postmaster of the town of Dipolog,
president, for his examination, Zamboanga, a C.O.D. package arrived at
certification and signature, the the post-office from the "Little Leather
municipal pay roll of said municipality Library" of New York, addressed to R.
for the payment of the salaries due the Vic. Oliva. The accused notified the
municipal functionaries and employees sendee several times, but the latter could
for the month of June, 1920, and that not make the required payment in
said accused, upon obtaining possession accordance with the nature of the
of said public document, voluntarily, correspondence, and asked him to
illegally, and criminally put aside, advance the amount and to retain it
concealed and destroyed said document, until he could reimburse him. The
accused retained the package without Accused, Jose R. Gorospe, in or about
paying for it, and about July 28th of that the month of July, 1914, in the
year, he opened the package which municipality of Pozorubbio, of the
proved to contain printed pamphlets Province of Pangasinan, he then being
which he carried to his house to show the postmaster of the said municipality,
them to his sister. At the inspection of duly appointed and qualified to act as
that office on the 30th day of that month such, did willfully, maliciously, and
of July, the officer who made the criminally remove from a letter
inspection, Eugenio de Mesa, learned addressed by Manuel Venezuela to the
that there was such correspondence in commercial firm called La Fortuna, at
that post-office, but that the package No. 360 Calle Santo Cristo, Binondo,
was not in the safe where it should have Manila, and mailed, on the 13th of the
been kept. Asked as to the whereabouts said month of July, 1914, in the post of
of the package, the defendant brought it the aforementioned municipality of
to the office by order of the inspector, Pozorrubio, which was in charge of the
saying that he had carried it to his house accused, Jose R. Gorospe, postal money
to show to his sister the pamphlets order No. 1570, inclosed in said letter,
contained therein. The rules of the post- drawn for one hundred and fifty pesos
office as to correspondence of such a (P150) and issued by the said accused,
nature are to the effect that if a C.O.D. Jose R. Gorospe, in favor of the
matter is not claimed and paid for by the commercial firm La Fortuna on the date
sendee within sixty days from receipt, it aforesaid of July 13, 1914, after he had
must be returned to the sender. received from the said Manuel
Venezuela the aforementioned sum of
Issue: one hundred and fifty (P150) for its
Whether or not accused is guilty of the remittal to the said commercial firm La
crime of Removal, concealment or Fortuna; and that the accused
destruction of documents afterwards did appropriate to himself
the said sum of one hundred hundred
and fifty pesos (P150) and did, for this
Ruling: purpose, sign at the foot of the said
postal money order the Christian name
No. The accused was not found guilty of and the surname of Manuel Venezuela;
the crime of Removal, concealment or which acts have caused serious damage
destruction of documents. The and harm to the said Manuel Venezuela
pamphlets in question cannot be said to and to the public weal and constitute the
evidence a fact, agreement or said crime of faithfulness in the custody
disposition. They are rather of documents
merchandise as any other article usually
sent by C.O.D. mail. In the case of
United States vs. Orera (11 Phil., 596), Issue:
defined the terms "documents" or
"papers" employed in said article 360 of Whether or not accused is guilty of the
the Penal Code, as: "A deed, instrument crime of Removal, concealment or
or other duly authorized paper by which destruction of documents
something is proved, evidenced or set
forth," "every deed or instrument
executed by a private person, without Ruling:
the intervention of a public notary or of
other person legally authorized, by The foregoing facts clearly show that the
which document some disposition or defendant, as postmaster of the
agreement is proved, evidenced or set municipality of Pozorrubio, is guilty of
forth,". the crime charged in the complaint, to
wit, faithlessness in the custody of
U.S. vs Gorospe, 31 Phil 285 documents, and should be punished in
accordance with the provisions of article
Facts: 226 in relation to 360 of the Penal Code.
