FRUSTRATED HOMICIDE ( HOMICIDE + frustrated)

statutory rape
sexual assault
qualified theft via conspiracy
murder
murder qualified by superior strength
robbery with homicide
complex crime vs. distinct crime of murder
definition of reasonable doubt of the complex crime of Estafa thru falsification
of public documents
self defense
definition unlawful aggression / elements of self- defense
There can be no self-defense, whether complete or incomplete, unless the
victim had committed unlawful aggression against the person who resorted to
self-defense."
Unlawful aggression does not contemplate a mere threatening or intimidating
attitude.
The moral and legal presumption is always in favor of soundness of mind;
that freedom and intelligence constitute the normal condition of a person. It
is improper to assume the contrary.
sufficient provocation -In the present case, a finding that the act of the victim
did not constitute unlawful aggression does not automatically negate the
attendant circumstance of sufficient provocation.
treachery (elements)
The aggravating circumstance of taking advantage of superior strength
To stress, qualifying circumstances must be proved as clearly as the crime
itself.
abuse of strength
In murder cases, the heirs of the victim should be automatically indemnified
in the amount of P50, 000 as moral damages.
No proof is necessary since the emotional and mental suffering of the heirs is
apparent.
guidelines of alibi
Moreover, in order to justify an acquittal based on alibi, the accused must
establish by clear and convincing evidence that he was somewhere else at
the time of the commission of the offense; and it was physically impossible
for him to be at the scene of the crime at the time it was committed
The conviction of a person as a principal by inducement requires that the
inducement be made with the intention of procuring the commission of the
crime; and that such inducement be the determining cause of the
commission by the material executor.
Applying article 70 of the RPC, such maximum period shall in no case exceed
forty years.

Therefore, in spite of the six (6) penalties of forty (40) years of reclusion
perpetua, petitioner shall only suffer imprisonment for a period not exceeding
40 years.
A downward modification of the penalty imposed by the RTC is then in order.
Act No. 3326, Section 2 which provides for two reckoning points for the
counting of the prescription of an offense: the day of the commission of the
violation of the law; and if the day when the violation was committed be not
known, then it shall begin to run from the discovery of said violation and the
institution of judicial proceedings for investigation and punishment.
The presumption of regularity in the conduct of police duty is disputable by
contrary proof and which when challenged by the evidence cannot be
regarded as binding truth
To constitute the offense of reckless driving Sec. 48 of RA 4136, the act must
be something more than a mere negligence in the operation of a motor
vehicle, and a willful and wanton disregard of the consequences is required
art 151
The IRR of RA 9165 readily reveals that the custodial chain rule is not to be
rigorously applied, provided "the integrity and evidentiary value of the seized
items are properly preserved by the apprehending officer/team."
Elements of illegal sale
Elements of illegal possession
A police officer's act of soliciting drugs from the accused during a buy-bust
operation or what is known as a decoy solicitation, is not prohibited by law
and does not render the buy-bust operation invalid.
What is significant in the requirement is the preservation of the integrity and
evidentiary value of the seized items.
(1) testimony about every link in the chain, from the moment the item was
picked up to the time it is offered into evidence; and (2) witnesses should
describe the precautions taken to ensure that there had been no change in
the condition of the item and no opportunity for someone not in the chain to
have possession of the item.
In determining the occurrence of entrapment, two tests have been
developed: the subjective test and the objective test. Under the subjective
view, the focus is on the intent of the accused to commit a crime. Under the
objective view, the primary focus is on the particular conduct of law
enforcement officials or their agents. Courts have adopted the objective test
in upholding the validity of a buy-bust operation and under this test, the
details of the purported transaction during the buy-bust operation must be
clearly and adequately shown and must be subject of strict scrutiny by courts
to insure that law-abiding citizens are not unlawfully induced to commit an
offense.
ISLAW
drug syndicate is any organized group of two (2) or more persons forming or
joining together with the intention of committing any offense prescribed
under RA 9165.
171

