 Home

 Law Firm
 Law Library
 Laws
 Jurisprudence

February 2018 - Philippine Supreme Court Decisions/Resolutions

Philippine Supreme Court

Jurisprudence
Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2018 > February 2018
Decisions > G.R. No. 215720, February 21, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. OSCAR MAT-AN Y ESCAD,
Accussed-Appellant.:

G.R. No. 215720, February 21, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. OSCAR MAT-AN Y ESCAD, Accussed-Appellant.

THIRD DIVISION

G.R. No. 215720, February 21, 2018

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. OSCAR MAT-

AN Y ESCAD, Accussed-Appellant.

DECISION

MARTIRES, J.:
On appeal is the 25 April 2014 Decision 1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in
CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 05858, which affirmed with modifications the 4
September 2012 Joint Judgment2 of the Regional Trial Court of Baguio City,
Branch 59, in Criminal Case Nos. 29335-R and 29336-R, finding herein
accused-appellant Oscar Mat-An y Escad (Oscar) guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of the crimes of Slight Physical Injury and Murder, defined and
penalized under Article 266 and Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code
(RPC).

THE FACTS

On 13 April 2009, Oscar was charged with the crimes of Attempted

Homicide and Murder in two Informations, the inculpatory allegations of
which respectively read, thus:
Criminal Case No. 29335-R (Attempted Homicide)

That on or about the 8th day of April 2009, in the City

of Baguio, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of
this Honorable Court, the above named accused, with
intent to kill, did then and there willfully, unlawfully
and feloniously attempt to kill ANTHONETTE EWANGAN, a 1
1/2 year old child, by stabbing her with a knife at the
nape, thus commencing the commission of the crime of
homicide directly by overt acts, but was not able to
perform all the acts of execution which would produce the
crime of homicide as a consequence by reason of some
causes other than his own spontaneous desistance, that
is, due to some other causes which prevented the accused
from consummating his unlawful purpose.

CONTRARY TO LAW.3

Criminal Case No. 29336-R (Murder)

That on or about the 8th day of April 2009, in the City

of Baguio, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of
this Honorable Court, the above named accused, with
intent to kill and taking advantage of superior strength
and with evident premeditation, did then and there
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously stab MINDA BABSA-
AY, a 61-year old woman, twice on her chest with a knife,
thereby inflicting upon the latter: Multiple stab wounds
on the chest, and as a result thereof, said MINDA BABSA-
AY died.

That the killing was attended by the aggravating

circumstance of evident premeditation considering that
the killing was planned, deliberated upon and the
criminal design carried out by the accused, and abuse of
 superior strength considering that the accused being then
armed with a knife took advantage of his superiority in
strength disregarding the sex and age of the victim.

CONTRARY TO LAW.4
On 13 May 2009, the RTC granted Oscar's motion to consolidate the two
cases.5

On 2 June 2009, Oscar, duly assisted by counsel, was arraigned and pleaded
not guilty to the charges against him.6

On 10 November 2009, pre-trial was conducted wherein the parties entered

into stipulations as to the identity of the accused, among others; the minority
of Anthonette Ewangan (Anthonette)7; that Oscar is the husband of Ruby
Babsa-ay Mat-an (Ruby), the daughter of the deceased Minda Babsaay
(Minda); and that Ruby works overseas and sends money remittances
through her mother and not to Oscar.8

Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued.

Evidence for the Prosecution

The prosecution presented ten (10) witnesses, namely: Norma C. Gulayan

(Norma), Dr. John L. Tinoyan (Dr. Tinoyan), Dr. Samuel P. Daw-as, Jr. (Dr.
Daw-as), Clyde Bunhian (Clyde), Police Senior Inspector Angeline B.
Amangan (PSI Amangan), Rosemarie B. Ewangan (Rosemarie), Police
Officer 3 Leo Mojica (PO3 Mojica), Police Officer 1 Jose Mana-ar, Jr. (PO1
Mana-ar), Robinson B. Babsa-ay (Robinson), and Sheyanne Mat-an
(Sheyanne). Their combined testimonies tended to establish the following:

On 8 April 2009, at around 11:00 a.m., Norma was selling halo-halo beside
Minda's store at Sunnyside Fairview, Tacay Road, Baguio City; Clyde was
in front of the same store. At that time, Minda was inside her store cradling
her 18-month-old granddaughter Anthonette in a blanket, 9 its ends tied
behind her back.

Moments later, Oscar entered the store and an argument ensued between
him and Minda. Apparently, Oscar was asking Minda why Ruby had not
answered his calls. Minda responded by telling Oscar not to create trouble
and to return once he was sober. There was silence for a few seconds; 10 after
which, Norma and Clyde heard Minda moaning as if her mouth was being
covered.11 Norma immediately ran inside the store where she saw Oscar stab
Minda twice. Norma pulled him out of the store and away from
Minda.12 Norma then asked Clyde, who followed her inside the store, to
look for Sheyanne, Oscar and Ruby's daughter.13 Norma also called out to
neighbors for help.14 Before calling Sheyanne, Clyde saw Oscar leaving the
vicinity.15

Sheyanne testified that on 8 April 2009, while she and her sister Desiree
Mat-an were doing laundry, Norma suddenly appeared, crying and without
her slippers and told them that Minda was stabbed by their father. Upon
hearing this, they immediately ran towards Minda's store. Upon reaching the
store, they saw Minda in a prone position with blood splattered on the floor.
Underneath Minda's body was Anthonette who appeared to be injured as
well.16 Sheyanne then ran to the roadside where her father was being held by
some of their neighbors including PO1 Mana-ar, a police officer on vacation
in Baguio at that time.17 Thereafter, PO1 Mana-ar, Sheyanne, and some of
the neighbors brought Oscar to the police station and they also turned over
the knife used by Oscar to stab Minda.18 Meanwhile, Minda and Anthonette
were rushed to the Baguio General Hospital and Medical Center (BGHMC)
where Anthonette was admitted for further observation. 19 Minda died on the
same day at the age of 61.20

The postmortem examination conducted by Dr. Tinoyan revealed that

Minda sustained four (4) stab wounds in her chest three (3) of which were
fatal, while one (1) was superficial.21 As regards Anthonette, the medico-
legal certificate prepared by Dr. Daw-as of the BGHMC revealed that she
sustained a superficial stab wound in the nape area. 22

Rosemarie, Anthonette's mother, testified that her daughter was confined in

the hospital for a night; and for that they incurred P929.00 for her
medication and hospitalization,23 as shown by the receipts she
presented.24 The heirs of Minda incurred the amount of P83,763.00 as
expenses for her wake and burial.25 This amount was admitted by the
defense.26

Evidence for the Defense

The defense presented Oscar as its sole witness. In his testimony, he

invoked denial as his defense and narrated his version of the incident as
follows:

On 8 April 2009, at about 9:00 to 10:00 o'clock in the morning, Oscar was
invited by Donato Bunhian for a drink at Donato's house. Later, he went to
Minda's store to buy bread, but he was not able to do so because Minda said
to him: "Why are you still coming here? You are even drunk." He answered
back but could no longer recall what his exact retort was. 27 After that brief
exchange, he could no longer recall what transpired next. When he came to
his senses, he was already by the roadside, allegedly waiting for a taxi to go
to his workplace at Camp 7.28 While waiting for a taxi, however, some
persons approached him and brought him to the police station where

he was informed that he had inflicted injuries on his mother-in-law. He

maintained, however, that he did not kill his mother-in-law and injure
Anthonette; and that he was actually surprised by the charges against him. 29

The RTC Ruling

In its joint judgment, the RTC found Oscar guilty of attempted homicide and
murder.