U.S. vs Peña, 12 Phil 362 Accused is the Clerk of Court of the
Court of First Instance of Basilan since
Facts: 1963 up to the present. As such, he is the
Issue: custodian of all the records of the Court
of First Instance of Basilan. Among the
Ruling: cases filed in said court was Criminal
Kataniag vs People, 74 Phil 45 Case No. 299, against Geronimo Borja
for malversation of public funds. Among
Facts: the property constituting the property
bond filed by said accused was that
The accused was caught carrying with
covered by Certificate of Title No. 877 of
him were intact, but as he had already
the Register of Deeds of Basilan. When
succeeded in removing or secreting away
accused discovered thru his subordinate
the documents in question from his
that Original Certificate of Title No. 877
office, for he was caught carrying them
was not existing in the Register of Deeds
after he had locked the door of his office
of Basilan, he ordered a subordinate to
and was already out walking through the
deliver owner’s copy of Certificate of
lobby towards the main door of the
Title No. 877 to Mr. Borja for the
building, the crime of removal of public
purpose of administrative reconstitution
documents summated, it being
thereof.
immaterial whether he has or has not
actually accomplished moved said Issue:
documents.
Whether or not accused is guilty of the
Issue: crime of Removal, concealment or
destruction of documents
Whether or not accused is guilty of the
crime of Removal, concealment or
destruction of documents
Ruling:
No. It is quite clear that in removing the
Ruling: certificate of title in question from the
court’s files and delivering the same to
Yes. The accused has committed
Borja for the purpose of effecting its
consummated crime of infidelity in the
administrative reconstitution, petitioner
custody of public documents. To warrant
was not prompted by criminal intent or
a finding of guilt of infidelity in the
illegal purpose. Rather, he was
custody of public documents, it is not
motivated with a sincere desire to
necessary that the act of removal must
protect the interest of the Government.
be coupled with proof of intention to
The prosecution did not even attempt to
conceal. The law punishes "any public
impute had faith on the part of
officer who shall remove, destroy or
petitioner; and there is nothing in the
conceal documents or papers officially
record to insinuate that petitioner had
entrusted to him. Whether during or
profited from the act complained of.
after office hours, if the removal by a
Citing the case of Kataniag v. People,
public officer of any official document
“Whether during or after office hours, if
from its usual place of safe-keeping is
the removal by a public officer of any
for an illicit purpose, such as to tamper
official document from its usual place of
with or to otherwise profit by it, or to do
safe-keeping is for an illicit purpose,
in connection therewith an act which
such as to tamper with or to otherwise
would constitute a breach of trust in his
profit by it, or to do in connection
official care thereof, the crime of
therewith an act which would constitute
infidelity in the custody of public
a breach of trust in his official care
documents is committed
thereof, the crime of infidelity in the
Manzanaris vs People, 127 SCRA custody of public documents is
201 committed. On the other hand, where
the act of removal is actuated with
Facts: lawful or commendable motives, as
when the public officer removes the
public documents committed to his trust acting in the CRIMINAL LAW II DAILY
for examination in connection with CASE DIGEST
official duty, or with a view to securing
them from imminent danger of loss, ISSUE:
there would be no crime committed Whether or not defendant Francisco
under the law. This is so, because the act Hilvano, can be charged of usurpation of
of removal, destruction or concealment executive functions.
of public documents is punished by law
only when any of such acts would HELD:
constitute infidelity in the custody Article 240 of the Revised Penal Code to
thereof." Hence, Tested by this rule, read as follows: “Usurpation of executive
petitioner cannot be punished functions. — Any judge who shall
criminally. assume any power pertaining to the
executive authorities, or shall obstruct
the latter in the lawful exercise of their
People vs Castro, G.R.No. 19273, powers, shall suffer the penalty of
March 16, 1923 arresto mayor in its medium period to
Facts: prision correccional in its minimum
period.”
Issue:
Thus, a councilor who assumes a power
Ruling: pertaining to the mayor or obstructs him
in the lawful exercise of his power is not
liable under Article 240, because only a
SORIANO: PUNZALAN to judge can commit usurpation of
MORELOS case executive functions. The councilor is
liable under Article 177 of the Code, if he
assumes the power of the mayor.
