Angel

Stages of commission
THE UNITED STATE vs. PROTASIO EDUAVE
FACTS: The accused rushed upon the girl suddenly and struck her from behind, in part at least, with a
sharp bolo, producing a frightful gash in the lumbar region and slightly to the side eight and one-half
inches long and two inches deep, severing all of the muscles and tissues of that part. Fortunately the girl
was able to survive
The motive of the crime was that the accused was incensed at the girl for the reason that she had
theretofore charged him criminally before the local officials with having raped her and with being the
cause of her pregnancy. He was her mother's querido and was living with her as such at the time the
crime here charged was committed
The accused is charged with frustrated murder. We are satisfied that there was an intent to kill in this
case. A deadly weapon was used. The blow was directed toward a vital part of the body. The aggressor
stated his purpose to kill, thought he had killed, and threw the body into the bushes. When he gave
himself up he declared that he had killed the complainant.
ISSUE: Whether or not the accused is to be charged with frustrated murder.
HELD: YES. The crime cannot be attempted murder. This is clear from the fact that the defendant
performed all of the acts which should have resulted in the consummated crime and voluntarily desisted
from further acts.
A felony is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which should produce the
felony as a consequence, but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of
the will of the perpetrator. To put it in another way, in case of an attempt the offender never passes the
subjective phase of the offense.
On the other hand, attempted murder is defined as when the offender commences the commission of the
felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which constitute the felony
by reason of some cause or accident other than his own voluntarily desistance. Hence the subjective
phase is completely passed. Subjectively the crime is complete.
The subjective phase is that portion of the acts constituting the crime included between the act which
begins the commission of the crime and the last act performed by the offender which, with the prior acts,
should result in the consummated crime. From that time forward the phase is objective. It may also be
said to be that period occupied by the acts of the offender over which he has control that period between
the point where he begins and the points where he voluntarily desists. If between these two points the
offender is stopped by reason of any cause outside of his own voluntary desistance, the subj ective phase
has not been passed and it is an attempt. If he is not so stopped but continues until he performs the last
act, it is frustrated.
Angel

Rivera v. People

Victim, Ruben went to a nearby store to buy food. Accused Rivera was in the same vicinity. When he saw
Ruben, Rivera mocked Ruben for being jobless and dependent on his wife. This caused an exchange of
heated words between the two.
The next day when Ruben and his daughter were once again buying food, Rivera and two other men
attacked Ruben. The two men punched and mauled Ruben while Rivera, on the other hand, got a
hollowblock and hit Rubenss head with it three times. Rivera and his companions left only when the
policemen arrived.
Ruben was brought to the hospital and it was said that he suffered only slight and superficial wounds but
were it not for the arrival of the policemen, Ruben would have died.
TC- the three are guilty of frustrated murder.
CA- affirmed the decision of the trial court, with modifications.
ISSUE: Whether or not there was INTENT TO KILL.
HELD: Yes. There is intent to kill in the case at bar.
The pieces of evidence required to prove intent to kill are as follows:
1.means used by the malefactors
2.nature,location and number of wounds sustained by the victim
3. conduct of the malefactor before, during and after the commission of the crime,
4.circumstances under which the crime was committed
5. motive of the accused.
Applying the elements to the case at bar, the means or weapons used by RIVERA is a piece of hollow
block.
As to nature, location and number of wounds, Rivera inflicted injuries on the head of Ruben three times.
Conduct before during and after the commission of the crime, Rivera was angry at Ruben because of the
circumstances that transpired between Ruben and him
Angel
Baleros v. People