With respect to the killing of Minda, the trial court was convinced that the
prosecution was able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that Oscar had
committed the crime. It also appreciated the aggravating circumstance of
evident premeditation to qualify the killing to murder. It observed that Oscar
decided to commit the crime because of his grudge against Minda as it was
to her, and not to him, that his wife remitted money from abroad.

The trial court also appreciated the aggravating circumstance of abuse of

superior strength. It noted that Oscar was about 5'10" tall, heavily built, and
armed with a deadly weapon; whereas Minda was only 4'11" in height, was
already 61 years old, and was carrying a child.

As to the injury inflicted on Anthonette, the trial court ruled that the same
constituted attempted homicide. It also opined that abuse of superior
strength was present considering her tender age. However, the same could
not be appreciated to qualify the crime to attempted murder because the
information charged only the crime of attempted homicide.

The dispositive portion of the joint judgment states:

WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing disquisitions, the
Court, finding the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable
doubt of the crimes of MURDER and ATTEMPTED HOMICIDE,
imposes upon the accused the following penalties:

1. Criminal Case No. 29335-R for Attempted Homicide

the Indeterminate Sentence of six (6) months
of arresto mayor as the minimum penalty to six
(6) years and one (1) day of prision
correccional as the maximum penalty, to indemnify
the private complainant the amount of P929.00 as
actual and compensatory damages, P25,000.00 as
moral damages, and P10,000.00 as exemplary damages.
2. Criminal Case No. 29336-R for Murder - reclusion
perpetua and to indemnify the heirs of Minda Babsa-
 ay the amounts of P83,763.00 as actual and
compensatory damages, P50,000.00 as civil
indemnity, P25,000.00 as moral damages, and
P25,000.00 as exemplary damages.

In the service of his sentence, accused shall serve them

successively. He shall be credited with 4/5 of his
preventive imprisonment.

Accused is ordered transferred to the National Bilibid

Prisons, Muntinlupa, Metro Manila in view of the nature
of the penalties imposed upon him pending any appeal he
may undertake.

SO ORDERED.30
Aggrieved, Oscar appealed before the CA.31

The CA Ruling

In its appealed decision, the CA affirmed with modification the RTC joint
judgment. The appellate court concurred with the trial court in its
assessment that the prosecution was able to establish by proof beyond
reasonable doubt that Oscar killed Minda and injured Anthonette.

The appellate court, however, ruled that evident premeditation could not be
appreciated to qualify the killing of Minda to murder. It explained that the
prosecution failed to establish with certainty the time when Oscar decided to
commit the felony. Consequently, that he clung to his determination to kill
Minda could not also be inferred. Nevertheless, the appellate court ruled that
abuse of superior strength attended the killing due to the evident disparity in
strength between Oscar and Minda. Thus, Oscar is still guilty of murder for
the killing of Minda.

The appellate court also ruled that Oscar could not be held criminally liable
for attempted homicide because there was no evidence that he had the intent
to kill Anthonette. Thus, Oscar could only be convicted of physical injuries;
and considering that the physician who treated Anthonette testified that her
injury was only superficial, Oscar is liable only for slight physical injuries
therefor.

The fallo of the appealed decision provides:

FOR THESE REASONS, the September 4, 2012 Decision of the
Regional Trial Court of Baguio City, Branch 59, is
AFFIRMED with the following MODIFICATIONS:

1. In Criminal Case No. 29335-R, accused-appellant

OSCAR MAT-AN Y ESCAD is found GUILTY of SLIGHT
 PHYSICAL INJURY and is meted a straight penalty of
twenty (20) days of arresto menor, and further
ORDERED to pay the victim the amounts of P929.00 as
actual damages and P5,000.00 as moral damages which
shall earn interest at the rate of 6% per annum
from date of finality of judgment until fully paid.
2. In Criminal Case No. 29336-R, accused-appellant
OSCAR MAT-AN Y ESCAD is found GUILTY of MURDER and
is sentenced to serve the penalty of reclusion
perpetua, and further ORDERED to pay the heirs of
the victim the amounts of P83,763.00 as actual
damages, P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P50,000.00
as moral damages, and P30,000.00 as exemplary
damages which shall earn interest at the rate of 6%
per annum from date of finality of the judgment
until fully paid.

SO ORDERED.32
Hence, this appeal.
ISSUE

WHETHER THE TRIAL AND APPELLATE COURTS ERRED

IN ADJUDGING ACCUSED-APPELLANT OSCAR MAT-AN Y
ESCAD GUILTY BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT FOR THE
DEATH OF MINDA BABSA-AY AND INJURIES
SUSTAINED BY ANTHONETTE EWANGAN.
THE COURT'S RULING

The appeal lacks merit.

Factual findings of the trial court; minor inconsistencies between the

testimonies of the witnesses

Oscar assails the credibility of the prosecution witnesses, particularly

Norma's. He claims that Norma's testimony that she had instructed Clyde to
look for Sheyanne is inconsistent with Sheyanne's version that Norma
herself appeared before her while doing laundry and related the incident to
her. For Oscar, this discrepancy generated perplexity on who between
Norma and Sheyanne was telling the truth, thereby putting in question what
they actually witnessed on the morning of 8 April 2009.

This argument deserves scant consideration.