The settled rule is that in the absence of satisfactory explanation, one found
in possession of and who used a forged document is the forger and therefore
guilty of falsification.
177
Anti-sexual harassment act
203-245
217
Private persons, when acting in conspiracy with public officers, may be
indicted and, if found guilty, held liable for the pertinent offenses under
Section 3 of R.A. 3019.
SEC 3 (3) OF RA 3019 (ELEMENTS)
Misconduct is the unlawful behavior of a public officer. It means the
"intentional wrongdoing or deliberate violation of a rule of law or standard of
behaviour, especially by a government official."
246-266
For alevosia to qualify the crime to murder, it must be shown that: (1) the
malefactor employed such means, method or manner of execution as to
ensure his or her safety from the defensive or retaliatory acts of the victim;
and (2) the said means, method and manner of execution were deliberately
adopted. Moreover, for treachery to be appreciated, it must be present and
seen by the witness right at the inception of the attack
Delay in revealing the identity of the perpetrators of a crime does not
necessarily impair the credibility of a witness, especially where sufficient
explanation is given. No standard form of behavior can be expected from
people who had witnessed a strange or frightful experience.
There is qualified rape if the crime of rape is committed and coupled with any
of the aggravating circumstances mentioned in Art. 266-B,
It is a basic doctrine that anyone who can perceive, and perceiving, can make
known such perception to others, may be a witness. Thus, by itself, mental
retardation does not disqualify a person from testifying. What is essential is
the quality of perception, and the manner in which this perception is made
known to the court.
"Sweetheart" theory, being an affirmative defense, must be established by
convincing evidence -- some documentary and/or other evidence like
mementos, love letters, notes, photographs and the like.
The requisites of qualified theft are: 1) Taking personal property; 2) said
property belongs to another; 3) Taking with intent to gain; 4) that it be done
without owners consent; 5) accomplished without violence or intimidation
against persons and force upon things; 6) that it be done with grave abuse of
confidence.
The allegation in the information that the offender is a laborer of the
offended party does not by itself, without more, create the relation of
confidence and intimacy required by law for the imposition of the penalty
prescribed for qualified theft.
To sustain a conviction based on circumstantial evidence, it is essential that
the circumstantial evidence presented must constitute an unbroken chain

which leads one to a fair and reasonable conclusion pointing to the accused,
to the exclusion of the others, as the guilty person. The circumstantial
evidence must exclude the possibility that some other person has committed
the crime. The Court finds that the prosecution failed to present sufficient
circumstantial evidence to convict the petitioner of the offense charged. We
find that the pieces of evidence presented before the trial court fail to provide
a sufficient combination of circumstances, as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt
The character of the crime is determined by the recital of the ultimate facts
and circumstances in the information.
The elements of the crime of estafa under Art. 315, par. 2 of the RPC are: (1)
the accused made false pretenses or fraudulent representations as to his
power, influence, qualifications, property, credit, agency, business, or
imaginary transactions; (2) such false pretenses or fraudulent
representations were made prior to or simultaneous with the commission of
the fraud; (3) such false pretenses or fraudulent representations constitute
the very cause which induced the offended party to part with his money or
property; and (4) as a result thereof, the offended party suffered damage.
Demand under this kind of estafa [Art. 315 (b)] need not be formal or written.
The elements of estafa in general are: (1) that the accused defrauded
another (a) by abuse of confidence, or (b) by means of deceit; and (2) that
damage or prejudice capable of pecuniary estimation is caused to the
offended party or third person.
The mere fact that the subject of the article is a public figure or a matter of
public interest does not automatically exclude the author from liability. For a
discreditable imputation to a public official to be actionable, it must be a
false allegation of fact or a comment based on a false supposition.
To be considered privileged, the following must exist: (a) That it is a fair and
true report of a judicial, legislative, or other official proceedings which are not
of confidential nature, or of a statement, report or speech delivered in said
proceedings, or of any other act performed by a public officer in the exercise
of his functions; (b) That it is made in good faith; and (c) That it is without any
comments or remarks. In this case, the articles are plain baseless accusations
based on the word of one unnamed source. The articles also failed to satisfy
the requirements of being fair and true
For purposes of determining venue, residence is not synonymous with
domicile. One may reside in a place apart from ones legal residence, without
changing domicile, and that residence would constitute actual residence for
purposes of determining venue.
for purposes of venue, the less technical definition of residence is adopted.
Thus, it is understood to mean as the personal, actual or physical habitation
of a person, actual residence or place of abode. It signifies physical presence
in a place and actual stay thereat. In this popular sense, the term means
merely residence, that is, personal residence, not legal residence or domicile.
Residence simply requires bodily presence as an inhabitant in a given place,

while domicile requires bodily presence in that place and also an intention to
make it ones domicile.
Well-entrenched in jurisprudence is the rule that the conviction of the
accused must rest, not on the weakness of the defense, but on the strength
of the prosecution.