G.R. No. 138033 February 22, 2006

Lessons Applicable: Attempted Rape

Laws Applicable: Art. 6

FACTS:
Martina Lourdes Albano (Malou), a medical student of the University of Sto. Tomas, stayed at Room
307 with her maid Marvilou.
December 12 10:30 pm: Malou slept. Her maid Marvilou slept on a folding bed right in front of her
bedroom door.
December 13, 1991 1:00 am: Chito left the fraternity party with Robert Chan and Alberto wearing a
barong tagalog, with t-shirt inside, with short pants with stripes lent by Perla Duran and leather shoes.
December 13, 1991 1:30 am: Chito arrived at the Building wearing a white t-shirt with fraternity
symbols and black shorts with the brand name Adidas from a party. He requested permission from S/G
Ferolin to go up to Room 306 leased by Ansbert Co but at that time only Joseph Bernard Africa was
there. Although Chito could not produce the required written authorization, he let him in because he will
be a tenant in the coming summer break. Joseph was awaken by Chitos knock so he glanced the alarm
clock and let him. He saw him wearing dark-colored shorts and white T-shirt.
December 13, 1991 1:50 am: Renato Baleros, Jr. y David (Chito) forcefully covered the face of
Martina Lourdes T. Albano with a piece of cloth soaked in chemical with dizzying effects. This awakened
Malou. She struggled but could not move because she was tightly held and pinned down on the
bed. She kicked him and got her right hand free to squeeze his sex organ causing him to let her go. She
went for the bedroom door and woke up Marvilou. She also intercommed S/G Ferolin saying: "may
pumasok sa kuarto ko pinagtangkaan ako". Malou proceed to Room 310 where her classmates Christian
Alcala, Bernard Baptista, Lutgardo Acosta and Rommel Montes were staying and seeked help. She saw
her bed in a mess and noticed that her nightdress was stained with blue. Aside from the window with
grills which she had originally left opened, another window inside her bedroom which leads to Room 306
was now open.
December 13, 1991 3:30 pm: Christian and his roommates, Bernard and Lutgardo were asked by the
CIS people to look for anything not belonging to them in their Unit when Rommel Montes went inside and
found a grey bag.
o Christian knew right away that it belonged to Chito. It contained white t-shirt with fraternity symbol, a
Black Adidas short pants, a handkerchief , 3 white T-shirts, an underwear and socks.
Chito pleaded NOT Guilty
13 witnesses including Malou and her classmates, Joseph Bernard Africa, Rommel Montes, Renato
Alagadan and Christian Alcala
o Malou: Chito was her classmate whom he rejected a week before
o Chito: He only slept and at about 6 to 6:30, Joseph told him that something had happened and asked
him to follow him to Room 310 carrying his gray bag and since no one was there they went to Room 401
where Renato Alagadan was. He left his grey bag at Room 306 the day before.
handkerchief and Malous night dress both contained chloroform, a volatile poison which causes first
degree burn exactly like what Malou sustained on that part of her face where the chemical-soaked cloth
had been pressed
RTC: guilty of attempted rape
CA: Affirmed

ISSUE: W/N Chito is guilty of attempted rape

HELD: NO. REVERSED and SET ASIDE. ACQUITTING Renato D. Baleros, Jr. of the charge for
attempted rape. GUILTY of light coercion and is accordingly sentenced to 30 days of arresto menor and
to pay a fine of P200.00, with the accessory penalties thereof and to pay the costs.

Under Article 335 of the Revised Penal Code, rape is committed by a man who has carnal knowledge
or intercourse with a woman under any of the following circumstances: (1) By using force or intimidation;
(2) When the woman is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious; and (3) When the woman is under
twelve years of age or is demented.
Under Article 6, in relation to the aforementioned article of the same code, rape is attempted when the
offender commences the commission of rape directly by overt acts and does not perform all the acts of
execution which should produce the crime of rape by reason of some cause or accident other than his
own spontaneous desistance.
o whether or not the act of the petitioner, i.e., the pressing of a chemical-soaked cloth while on top of
Malou, constitutes an overt act of rape.
o Overt or external act has been defined as some physical activity or deed, indicating the intention to
commit a particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried out to its complete
termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the voluntary
desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete offense
Chito was fully clothed and that there was no attempt on his part to undress Malou, let alone touch her
private part
Verily, while the series of acts committed by the petitioner do not determine attempted rape, they
constitute unjust vexation punishable as light coercion under the second paragraph of Article 287 of the
Revised Penal Code.
o As it were, unjust vexation exists even without the element of restraint or compulsion for the reason
that this term is broad enough to include any human conduct which, although not productive of some
physical or material harm, would unjustly annoy or irritate an innocent person
o That Malou, after the incident in question, cried while relating to her classmates what she perceived to
be a sexual attack and the fact that she filed a case for attempted rape proved beyond cavil that she was
disturbed, if not distressed
Angel