The established rule in our criminal jurisprudence is that when the issue is
one of credibility of witnesses, the appellate courts will not disturb the
findings of the trial court considering that the latter is in a better position to
decide the question, having heard the witnesses themselves and observed
their deportment and manner of testifying during the trial. Unless it can be
shown that the trial court plainly overlooked certain facts of substance and
value which, if considered, may affect the result of the case; or in instances
where the evidence fails to support or substantiate the trial court's findings
of fact and conclusions; or where the disputed decision is based on a
misapprehension of facts; the trial court's assessment of the credibility of
witnesses will be upheld.33

In this case, no cogent reason exists which would justify the reversal of the
trial court's assessment on the credibility of the witnesses. It is well-settled
that immaterial and insignificant details do not discredit a testimony on the
very material and significant point bearing on the very act of accused-
appellants. As long as the testimonies of the witnesses corroborate one
another on material points, minor inconsistencies therein cannot destroy
their credibility. Inconsistencies on minor details do not undermine the
integrity of a prosecution witness.34

While there are inconsistencies between Norma and Sheyanne's testimonies,

these refer only to minor details which do not diminish the probative value
of the testimonies at issue. Thus, the fact remains that Norma's categorical
and positive identification of Oscar as the person who stabbed Minda
prevails over his defense of denial. Denial is inherently a weak defense
which cannot outweigh positive testimony. As between a categorical
statement that has the earmarks of truth on the one hand and bare denial on
the other, the former is generally held to prevail. 35

Furthermore, Oscar himself could not firmly deny the accusations against
him. Oscar himself could not categorically deny the possibility that he
stabbed Minda and Anthonette after he "blacked-out." He merely stated that
he was "shocked" by the aforesaid charges and that he "cannot recall"
stabbing Minda and Anthonette, thus:
ATTY. CAMUYOT:

So from the residence of your neighbour Donato Bunhian, where did

Q.
you proceed, if you can remember?
A. I went to buy bread at the store, Ma'am.

Q. What store are you referring to Mr. Witness?

A. From the store of my mother-in-law, Ma'am.

Q. And what is the name of your mother-in-law?

A. Minda Babsa-ay, Ma'am.

So were you able to buy bread from the store of your mother-in-
Q.
law?
A. I was not able to buy, Ma'am.

Q. Why?
I was about to buy bread, Ma'am, but then my mother-in-law, Minda
A.
Babsa-ay, uttered some words on me, Ma'am.

What did she utter to you particularly? What word did your mother-
Q.
in-law uttered against you, if you can still remember?
A. "Why are you still coming here? You are even drunk."

Q. So how did you answer your mother-in-law, if you did answer?

I answered her back, Ma'am, but I cannot recall anymore what I
A.
have answered.

So what transpired after that exchange of words with your mother--

Q.
in-law, if you can still remember?
I cannot recall anymore, Ma'am, I was shocked and I had a black
A.
out.

So when did you come next to your senses during that day if you
Q.
did, Mr. Witness?
A. I was already at the road located at the upper level, Ma'am.

Q. On the same day, Mr. Witness?

A. Yes, Ma'm.36 (emphasis supplied)

x x x x

ATTY. CAMUYOT:

Q. Now, Mr. Witness, you are being charged of murdering your mother-
 in-law, Minda Babsa-ay. What can you say about this allegation?
A. I am shocked, Ma'am.

You are also being charged, Mr. Witness of attempting to kill

Q.
Ant[h]onette Ewangan. What can you say about this charge?
A. I don't know anything about that, Ma'am.37 (emphases supplied)

x x x x

PROS. BERNABE:

You do not recall, Mr. Witness, that you stabbed your mother-in-
Q.
law?
A. No, ma'am.

You do not also recall that you stabbed Ant[h]onette Ewangan whom
Q.
she was carrying at that time?
A. No, ma'am.38
From the foregoing, it is clear that the trial and appellate courts did not err in
convicting Oscar. The prosecution was able to establish his guilt for Minda's
death and Anthonette's injury. He cannot escape liability therefor just
because he "blacked out" and "could not recall" that he committed said
crimes.

Oscar is guilty of murder qual(fied by abuse of superior strength, and also

of slight physical injury.

The Court concurs that the crime committed against Minda is Murder
qualified by abuse of superior strength.

The circumstance of abuse of superior strength is present whenever there is

inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor, assuming a
situation of superiority of strength notoriously advantageous for the
aggressor, and the latter takes advantage of it in the commission of the
crime.39 The appreciation of the aggravating circumstance of abuse of
superior strength depends on the age, size, and strength of the parties. 40

In a plethora of cases, the Court has consistently held that the circumstance
of abuse of superior strength is present when a man, armed with a deadly
weapon, attacks an unarmed and defenseless woman. In such case, the
assailant clearly took advantage of the superiority which his sex and the
weapon used in the act afforded him, and from which the woman was
unable to defend herself.41

In this case, the prosecution was able to establish that Oscar abused his
superiority when he killed Minda. Indeed, it was sufficiently shown that
Oscar was armed with a knife, a deadly weapon, while Minda was then
burdened by a child and had no means to defend and repel the attacks of her
assailant. Furthermore, the trial court noted that Oscar was of heavy build
and stood at 5'10" in contrast to Minda's 4'11" frame. Clearly, Oscar abused
his superiority afforded him by his sex, height, and build and a weapon
when he attacked Minda who was then carrying a child. Thus, the trial and
appellate courts correctly convicted him of murder.

The Court also concurs that Oscar can be held guilty only of slight physical
injuries with respect. to Anthonette. The prosecution failed to present any
evidence which would show that Oscar also intended to kill Anthonette.
Without the element of intent to kill, Oscar could only be convicted for
physical injury; and considering that Anthonette's wound was only
superficial, the appellate court correctly convicted Oscar of slight physical
injury.

Alternative circumstance of intoxication

Oscar disputes that, on the assumption of his guilt, the trial and appellate
courts erred in not appreciating the alternative circumstance of intoxication
to mitigate his liability. He argues that records would show that he blacked
out and could not remember what transpired; thus, his mental faculties were
dulled by the alcohol he imbibed.

The Court is not persuaded.

Drunkenness or intoxication is a modifying circumstance which may either

aggravate or mitigate the crime. It is aggravating if habitual or intentional;
and it is mitigating if not habitual nor intentional, that is, not subsequent to
the plan to commit the crime.42 Once intoxication is established by
satisfactory evidence, then, in the absence of truth to the contrary, it is
presumed to be unintentional or not habitual.43 From the foregoing,
however, it is clear that the accused must first establish his state of
intoxication at the time of the commission of the felony before he may
benefit from the presumption that the intoxication was unintentional and not
habitual. He must prove that he took such quantity of alcoholic beverage,
prior to the commission of the crime, as would blur his reason. 44
In this case, other than his bare allegation that he blacked out, Oscar failed
to present sufficient evidence that would show that he was in a state of
intoxication as would blur his reason. This uncorroborated and self-serving
statement as to his state of intoxication is devoid of any probative
value.45 On the contrary, there is sufficient reason to believe that Oscar
recognized the injustice of his acts. After stabbing her mother-in-law to
death, Oscar proceeded to the roadside and waited for a taxi in an apparent
attempt to escape. His excuse that he was there because he was going to
work is not worthy of any belief. Thus, the trial and appellate courts did not
err in not appreciating the alternative circumstance of intoxication in favor
of Oscar.

Penalties and monetary awards

In Criminal Case No. 29335-R, there being no aggravating or mitigating

circumstance present in the commission of the crime, the penalty shall be
imposed in its medium period or twenty (20) days of arresto menor,
following Article 266 of the RPC. The Court further finds the monetary
awards consisting of P929.00 as actual damages and P5,000.00 as moral
damages proper in this case.