Punzalan v. People ------------------------------------------------
FACTS:  Article 241. Usurpation
ISSUE: of judicial functions

HELD: People v. Valdehuesa

Facts:
Issue:
Ruling:

 Article 240. Usurpation

of executive functions Angara v. Electoral Commission
PEOPLE VS HILVANO GR NO. L- FACTS
8583, JUL 31, 1956 PONENTE:
JUSTICE BENGZON Petitioner Jose Angara was proclaimed
winner and took his oath of office as
FACTS: member of the National Assembly of the
On September 22, 1952, When Mayor Commonwealth Government. On
Fidencio Latorre of Villareal, Samar, December 3, 1935, the National
departed for Manila on official business, Assembly passed a resolution
designated the herein defendant confirming the election of those who
Francisco Hilvano, councilor, to have not been subject of an election
discharge the duties of his office. Later, protest prior to the adoption of the said
Vice-Mayor Juan Latorre found Hilvano resolution.
On December 8, 1935, however, private WON the transfer of Judge Borromeo by
respondent Pedro Ynsua filed an the Governor-General was valid.
election protest against the petitioner
before the Electoral Commission of the HELD:
National Assembly. The following No, it was not. Under the Administrative
day, December 9, 1935, the Electoral Code, ”a Judge of First Instance can be
Commission adopted its own resolution removed from office by the Governor-
providing that it will not consider any General only if in the judgment of the
election protest that was not submitted Supreme Court sufficient cause shall
on or before December 9, 1935. exist involving serious misconduct or
Citing among others the earlier inefficiency in office..”
resolution of the National Assembly, the Relatedly, Art. 243 of the Revised Penal
petitioner sought the dismissal of Code states that “Orders or request by
respondent’s protest. The Electoral executive officers to any judicial
Commission however denied his motion. authority. – Any executive officer who
ISSUE shall address any order or suggestion to
any judicial authority with respect to any
Did the Electoral Commission act case or business coming within the
without or in excess of its jurisdiction in exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of
taking cognizance of the protest filed justice shall suffer the penalty of arresto
against the election of the petitioner mayor and a fine not exceeding 500
notwithstanding the previous pesos.”
confirmation of such election by
resolution of the National Assembly? It was noted that although the
appointment of a judge lies with the
RULING Executive Department (by the Governor-
General with the consent of the Senate),
NO, the Electoral Commission did not the power to remove, transfer or
act without or in excess of its discipline the judges lies with the
jurisdiction in taking cognizance of the Judiciary. The power of the Executive
protest filed against the election of the ceases upon the consent of the judge to
petitioner notwithstanding the previous the position, to allow such action by the
confirmation of such election by Executive could be used to discipline the
resolution of the National Assembly. judge or as an indirect means of removal
----------------------------------------------- thus would violate the separation of
powers between a coordinate and equal
 Article 243. Orders or branch of the government.
requests by executive
officers to any judicial
authority Ferrer v. Hon. De Leon
BORRROMEO V. MARIANO G.R. Facts:
NO. 16808 JANUARY 3, 1921
Issues:
FACTS:
Held:
Andres Borromeo was appointed as
judge of the 24th Judicial District (JD)  Article 245. Abuses
on July 1, 1914. Said appointment was against chastity.
accepted by Borromeo on the same date.
On February 25, 1920, he was US v. EULALIO MORELOS
transferred to the 21st JD without his Issue:
consent. Under the Administrative Code,
Judges of First Instance are appointed Whether or not proof of solicitation is
by the Governor-General with the necessary when the illicit relations were
consent of the Philippine Senate to serve consummated.
until they reach the age of 65 years. FACTS:
ISSUE:
The appellant, as acting warden, was in
charge of the prisoners in the Tondo
police station. Among them was a
woman named Tomasa Clemente. On
the night of 18th of September 1913, he
entered the cell of the woman and had
illicit relations with her.
The appellant argues that the proof fails
to show that he solicited a woman in his
custody. It was proven, however, that his
illicit relations were consummated.
HELD:
No. It would be a strange interpretation
to place upon said law, that a failure in
the proof to show a "solicitation" was
sufficient to relieve the defendant from
responsibility, when the act solicited was
consummated.