Valenzuela v. People
G. R. No. 160188 June 21, 2007

Lessons Applicable: frustrated or consummated theft

Laws Applicable: Art. 6

FACTS:
May 19, 1994 4:30 pm: Aristotel Valenzuela and Jovy Calderon were sighted outside the Super Sale
Club, a supermarket within the ShoeMart (SM) complex along North EDSA, by Lorenzo Lago, a security
guard who was then manning his post at the open parking area of the supermarket. Lago saw
Valenzuela, who was wearing an ID with the mark Receiving Dispatching Unit (RDU) who hauled a push
cart with cases of detergent of Tide brand and unloaded them in an open parking space, where
Calderon was waiting. He then returned inside the supermarket and emerged 5 minutes after with more
cartons of Tide Ultramatic and again unloaded these boxes to the same area in the open parking space.
Thereafter, he left the parking area and haled a taxi. He boarded the cab and directed it towards the
parking space where Calderon was waiting. Calderon loaded the cartons of Tide Ultramatic inside the
taxi, then boarded the vehicle. As Lago watched, he proceeded to stop the taxi as it was leaving the open
parking area and asked Valenzuela for a receipt of the merchandise but Valenzuela and Calderon
reacted by fleeing on foot. Lago fired a warning shot to alert his fellow security guards. Valenzuela and
Calderon were apprehended at the scene and the stolen merchandise recovered worth P12,090.
Valenzuela, Calderon and 4 other persons were first brought to the SM security office before they
were transferred to the Baler Station II of the Philippine National Police but only Valenzuela and Calderon
were charged with theft by the Assistant City Prosecutor.
They pleaded not guilty.
Calderons Alibi: On the afternoon of the incident, he was at the Super Sale Club to withdraw from his
ATM account, accompanied by his neighbor, Leoncio Rosulada. As the queue for the ATM was long, he
and Rosulada decided to buy snacks inside the supermarket. While they were eating, they heard the
gunshot fired by Lago, so they went out to check what was transpiring and when they did, they were
suddenly grabbed by a security guard
Valenzuelas Alibi: He is employed as a bundler of GMS Marketing and assigned at the supermarket.
He and his cousin, a Gregorio Valenzuela, had been at the parking lot, walking beside the nearby BLISS
complex and headed to ride a tricycle going to Pag-asa, when they saw the security guard Lago fire a
shot causing evryon to start running. Then they were apprehended by Lago.
RTC: guilty of consummated theft
CA: Confirmed RTC and rejected his contention that it should only be frustrated theft since at the time
he was apprehended, he was never placed in a position to freely dispose of the articles stolen.

ISSUE: W/N Valenzuela should be guilty of consummated theft.

HELD: YES. petition is DENIED
Article 6 defines those three stages, namely the consummated, frustrated and attempted felonies.
o A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are
present.
o It is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony
as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will
of the perpetrator.
o It is attempted when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and
does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or
accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.
Each felony under the Revised Penal Code has a:
o subjective phase - portion of the acts constituting the crime included between the act which begins the
commission of the crime and the last act performed by the offender which, with prior acts, should result in
the consummated crime

o objective phase - After that point of subjective phase has been breached

the determination of whether a crime is frustrated or consummated necessitates an initial concession
that all of the acts of execution have been performed by the offender
The determination of whether the felony was produced after all the acts of execution had been
performed hinges on the particular statutory definition of the felony.
actus non facit reum, nisi mens sit rea - ordinarily, evil intent must unite with an unlawful act for there
to be a crime or there can be no crime when the criminal mind is wanting
In crimes mala in se, mens rea has been defined before as a guilty mind, a guilty or wrongful purpose
or criminal intent and essential for criminal liability.
Statutory definition of our mala in se crimes must be able to supply what the mens rea of the crime is
and overt acts that constitute the crime
Article 308 of the Revised Penal Code (Elements of Theft):
1. that there be taking of personal property - only one operative act of execution by the actor involved in
theft
2. property belongs to another
3. taking be done with intent to gain - descriptive circumstances
4. taking be done without the consent of the owner - descriptive circumstances
5. taking be accomplished without the use of violence against or intimidation of persons or force upon
things - descriptive circumstances
Abandoned cases:
o U.S. v. Adiao: failed to get the merchandise out of the Custom House - consummated theft
o Dio: Military Police inspected the truck at the check point and found 3 boxes of army rifles -
frustrated theft
o Flores: guards discovered that the empty sea van had actually contained other merchandise as well
- consummated theft
o Empelis v. IAC: Fled the scene, dropping the coconuts they had seized - frustrated qualified theft
because petitioners were not able to perform all the acts of execution which should have produced the
felony as a consequence