In Criminal Case No. 29336-R, other than the circumstance of abuse of

superior strength which already qualified the crimes to murder, no other
modifying circumstance is present, whether aggravating or mitigating. Thus,
the penalty of reclusion perpetua is imposed in accordance with Article 248
of the RPC, as amended by Section 6 of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7659, in
relation to Article 63(2) of the RPC.

The Court, however, modifies the CA decision with respect to the monetary
awards. In People v. Jugueta,46 the Court summarized the amounts of
damages which may be awarded for different crimes. In said case, the Court
held that when the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, the following
amounts may be awarded: (1) P75,000.00, as civil indemnity; (2)
P75,000.00, as moral damages; and (3) P75,000.00 as exemplary damages.
The aforesaid amounts are proper in this case. The Court further retains the
award of actual damages in the amount of P83,763.00.

WHEREFORE, the present appeal is DISMISSED for lack of merit. The

25 April 2014 Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No.
05858 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATIONS as follows:

1. In Criminal Case No. 29335-R, accused-appellant OSCAR MAT-AN Y

ESCAD is found GUILTY of SLIGHT PHYSICAL INJURY and is meted
a straight penalty of twenty (20) days of arresto menor, and
further ORDERED to pay the victim the amounts of;p929.00 as actual
damages and P5,000.00 as moral damages which shall earn interest at the
rate of six percent (6%) per annum from date of finality of judgment until
fully paid.

2. In Criminal Case No. 29336-R, accused-appellant OSCAR MAT-AN Y

ESCAD is found GUILTY of MURDER and is sentenced to serve the
penalty of reclusion perpetua, and further ORDERED to pay the heirs of
the deceased Minda Babsa-ay the following amounts: (1) P83,763.00 as
actual damages; (2) P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; (3) P75,000.00 as moral
damages; and (4) P75,000.00 as exemplary damages. All monetary awards
shall earn interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum reckoned from
the finality of this decision until their full payment. 47

SO ORDERED.

Velasco, Jr., (Chairperson), Bersamin, Leonen, and Gesmundo, JJ., concur.

March 12, 2018

NOTICE OF JUDGMENT

Sirs / Mesdames:

Please take notice that on February 21, 2018 a Decision, copy attached
hereto, was rendered by the Supreme Court in the above-entitled case, the
original of which was received by this Office on March 21, 2018 at 3:27
p.m.

Very truly yours,

(SGD)
WILFREDO V. LAPITAN
Division Clerk of Court

Endnotes:

1
Rollo, pp. 2-9; penned by Associate Justice Mario V.
Lopez, and concurred in by Associate JusticeJose C.
Reyes, Jr., and Associate Justice Socorro B. Inting.
2
 Records (Crim. Case No. 29335-R), pp. 489-515; penned
by Judge Iluminada P. Cabato.
3
 Id. at 1.
4
 Records (Crim. Case No. 29336-R), p. 1.
5
 Id. at 28.
6
 Records (Crim. Case No. 29335-R), p. 25.
7
 Also referred to as "Antonette Ewangan" in some parts
of the records.
8
 Records (Crim. Case No. 29335-R), pp. 29-30.
9
 TSN, dated 15 June 2011, pp. 7-8; TSN, dated 10 August
2011, p. 5.
10
 Id. at 9-10.
11
 Id. at 10; TSN, dated 10 August 2011, p. 6.
12
 Id. at 10-12; id. at 6-7.
13
 Id. at 14; id. at 8.
14
 Id. at 14.
15
 TSN, dated 10 August 2011, p. 8.
16
 TSN, dated 9 November 2011, pp. 9-10.
17
 Id. at 10; TSN, dated 25 October 2011, pp. 3 and 6.
18
 Id.; id. at 7.
19
 TSN, dated 21 June 2011, p. 5.
20
 Records (Crim. Case No. 29335-R), p. 70, Exhibit "D";
TSN, dated 6 June 2011, p. 6.
21
 Id. at 71, Exhibit "E"; id. at 6-14.
22
 Id. at 68, Exhibit "B"; TSN, dated 21 June 2011, p. 5.
23
 TSN, dated 6 September 2011, p. 11.
24
 Records (Crim. Case No. 29335-R), pp. 82-85; Exhibits
"T-1" to "T-4."
25
 Id. at 79-80-C; Exhibits "S" to "S-4."
26
 TSN, dated 7 February 2012, p. 3.
27
 TSN, dated 16 April 2012, pp. 4-5.
28
 Id. at 5-6.
29
 Id. at 6-7.
30
 Records (Crim. Case No. 29335-R), pp. 514-515.
31
 Id. at 518-520.
32
 Id. at 8-9.
33
People v. Balleras, 432 Phil. 1018, 1024 (2002).
34
Avelino v. People, 714 Phil. 322, 334 (2013).
35
People v. Bitancor, 441 Phil. 758, 769 (2002).
36
 TSN, dated 16 April 2012, pp. 4-5.
37
 Id. at 7.
38
 TSN, dated 7 May 2012, p. 6.

Espineli
39
v. People, 735 Phil. 530, 544-545
(2014); People v. Quisayas, 731 Phil. 577, 596 (2014).
40
People v. Calpito, 462 Phil. 172, 179 (2003).

People v. Appegu, 429 Phil. 467, 482 (2002); People v.

41

Molas, 291-A Phil. 516, 525 (1993).

42
People v. Baroy, 431 Phil. 638, 659 (2002).
43
People v. Fortich, 346 Phil. 596, 618 (1997).
44
People v. Fontillas, 653 Phil. 406, 419 (2010).
45
People v. Apduhan, 133 Phil. 786, 800 (1968).
46
 G.R. No. 202124, 05 April 2016, 788 SCRA 331, 373.
47
People v. Combate, 653 Phil. 487, 517-518 (2010).
 Back to Home | Back to Main

窗体顶端
 
窗体底端

ChanRobles Professional Review, Inc.

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

 ChanRobles CPA Review Online

ChanRobles Special Lecture Series

February-2018 Jurisprudence                 

· G.R. No. 224162, February 06, 2018 - JANET LIM NAPOLES,

Petitioner, v. SANDIGANBAYAN (THIRD DIVISION), Respondent.

· G.R. No. 196045, February 21, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Petitioner, v. AMADOR PASTRANA AND RUFINA ABAD, Respondents.
· A.M. No. P-11-2959, February 06, 2018 - OFFICE OF THE COURT
ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v. ALMA P. LICAY, CLERK OF
COURT II, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL COURT, SAN JUAN-SAN
GABRIEL, LA UNION, Respondent.; A.M. No. P-14-3230, February 06,
2018 - OFFICE OF THE COURT ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v.
ALMA P. LICAY, CLERK OF COURT, MUNICIPAL CIRCUIT TRIAL
COURT, SAN JUAN, LA UNION, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 220884, February 21, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOSEPH AGALOT Y RUBIO, Accused-Appellant.

