DEAR FUTURE LAWYERS

  ROSARIO NAS-VILLAR v. PEOPLE G.R. No. 176169, November 14, 2008 TINGA, J.: TOPICS: EX POST FACTO LAW FACTS: Petitioner was charged for Illegal Recruitment as defined under Section 6 and Section 7 of R.A. No. 8042.  RTC of Davao found accused guilty of Illegal Recruitment under the Labor Code and sentenced her to an indeterminate sentence of 4 years as minimum and 5 years as maximum.  Petitioner appealed before the CA wo affirmed the decision of the RTC and ordered to pay P10,000 as temperate damages.   On appeal, petitioner alleged that the CA erred in failing to consider that R.A. 8042 cannot be given retroactive effect and that the decision of the RTC constitutes a violation of the constitutional prohibition against ex post facto law.  Since R.A. No. 8042 did not yet exist in January 1993 when the crime was committed.   She argues that what was applicable in 1993 was the Article 38, in relation with Article 39 of the Labor Code.  The said...

  PEOPLE v. SANDIGANBAYAN AND CEFERINO S. PAREDES, JR., G.R. No. 157171, March 14, 2006 GRINO-AQUINO, J.: TOPICS: EX POST FACTO LAW FACTS: B.P. 195 amended Section 11 of R.A. No. 3019 by increasing from 10 to 15 years the period for the prescription or extinguishment of a violation of the Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Private Respondent was issued a free patent title when he was still the provincial attorney of Agusan del Sur before he became a Governor.  A letter of complaint was filed against him, a subpoena was issued but was not served.  Despite the  absence of Notice to the Respondent, a preliminary investigation was conducted and a recommendation for filing an information in the Sandiganbayan was approved. A warrant of arrest was issued and respondent was arrested.  Respondent then filed "An Urgent Motion to Quash Information and to Recall Warrant of Arrest" on the ground that the charged filed against him already prescribed; that the preliminary i...

  BENJAMIN "KOKOY" ROMUALDEZ v. OMBUDSMAN AND PCGG G.R. Nos. 165510-33, July 28, 2006 YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.: TOPICS: RELATION OF PRESCIPTION UNDER THE REVISED PENAL CODE TO                                 SPECIAL PENAL LAWS PRESCRIPTION FACTS: Petitioner Benjamin Romualdez claims that the Office of the Ombudsman gravely abused its discretion in recommending the filing of 24 information against him for violation of Section 7 of Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act.  It was raised that the Ombudsman cannot revive the aforementioned cases which were previously dismissed by the Sandiganbayan.  The defense of prescription may be raised for the first time on appeal and thus, there is no necessity for the presentation of evidence thereon before the court a quo. The Ombudsman argues that the dismissal of the information does not mean that petitioner was thereafter exempt from criminal prosecution....

ARSENIA B. GARCIA v. PEOPLE G.R. No. 157171, March 14, 2006 QUISUMBING, J.: TOPICS: MALA PROHIBITA AND MALA IN SE IN ELECTION LAWS            FACTS: Petitioner Garcia and several members of the Board of Canvassers of Alaminos, Pangasinan allegedly decreased the votes received by senatorial candidate Aquilino Q. Pimentel, Jr. from six thousand nine hundred ninety-eight (6,998) votes as clearly disclosed in the total number of votes in the one hundred fifty-nine (159) precincts of the Statement of Votes by Precincts of the said municipality, to one thousand nine hundred twenty one (1,921) votes reflected in the Statement of Votes by Precincts and Certificate of Canvass. RTC acquitted all the accused for insufficiency of evidence except for the petitioner who was found guilty for violation of Section 27(b) of R.A. No. 6646.  Petitioner contends that there is no motive on her part to reduce the votes of private complainant.  Respondent contends t...

EVANGELINE LADONGA v. PEOPLE G.R. No. 141066, February 17, 2005 AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.: TOPICS: CONSPIRACY IN VIOLATION OF B.P 22                       SUPPLETORY APPLICATION OF THE REVISED PENAL CODE                       CONSPIRACY FACTS: Spouses Adronico and Evangeline Ladonga was a regular customers of Alfredo Oculam's pawnshop.  Ladonga spouses obtained several loans from Oculam which were guaranteed by several check.  The said checks bounced for the reason of "Closed Account".  Spouses Ladonga failed to redeem the checks despite repeated demand thus three (3) criminal cases for conspiracy to commit violation of B.P. 22. RTC found spouses Ladonga guilty for violation of B.P. 22.  On appeal, Evangeline argued that conspiracy RTC erred in finding her criminally liable for conspiring with her husband as the principle of conspiracy is inapp...

JESTER MABUNOT v. PEOPLE G.R. No. 204659, September 19, 2016 REYES, J.: TOPICS: MALA IN SE IN SPECIAL LAWS                      INTENT IN MALA IN SE FACTS: William a classmate of the petitioner threw an object that hit the latter's back.  Petitioner, who was a 19 year old and was under the influence of alcohol reacted by boxing William.  Petitioner went outside the classroom, Dennis, another classmate followed him and a fist fight ensued between the two.  Private respondent Shiva a 14 year old and also a classmate of the respondent tried to pacify them, she was  shoved by the petitioner leaving her with a broken rib.  Petitioner was charged with violation of Section 10(a), Article VI of R.A. 7610. Petitioner argued that since and he and Dennis were exchanging punches, he could not have made a deliberate design to injure Shiva.  Without intent to harm Shiva; otherwise, no crime is committed. IS...