The ability of the actor to freely dispose of the articles stolen, even if it were only momentary.
o We are satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the taking by the petitioner was completed in this
case. With intent to gain, he acquired physical possession of the stolen cases of detergent for a
considerable period of time that he was able to drop these off at a spot in the parking lot, and long
enough to load these onto a taxicab.
Article 308 of the Revised Penal Code, theft cannot have a frustrated stage. Theft can only be
attempted (no unlawful taking) or consummated (there is unlawful taking).
Angel
Epifanio vs. People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 157057, June 26, 2007
Facts: On August 15, 1990, Crisaldo Alberto (Crisaldo) and his cousin, Allan Perez (Allan), were walking
to their respective homes after spending time at the house of Crisaldo's father. Since the pavement going
to Crisaldo's house followed a narrow pathway along the local shrubs called banganga, Allan walked
ahead of Crisaldo. Suddenly, Crisaldo felt the piercing thrust of a bladed weapon on his back, which
caused him to cry out in pain. He made a quick turnaround and saw his attacker, petitioner, also known
as "Iyo (Uncle) Kingkoy." Petitioner stabbed Crisaldo again but only hit the latter's left arm. When Allan
heard Crisaldo's outcry, he rushed to Crisaldo's side which caused petitioner to run away. Allan then
brought Crisaldo to his father's house where Crisaldo's wounds were wrapped in a blanket. Crisaldo was
then brought to the Peaplata Hospital where he was given first aid and then transferred to the Davao
Medical Center where he stayed for three weeks to recuperate from his wounds.

Subsequently, petitioner was charged with Frustrated Murder. During his arraignment, petitioner pleaded
"not guilty." Petitioner's defense consisted mainly of denial. On July 5, 1994, the RTC rendered its
Decision convicting the petitioner. Petitioner appealed his conviction to the CA, which affirmed the
decision in toto.

Issue: Whether the accused was guilty of frustrated murder.

Held: No. It must be stressed that it is not the gravity of the wounds alone which determines whether a
felony is attempted or frustrated, but whether the assailant had passed the subjective phase in the
commission of the offense.

In homicide cases, the offender is said to have performed all the acts of execution if the wound inflicted
on the victim is mortal and could cause the death of the victim barring medical intervention or attendance.
If one inflicts physical injuries on another but the latter survives, the crime committed is either
consummated physical injuries, if the offender had no intention to kill the victim; or frustrated or attempted
homicide or frustrated murder or attempted murder if the offender intends to kill the victim. Intent to kill
may be proved by evidence of: (a) motive; (b) the nature or number of weapons used in the commission
of the crime; (c) the nature and number of wounds inflicted on the victim; (d) the manner the crime was
committed; and (e) words uttered by the offender at the time the injuries were inflicted by him on the
victim.

In the present case, the intent to kill is very evident and was established beyond reasonable doubt
through the unwavering testimony of Crisaldo on the manner of execution of the attack as well as the
number of wounds he sustained. Crisaldo was stabbed from behind by petitioner. When Crisaldo turned
around, petitioner continued his assault, hitting Crisaldo on the left arm as the latter tried to defend
himself. The treacherous manner in which petitioner perpetrated the crime is shown not only by the
sudden and unexpected attack upon the unsuspecting victim but also by the deliberate manner in which
the assault was perpetrated. Nonetheless, petitioner failed to perform all the acts of execution, because
Allan came to the aid of Crisaldo and petitioner was forced to scamper away. He did not voluntarily desist
from stabbing Crisaldo, but he had to stop stabbing when Allan rushed to help Crisaldo and recognized
petitioner. Thus, the subjective phase of the crime had not been completed.

Moreover, the prosecution failed to present testimonial evidence on the nature of the wounds sustained
by Crisaldo. No evidence in this case was introduced to prove that Crisaldo would have died from his
wound without timely medical attendance. It is well-settled that where there is nothing in the evidence to
show that the wound would be fatal if not medically attended to, the character of the wound is doubtful;
hence, the doubt should be resolved in favor of the accused and the crime committed by him may be
declared as attempted, not frustrated murder.
Angel
PEOPLE v. LAMAHANG [61 Phil. 703 (1935)]

Facts: Aurelio Lamahang was caught opening with an iron bar a wall of a store of cheap goods in Fuentes
St. Iloilo. He broke one board and was unfastening another when a patrolling police caught him. Owners
of the store were sleeping inside store as it was early dawn. Convicted of attempt of robbery

Issue: WON crime is attempted robbery?