· A.M. No. P-18-3792 [Formerly OCA IPI No. 16-4579-P], February 20,
2018 - RUTH NADIA N. DE LOS SANTOS, Complainant, v. JOSE RENE
C. VASQUEZ, SHERIFF IV, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 41
BACOLOD CITY, NEGROS OCCIDENTAL, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 227796, February 20, 2018 - NATIONAL TRANSMISSION

CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. COMMISSION ON AUDIT (COA) AND
COA CHAIRPERSON MICHAEL G. AGUINALDO, Respondents.

· A.C. No. 9512, February 05, 2018 - ROBERTO P. MABINI,

Complainant, v. ATTY. VITTO A. KINTANAR, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 216753, February 07, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JESUS DUMAGAY Y SUACITO, Accused-
Appellants.

· G.R. No. 222654, February 21, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ROMEO GARIN Y OSORIO, Accused-Appellant.

· G.R. No. 212195, February 21, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NAMRAIDA ALBOKA Y NANING @ "MALIRA,"
Accused-Appellant.

· G.R. No. 220892, February 21, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. BENEDICT GOMEZ Y RAGUNDIAZ, Accused-
Appellant.

· A.M. No. P-17-3705, February 06, 2018 - OFFICE OF THE COURT

ADMINISTRATOR, Complainant, v. PAULINO I. SAGUYOD, BRANCH
CLERK OF COURT, REGIONAL TRIAL COURT, BRANCH 67,
PANIQUI, TARLAC, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 218913, February 07, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ROMULO BANDOQUILLO Y OPALDA, Accused-
Appellant.
· G.R. No. 226208, February 07, 2018 - AGNES COELI BUGAOISAN,
Petitioner, v. OWI GROUP MANILA AND MORRIS CORPORATION,
Respondents.

· G.R. No. 214910, February 13, 2018 - BAYANI F. FERNANDO,

ANGELITO S. VERGEL DE DIOS, CESAR S. LACUNA, RUBEN C.
GUILLERMO, RAMON S. ONA, FELIMON T. TARRAGO, FEDERICO
E. CASTILLO, ALLAN ARCEO, DANILO M. SEÑORAN,* RENE
ESTIPONA AND EDENISON F. FAINSAN, IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE
INCUMBENT ASSISTANT GENERAL MANAGER FOR FINANCE
AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE METRO MANILA DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY, Petitioners, v. HONORABLE COMMISSION ON AUDIT
EN BANC, RIZALINA Q. MUTIA, DIRECTOR IV, CLUSTER B -
GENERAL PUBLIC SERVICE II AND DEFENSE, NATIONAL
GOVERNMENT SECTOR, COMMISSION ON AUDIT AND IRENEO B.
MANALO, STATE AUDITOR V, SUPERVISING AUDITOR,
COMMISSION ON AUDIT, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 218236, February 07, 2018 - SUMIFRU (PHILIPPINES)

CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. SPOUSES DANILO CEREÑO AND
CERINA CEREÑO, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 213128, February 07, 2018 - LOURDES SCHOOL QUEZON

CITY, INC., Petitioner, v. LUZ V. GARCIA, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 223113, February 19, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PIDLIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. AUGUSTO GONZALES ESMENIO PADER, JR.,
AND MARCELO ANTONIO, Accused, - MARCELO ANTONIO,
Accused-Appellant.

· G.R. No. 218130, February 14, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. HERMIE PARIS Y NICOLAS, Accused, - RONEL
FERNANDEZ Y DELA VEGA, Accused-Appellants.

· G.R. No. 206632, February 14, 2018 - EDEN ETINO, Petitioner, v.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 218701, February 14, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GIL RAMIREZ Y SUYU, Accused-Appellants.

· G.R. No. 223102, February 14, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CARLOS BAUIT Y DELOS SANTOS, Accused-
Appellants.

· G.R. No. 205548, February 07, 2018 - DE LA SALLE MONTESSORI

INTERNATIONAL OF MALOLOS, INC., Petitioner, v. DE LA SALLE
BROTHERS, INC., DE LA SALLE UNIVERSITY, INC., LA SALLE
ACADEMY, INC., DE LA SALLE-SANTIAGO ZOBEL SCHOOL, INC.
(FORMERLY NAMED DE LA SALLE-SOUTH INC.), DE LA SALLE
CANLUBANG, INC. (FORMERLY NAMED DE LA SALLE
UNIVERSITY-CANLUBANG, INC.), Respondents.

· G.R. No. 226130, February 19, 2018 - LILIA S. DUQUE AND HEIRS
OF MATEO DUQUE, NAMELY: LILIA S. DUQUE, ALMA D.
BALBONA, PERPETUA D. HATA, MARIA NENITA D. DIENER, GINA
D. YBAÑEZ, AND GERVACIO S. DUQUE, Petitioners, v. SPOUSES
BARTOLOME D. YU, JR. AND JULIET O. YU AND DELIA DUQUE
CAPACIO, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 229420, February 19, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Petitioner, v. ROGER DOMINGUEZ Y SANTOS, RAYMOND
DOMINGUEZ Y SANTOS, JAYSON MIRANDA Y NACPIL, ROLANDO
TALBAN Y MENDOZA, AND JOEL JACINTO Y CELESTINO,
Respondents.

· G.R. No. 215720, February 21, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. OSCAR MAT-AN Y ESCAD, Accussed-Appellant.

· G.R. No. 231116, February 07, 2018 - REPUBLIC OF THE

PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. CLARO YAP, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 223477, February 14, 2018 - CELSO M.F.L. MELGAR,

Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 213972, February 05, 2018 - FELICITAS L. SALAZAR,

Petitioner, v. REMEDIOS FELIAS, ON HER OWN BEHALF AND
REPRESENTATION OF THE OTHER HEIRS OF CATALINO NIVERA,
Respondents.

· G.R. No. 225745, February 28, 2018 - THE PEOPLE OF THE

PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ARSENIO ENDAYA, JR. Y PEREZ,
Accused-Appellants.

· G.R. No. 215320, February 28, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. MANUEL CORPUZ, Accused-Appellants.

· G.R. No. 226494, February 14, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOMAR SISRACON Y RUPISAN, MARK
VALDERAMA Y RUPISAN, ROBERTO CORTEZ Y BADILLA,LUIS
PADUA Y MITRA AND ADONIS MOTIL Y GOLONDRINA, Accused-
Appellants.
· G.R. No. 200088, February 26, 2018 - PHILIPPINE AIRLINES, INC.,
Petitioner, v. AIRLINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION OF THE PHILIPPINES,
SOTICO T. LLOREN, RONALDO V. CUNANAN, LEONCIO H.
MANARANG, JR., VICTOR N. AGUILAR, RODOLFO M. MEDINA,
RENATO A. FLESTADO, ROMEO L. LORENZO, WESLEY V. TATE,
SALVADOR S. ARCEO, JR., MARIANO V. NAVARETTE, JR.,
WILLIAM Z. CENZON, LIBERATE D. GUTIZA, MANUEL F.
FORONDA, ISMAEL C. LAPUS, JR., RAQUELITO L. CAMACHO,
JOHN JOSEPH V. DE GUZMAN, EFREN L. PATTUGALAN, JIMMY
JESUS D. ARRANZA, PAUL DE LEON, ANTONIO A. CAYABA,
DIOSDADO S. JUAN, JR., ORLANDO A. DEL CASTILLO,
DEOGRACIAS C. CABALLERO, JR., AND FLORENDO R. UMALI,
Respondents.

· G.R. No. 227336, February 26, 2018 - ROMMEL RAMOS Y

LODRONIO, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 219174, February 21, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ALVIN VELASCO Y HUEVOS, Plaintiff-Appellant

· G.R. No. 204735, February 19, 2018 - SPOUSES CIPRIANO

PAMPLONA AND BIBIANA INTAC, Petitioners, v. SPOUSES LILIA I.
CUETO AND VEDASTO CUETO, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 200571, February 19, 2018 - JOSEPHINE A. CASCO,

Petitioner, v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, SIXTH
DIVISION, CAPITOL MEDICAL CENTER AND/OR THELMA N.
CLEMENTE, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 202863, February 21, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ISIDRO RAGASA STA. ANA ALIAS "NONOY,"
Accused-Appellant.

· G.R. Nos. 208481-82, February 07, 2018 - OFFICE OF THE

OMBUDSMAN, REPRESENTED BY OMBUDSMAN CONCHITA
CARPIO MORALES, Petitioner, v. MARIA ROWENA REGALADO,
Respondent.

· G.R. No. 218390, February 28, 2018 - HONGKONG BANK

INDEPENDENT LABOR UNION (HBILU), Petitioner, v. HONGKONG
AND SHANGHAI BANKING CORPORATION LIMITED, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 225022, February 05, 2018 - CAROLINA QUE VILLONGCO,

ANA MARIA QUE TAN, ANGELICA QUE GONZALES, ELAINE
VICTORIA QUE TAN AND EDISON WILLIAMS QUE TAN, Petitioners,
v. CECILIA QUE YABUT, EUMIR CARLO QUE CAMARA AND MA.
CORAZON QUE GARCIA, Respondents.; G.R. No. 225024, February 5,
2018 - CECILIA QUE YABUT, EUMIR CARLO QUE CAMARA AND
MA. CORAZON QUE GARCIA, Petitioners, v. CAROLINA QUE
VILLONGCO, ANA MARIA QUE TAN, ANGELICA QUE GONZALES,
ELAINE VICTORIA QUE TAN AND EDISON WILLIAMS QUE TAN,
Respondents.

· G.R. No. 233073, February 14, 2018 - L.C. BIG MAK BURGER, INC.,
Petitioner, v. MCDONALD'S CORPORATION, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 220451, February 26, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ALLAN BUGTONG Y AMOROSO, Accused-
Appellant.

· G.R. No. 220832, February 28, 2018 - BUREAU OF CUSTOMS (BOC),

REPRESENTED BY COMMISSIONER ALBERTO D. LINA, AND
DEPARTMENT OF BUDGET AND MANAGEMENT-PROCUREMENT
SERVICE, (DBM-PS), REPRESENTED BY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
JOSE TOMAS C. SYQUIA, Petitioners, v. HON. PAULINO Q.
GALLEGOS, IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDING JUDGE, REGIONAL
TRIAL COURT, MANILA, BRANCH 47, AND THE PURPORTED
JOINT VENTURE OF OMNIPRIME MARKETING, INC. AND
INTRASOFT INTERNATIONAL, INC., REPRESENTED BY
ANNABELLE A. MARGAROLI, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 211153, February 28, 2018 - AMPARO S. CRUZ; ERNESTO

HALILI; ALICIA H. FLORENCIO; DONALD HALILI; EDITHA H.
RIVERA; ERNESTO HALILI, JR.; AND JULITO HALILI, Petitioners, v.
ANGELITO S. CRUZ, CONCEPCION S. CRUZ, SERAFIN S. CRUZ,
AND VICENTE S. CRUZ, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 219591, February 19, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GENERALDO M. CONDINO, Accused-Appellant.

· G.R. No. 225709, February 14, 2018 - JASPER GONZALEZ* Y

DOLENDO, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

· A.C. No. 10441, February 14, 2018 - SUSAN T. DE LEON,

Complainant, v. ATTY. ANTONIO A. GERONIMO, Respondent.

· A.C. No. 11829, February 26, 2018 - MARIA ROMERO, Complainant,

v. ATTY. GERONIMO R. EVANGELISTA, JR., Respondent.

· G.R. No. 193305, February 05, 2018 - REPUBLIC OF THE

PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. BANAL NA PAG-AARAL, INC.,
Respondent.
· G.R. No. 229092, February 21, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RAUL MANANSALA Y MANINANG, Accused-
Appellant.

· G.R. No. 235935, February 06, 2018 - REPRESENTATIVES EDCEL C.