Held: No. Attempted trespass to dwelling. Attempt should have logical relation to a particular and
concrete offense which would lead directly to consummation. Necessary to establish unavoidable
connection & logical & natural relation of cause and effect. Important to show clear intent to commit crime.
In case at bar, we can only infer that his intent was to enter by force, other inferences are not justified by
facts. Groizard: infer only from nature of acts executed. Acts susceptible of double interpretation cant
furnish ground for themselves. Mind should not directly infer intent. Spain SC: necessary that objectives
established or acts themselves obviously disclose criminal objective.
Angel
People v. Kalalo GR Nos. L-39303-39305 March 17, 2009
FACTS: On November 10, 1932, the appellants, namely, Felipe Kalalo, Marcelo Kalalo, Juan Kalalo and
Gregorio Ramos, were tried in the Court of First Instance of Batangas, together with Alejandro Garcia,
Fausta Abrenica and Alipia Abrenica in criminal cases Nos. 6858, 6859 and 6860,the first two for murder,
and the last for frustrated murder. Upon agreement of the parties said three cases were tried together and
after the presentation of their respective evidence, the said court acquitted Alejandro Garcia, Fausta
Abrenica and Alipia Abrenica, and sentenced the other appellants. Prior to the commission of the three
crimes, the appellant Marcelo Kalalo and Isabel Holgado, the latter being the sister of one of the
deceased, had a litigation over a parcel of land situated in the barrio of Calumpang in the municipality of
San Luis, Batangas. Kalalo filed two complaints against the said woman in the Court of First Instance of
Batangas, alleging that he, Kalalo cultivated the land in question during 1931 and 1932 but that, when
harvest time came Isabela Holgado reaped all that had been planted thereon. Both complaints were
dismissed. On October 1, 1932, Isabela Holgado and her brother Arcadio Holgado, one of the deceased,
ordered the plowing of the disputed land and employed several laborers for that purpose. Marcelo Kalalo,
upon learning about it, went to the place accompanied by his brothers and Felipa and Juan, his brother-
in-law Gregorio Ramos and by Alejandro Garcia. They were all armed with bolos and upon arriving at the
place, they ordered the workers to stop. Having been informed of the cause of the suspension of the
work, Marcelino Panaligan, one of the deceased, ordered the laborers to continue the work. At this point,
Marcelo Kalalo approached Arcadio and the other appellants approached Marcelino Panaligan and they
all simultaneously struck with their bolos. Arcadio Holgado and Marcelino Panaligan died instantly from
the wounds received. After the two had fallen, Marcelo Kalalo took the revolver that Marcelino Panaligan
carried, and fired four shots at Hilario Holgado who wasthen fleeing from the scene in order to save his
own life.
ISSUE: WON the appellants are guilty of murder or of simple homicide in each of the cases.
HELD: It is true that under article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, which defines murder, the
circumstance of abuse of superior strength, if proven to have been presented, raises homicide to the
category of murder; but it is also to be borne in mind that the deceased were also armed, one of them
with a bolo, and the other with a revolver. The risk was even for the contending parties and their strength
was almost balanced because there is no doubt but that, under circumstances similar to those of the
present case, a revolver is as effective as, if not more than three bolos. For this reason, this court is of the
opinion that the acts established in cases Nos. 6858 and 6859 (G.R. Nos. L-39303 and
39304,respectively), merely constitute two homicides. As to the third case, the evidence shows that
Marcelo Kalalo fired four successive shots at Hilarion Holgado while the latter was fleeing from the scene
of the crime in order to be out of reach of the appellants and their companions and save his own life. The
fact that the said appellant, not having contended himself with firing only once, fired said successive shots
at Hilarion Holgado, added to the circumstance that immediately before doing so he and his co-appellants
had already killed Arcadio Holgado and Marcelino Panaligan, cousin and brother-in-law, respectively, of
the former, shows that the was then bent on killing said Hilarion Holgado. He performed everything
necessary on his pat to commit the crime that he determined to commit but he failed by reason of causes
independent of his will, either because of his poor aim or because his intended victim succeeded in
dodging the shots,none of which found its mark. The acts thus committed by the said appellant Marcelo
Kalalo constitute attempted homicide.