LAGMAN, TOMASITO S. VILLARIN, EDGAR R. ERICE, TEDDY
BRAWNER BAGUILAT, JR., GARY C. ALEJANO, AND EMMANUEL
A. BILLONES, Petitioners, v. SENATE PRESIDENT AQUILINO
PIMENTEL III, SPEAKER PANTALEON D. ALVAREZ, EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY SALVADOR C. MEDIALDEA,DEFENSE SECRETARY
DELFIN N. LORENZANA, BUDGET SECRETARY BENJAMIN E.
DIOKNO AND ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES CHIEF OF
STAFF GENERAL REY LEONARDO GUERRERO, Respondents.; G.R.
No. 236061, February 06, 2018 - EUFEMIA CAMPOS CULLAMAT,
NOLI VILLANUEVA, RIUS VALLE, ATTY. NERI JAVIER
COLMENARES, DR. MARIA CAROLINA P. ARAULLO, RENATO M.
REYES, JR. CRISTINA E. PALABAY, BAYAN MUNA PARTYLIST
REPRESENTATIVE CARLOS ISAGANI T. ZARATE, GABRIELA
WOMEN'S PARTY REPRESENTATIVES EMERENCIANA A. DE
JESUS AND ARLENE D. BROSAS, ANAKPAWIS REPRESENTATIVE
ARIEL B. CASILAO, ACT TEACHERS' REPRESENTATIVES
ANTONIO L. TINIO,AND FRANCISCA L. CASTRO, AND KABATAAN
PARTYLIST REPRESENTATIVE SARAH JANE I. ELAGO, Petitioners,
v. PRESIDENT RODRIGO DUTERTE, SENATE PRESIDENT
AQUILINO PIMENTEL III, HOUSE SPEAKER PANTALEON
ALVAREZ, EXECUTIVE SECRETARY SALVADOR MEDIALDEA,
DEFENSE SECRETARY DELFIN LORENZANA, ARMED FORCES OF
THE PHILIPPINES CHIEF-OF-STAFF GEN. REY LEONARDO
GUERRERO, PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE DIRECTOR-GENERAL
RONALDO DELA ROSA, Respondents.; G.R. No. 236145, February 06,
2018 - LORETTA ANN P. ROSALES, Petitioner, v. PRESIDENT
RODRIGO R. DUTERTE, REPRESENTED BY EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY SALVADOR C. MEDIALDEA, MARTIAL LAW
ADMINISTRATOR SECRETARY DELFIN N. LORENZANA,
MARTIAL LAW IMPLEMENTER GENERAL REY L. GUERRERO,
AND PHILIPPINE NATIONAL POLICE DIRECTOR GENERAL
RONALDO M. DELA ROSA, AND THE CONGRESS OF THE
PHILIPPINES, CONSISTING OF THE SENATE OF THE PHILIPPINES
REPRESENTED BY SENATE PRESIDENT AQUILINO Q. PIMENTEL
III, AND THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, REPRESENTED BY
HOUSE SPEAKER PANTALEON D. ALVAREZ, Respondents.; G.R. No.
236155, February 06, 2018 - CHRISTIAN S. MONSOD, DINAGAT
ISLANDS REPRESENTATIVE ARLENE J. BAG-AO, RAY PAOLO J.
SANTIAGO, NOLASCO RITZ LEE B. SANTOS III, MARIE HAZEL E.
LAVITORIA, NICOLENE S. ARCAINA, AND JOSE RYAN S.
PELONGCO, Petitioners, v. SENATE PRESIDENT AQUILINO
PIMENTEL III, SPEAKER PANTALEON D. ALVAREZ, EXECUTIVE
SECRETARY SALVADOR C. MEDIALDEA, DEPARTMENT OF
NATIONAL DEFENSE (DND) SECRETARY DELFIN N. LORENZANA,
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT
(DILG) SECRETARY (OFFICER-IN-CHARGE) EDUARDO M. AÑO,
ARMED FORCES OF THE PHILIPPINES (AFP) CHIEF OF STAFF
GENERAL REY LEONARDO GUERRERO, PHILIPPINE NATIONAL
POLICE (PNP) CHIEF DIRECTOR GENERAL RONALD M. DELA
ROSA, NATIONAL SECURITY ADVISER HERMOGENES C.
ESPERON, JR., Respondents.

· G.R. No. 208424, February 14, 2018 - ARMANDO LAGON, Petitioner,

v. HON. DENNIS A. VELASCO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS PRESIDING
JUDGE OF MUNICIPAL TRIAL COURT IN CITIES OF KORONADAL,
SOUTH COTABATO, AND GABRIEL DIZON, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 221932, February 14, 2018 - PATRICIA CABRIETO DELA

TORRE, REPRESENTED BY BENIGNO T. CABRIETO, JR., Petitioner,
v. PRIMETOWN PROPERTY GROUP, INC., Respondent.

· A.M. No. 17-08-191-RTC, February 07, 2018 - RE: DROPPING FROM

THE ROLLS OF MS. MARISSA M. NUDO, CLERK III, BRANCH 6,
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT (RTC), MANILA.

· G.R. No. 218402, February 14, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. RAMIL GALICIA Y CHAVEZ, Accused-Appellants.

· G.R. No. 219955, February 05, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. GLENN DE GUZMAN Y DELOS REYES, Accused-
Appellants.

· G.R. No. 233744, February 28, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. WILSON RAMOS Y CABANATAN, Accused-
Appellant.

· G.R. No. 214779, February 07, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ABDULWAHID PUNDUGAR, Accused-Appellant.

· A.C. No. 10756 (Formerly CBD Case No. 11-3218), February 21, 2018 -
JUNIELITO R. ESPANTO, Complainant, v. ATTY. ERWIN V. BELLEZA,
Respondent.

· G.R. No. 220502, February 12, 2018 - STEEL CORPORATION OF

THE PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. BUREAU OF CUSTOMS (BOC),
BUREAU OF INTERNAL REVENUE (BIR), DEPARTMENT OF
FINANCE (DOF), OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT (OP), AND
MUNICIPALITY OF BALAYAN, BATANGAS, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 214587, February 26, 2018 - JOSEPHINE P. DELOS REYES

AND JULIUS C. PERALTA, REPRESENTED BY THEIR ATTORNEY-
IN-FACT, J.F. JAVIER D. PERALTA, Petitioners, v. MUNICIPALITY OF
KALIBO, AKLAN, ITS SANGGUNIANG BAYAN AND MAYOR
RAYMAR A. REBALDO, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 229712, February 28, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. DELIA C. MOLINA, Accused-Appellant.

· G.R. No. 231050, February 28, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ROY MAGSANO Y SAGAUINIT, Accused-
Appellant.

· G.R. No. 205693, February 14, 2018 - MANUEL M. VENEZUELA,

Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 209527, February 14, 2018 - THE REPUBLIC OF THE

PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. VIRGIE (VIRGEL) L. TIPAY, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 233100, February 14, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CRISTHIAN* KEVIN GUIEB Y BUTAY, Accused-
Appellant.

· G.R. No. 222428, February 19, 2018 - COCA-COLA BOTTLERS

PHILIPPINES, INC., Petitioner, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL
REVENUE, Respondent.

· A.M. No. MTJ-17-1893 (Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 15-2773-MTJ),

February 19, 2018 - TEODORA ALTOBANO-RUIZ, Complainant, v.
HON. RAMSEY DOMINGO G. PICHAY, PRESIDING JUDGE,
BRANCH 78, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT, PARAÑAQUE CITY,
Respondent.

· A.M. No. 17-11-131-MeTC, February 07, 2018 - RE: DROPPING

FROM THE ROLLS OF MS. JANICE C. MILLARE, CLERK III, OFFICE
OF THE CLERK OF COURT, METROPOLITAN TRIAL COURT,
QUEZON CITY.

· G.R. No. 231359, February 07, 2018 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee, v. CRISANTO CIRBETO Y GIRAY, Accused-
Appellant.

· G.R. No. 206788, February 14, 2018 - CHAILESE DEVELOPMENT

COMPANY, INC., REPRESENTED BY MA. TERESA M. CHUNG,
Petitioner, v. MONICO DIZON, JIMMY V. CRUZ, JESUS A. CRUZ,
RONALD V. DE GUZMAN, JARDO M. ENRIQUEZ, NENITA B.
LUSUNG, EDGAR F. NICDAO, RAFAEL L. DIZON, SOTERO J.
SANCHEZ, FERNANDO N. LEONARDO, MARILYN L.
VALENZUELA, JOE F. VALENZUELA, RAMON L. MANALASTAS,
NESTOR D. REYES, BRIGIDO S. CALMA, ANABELLA C. VALLEJO,
FERNANDO M. DIZON, JUANITO D. SERRANO, LOURDES V.
LAPID, FERDINAND L. UNCIANO, ALFREDO L. DIZON, MARIO A.
TONGOL, ROSSANA D. LEONES, RUFINO L. DIZON, ADELMO V.
GARCIA, NORMAN G. SUNDIAM, ORLANDO D. CRUZ, JERRY C.
ESPINO, ESTRELLITA S. CRUZ, ORLANDO B. CRUZ, SUSANA C.
AZARCON, FERNANDO MANDAP, RUBEN I. SUSI, MARIO M.
PAULE, ANGELITO G. PECO, LAURO R. MAQUESIAS, MAYLINDA
A. DAGAL, ABELARDO I. SUSI, MARIA C. MAQUESIAS, ISAGANI
A. TONGOL, JOSEFA L. UNCIANO, ORLANDO A. SERRANO, SR.,
GONZALO C. MAQUESIAS, CONSOLACION M. VALENZUELA,
REYNALDO A. CRUZ, RESTITUTO D. DABU, LEONARDO A. CRUZ,
PABLO M. DIZON, DOMINADOR V. CRUZ, RENATO DONATO, SR.,
EDUARDO L. BUNAG, SR., CARMELITA C. LAQUINDANUM, JUAN
O. MACABULOS, LIGAYA L. ECLARINAL, ANGEL D.
VALENZUELA, JR., HERNANDO D. CRUZ, ROSALINDA D. CRUZ,
BERNARD B. MENDOZA, RODALINO M. MEDINA, FERNANDO L.
MANANSALA, CORAZON C. SANTOS, JOSELITO C. NICDAO,
ROSARIO R. LOPEZ, MARY GRACE D. SAMONTE AND TERESITA
R. MAQUESIAS, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 225730, February 28, 2018 - THE PEOPLE OF THE

PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JULIA REGALADO ESTRADA,
Accused-Appellant.

· G.R. No. 206284, February 28, 2018 - REDANTE SARTO Y

MISALUCHA, Petitioner, v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,
Respondent.

· G.R. No. 212003, February 28, 2018 - PHILIPPINE SPAN ASIA

CARRIERS CORPORATION (FORMERLY SULPICIO LINES, INC.),
Petitioner, v. HEIDI PELAYO, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 223272, February 26, 2018 - IN THE MATTER OF THE

PETITION FOR HABEAS CORPUS, SSGT. EDGARDO L. OSORIO,
Petitioner, v. ASSISTANT STATE PROSECUTOR JUAN PEDRO C.
NAVERA; ASSISTANT STATE PROSECUTOR IRWIN A. MARAYA;
ASSOCIATE PROSECUTION ATTORNEY ETHEL RHEA G. SURIL OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, MANILA; COLONEL ROBERT M.
AREVALO, COMMANDER, HEADQUARTERS AND
HEADQUARTERS SUPPORT GROUP PHILIPPINE ARMY; COLONEL
ROSALIO G. POMPA, INF (GSC), PA, COMMANDING OFFICER, MP
BATALLION, HHSG, PA; AND CAPTAIN TELESFORO C.
BALASABAS, INF PA, AND/OR ANY AND ALL PERSONS WHO
MAY HAVE ACTUAL CUSTODY OVER THE PERSON OF SSGT.
EDGARDO L. OSORIO, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 229882, February 13, 2018 - CAMILO L. SABIO, Petitioner,

v. FIELD INVESTIGATION OFFICE (FIO), OFFICE OF THE
OMBUDSMAN, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 187423, February 28, 2018 - LANDBANK OF THE

PHILIPPINES, Petitioner, v. EDNA MAYO ALCANTARA AND HEIRS
OF CRISTY MAYO ALCANTARA, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 224834, February 28, 2018 - JONATHAN Y. DEE, Petitioner,

v. HARVEST ALL INVESTMENT LIMITED, VICTORY FUND
LIMITED, BONDEAST PRIVATE LIMITED, AND ALBERT HONG HIN
KAY, AS MINORITY SHAREHOLDERS OF ALLIANCE SELECT
FOODS INTERNATIONAL, INC., AND HEDY S.C. YAP-CHUA, AS
DIRECTOR AND SHAREHOLDER OF ALLIANCE SELECT FOODS
INTERNATIONAL, INC., Respondents.; G.R. No. 224871, February 28,
2018 - HARVEST ALL INVESTMENT LIMITED, VICTORY FUND
LIMITED, BONDEAST PRIVATE LIMITED, ALBERT HONG HIN
KAY, AS MINORITY SHAREHOLDERS OF ALLIANCE SELECT
FOODS INTERNATIONAL, INC., AND HEDY S.C. YAP-CHUA, AS A
DIRECTOR AND SHAREHOLDER OF ALLIANCE SELECT FOODS
INTERNATIONAL, INC., Petitioners, v. ALLIANCE SELECT FOODS
INTERNATIONAL, INC., GEORGE E. SYCIP, JONATHAN Y. DEE,
RAYMUND K.H. SEE, MARY GRACE T. VERA CRUZ, ANTONIO C.
PACIS, ERWIN M. ELECHICON, AND BARBARA ANNE C.
MIGALLOS, Respondents.

· G.R. No. 199172, February 21, 2018 - HON. LEONCIO EVASCO, JR.,
IN HIS CAPACITY AS OIG CITY ENGINEER OF DAVAO CITY AND
HON. WENDEL AVISADO, IN HIS CAPACITY AS THE CITY
ADMINISTRATOR OF DAVAO CITY, Petitioners, v. ALEX P.
MONTANEZ, DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE NAME AND STYLE
APM OR AD AND PROMO MANAGEMENT, Respondents.; DAVAO
BILLBOARD AND SIGNMAKERS ASSOCIATION (DABASA), INC.,
Respondent-Intervenor.

· G.R. No. 208642, February 07, 2018 - FACILITIES, INCORPORATED,

Petitioner, v. RALPH LITO W. LOPEZ, Respondent.; G.R. No. 208883,
February 07, 2018 - RALPH LITO W. LOPEZ, Petitioner, v. FACILITIES,
INCORPORATED, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 194262, February 28, 2018 - BOBIE ROSE D. V. FRIAS, AS

REPRESENTED BY MARIE REGINE F. FUJITA, Petitioner, v.
ROLANDO F. ALCAYDE, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 232202, February 28, 2018 - DANIEL A. VILLAREAL, JR.

(ON BEHALF OF ORLANDO A. VILLAREAL), Petitioner, v.
METROPOLITAN WATERWORKS AND SEWERAGE SYSTEM,
Respondent.

· G.R. No. 207843, February 14, 2018 - COMMISSIONER OF

INTERNAL REVENUE, Petitioner, v. COURT OF TAX APPEALS AND
PETRON CORPORATION, Respondent.

· G.R. No. 202974, February 07, 2018 - NORMA D. CACHO AND

NORTH STAR INTERNATIONAL TRAVEL, INC., Petitioners, v.
VIRGINIA D. BALAGTAS, Respondent.

Copyright © 1995 - 2022 REDiaz