Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code.

The Court reasoned

Case Digest: People of the Philippines vs. Pablito Domasian that the detention of the minor, Enrico, even though brief, and
and Dr. Samson Tan the sending of the ransom note clearly constituted the offense.
The conspiracy between Domasian and Tan was established
G.R. No. 95322 | March 1, 1993 through their complementary actions aimed at extorting money
from the victim’s family.
Facts: On March 11, 1982, eight-year-old Enrico Paulo Agra
was approached by a man, later identified as Pablito Domasian, Key Points:
who asked for help in getting his father’s signature on a
medical certificate. Enrico was taken by Domasian to various 1. Kidnapping and Serious Illegal Detention: The crime
locations, during which he was forcibly detained. Enrico was of kidnapping does not require that the victim be
eventually released after bystanders, suspicious of Domasian's confined in an enclosure; any form of deprivation of
behavior, intervened. liberty suffices.
2. Conspiracy: The acts of Domasian (detaining Enrico)
After Enrico’s return, his father received a ransom note and Tan (writing the ransom note) were found to be
demanding ₱1 million for his son's release, allegedly written by interrelated and aimed at achieving a common criminal
Dr. Samson Tan, a resident physician at the hospital owned by purpose.
Enrico’s parents. Both Domasian and Tan were charged with 3. Handwriting Evidence: The Court favored the
kidnapping with serious illegal detention. testimony of the NBI handwriting expert, who
identified Tan as the writer of the ransom note, over the
Issues:
conflicting findings of the PC/INP.
1. Whether the crime committed was kidnapping with 4. Constitutional Rights: Allegations of the accused
serious illegal detention or merely grave coercion. being tortured or held incommunicado were noted but
2. Whether there was sufficient evidence to prove the did not impact the decision, as no confession was
conspiracy between Domasian and Tan. extracted and the evidence used was not obtained
3. Whether the procedural and constitutional rights of the unlawfully by the authorities.
accused were violated.

Ruling: The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of both

accused for kidnapping with serious illegal detention under

1
Disposition: The decision of the lower court was affirmed,
sentencing both Domasian and Tan to reclusion perpetua and
ordering them to pay ₱200,000 in damages and attorney’s fees
to the victim’s family.

What is the case all about?

The case G.R. No. 95322 involves Pablito Domasian and Dr.
Samson Tan, who were convicted of kidnapping with serious
illegal detention. On March 11, 1982, Domasian, pretending
to need help, abducted 8-year-old Enrico Paulo Agra and
detained him for several hours. Dr. Tan was implicated
through a ransom note that was found to have been written
by him. Despite their claims of alibi, both were found guilty
and sentenced to life imprisonment.

How is the case related to the topic "impossible crimes"?

The case is related to "impossible crimes" in that Dr. Samson

Tan argued that the ransom note might be considered an
impossible crime because it was delivered after Enrico’s
rescue. However, the Supreme Court clarified that the
underlying crime of kidnapping with serious illegal detention
was already completed by Domasian’s actions, and the
ransom note did not constitute an impossible crime since the
kidnapping itself was a real and achievable offense.

2
Timeline of Events: familiar in handwriting to Dr. Agra, who submits it to
the police.
March 11, 1982:
March 12, 1982:
● Morning: Enrico Paulo Agra, an 8-year-old boy, is
walking with a classmate along Roque Street, ● Forensic Analysis: The National Bureau of
Poblacion, Lopez, Quezon. A man approaches Enrico, Investigation (NBI) confirms that the ransom note was
claiming to need assistance with obtaining his father’s written by Dr. Samson Tan.
signature on a medical certificate. Enrico agrees and
rides a tricycle with the man to Calantipayan. March 13, 1982:
● At Calantipayan: The man leaves Enrico outside while
● Identification: Enrico is shown a photo lineup and
he goes inside a building to get the certificate. Instead
identifies Pablito Domasian as the man who detained
of taking Enrico to the hospital, the man flags down a
him.
minibus and forcibly takes Enrico on board.
● Midday: The man, still holding Enrico, takes another Subsequent Days:
tricycle to San Vicente. Enrico, still crying, arouses the
suspicion of the tricycle driver, Alexander Grate. Grate ● Charges Filed: Pablito Domasian and Dr. Samson Tan
questions the man about his relationship with the boy are charged with kidnapping with serious illegal
and finds the answers suspicious. He reports the detention in the Regional Trial Court of Quezon.
incident to barangay tanods, who pursue the man and
Enrico. Trial Phase:
● Early Afternoon: The man tells Enrico to run away
● Defense: Domasian claims an alibi, stating he was
from the pursuers, who are closing in on them. The man
watching mahjong and then went to an optical clinic.
escapes, leaving Enrico behind. Enrico is found by his
Dr. Tan also presents an alibi, claiming he was in
parents in a passenger jeep while they are looking for
Manila.
him.
● Prosecution Evidence: Enrico and witnesses such as
● 1:45 PM: Enrico's father, Dr. Enrique Agra, receives an
Alexander Grate and Tirso Ferreras positively identify
envelope containing a ransom note demanding PHP 1
Domasian. Expert opinions support the claim that Dr.
million for Enrico’s release. The note is found to be
Tan wrote the ransom note.

3
Trial Outcome: ○ The alleged constitutional rights violations by
Domasian do not affect the conviction.
● Judge Enrico A. Lanzanas: Finds both accused guilty
of kidnapping with serious illegal detention, sentencing Post-Decision:
them to reclusion perpetua (life imprisonment) and
ordering them to pay PHP 200,000 in damages. ● The decision is affirmed, with costs against the
accused-appellants. The case is forwarded to the
Appeal: Commission on Human Rights for investigation into the
alleged violation of constitutional rights of Pablito
● Accused-Appellants’ Arguments: Domasian.
○ Denial of participation and challenges to the
credibility of prosecution witnesses. This timeline captures the key events and decisions in the case,
○ Disputes over the classification of the crime and from the initial incident through to the final Supreme Court
claims that the ransom note constituted an ruling.
impossible crime.
○ Arguments against the finding of conspiracy.

Supreme Court Decision (March 1, 1993):

● Affirmation of Lower Court’s Decision: The

Supreme Court upholds the conviction of both accused.
It finds that:
○ The trial court correctly assessed the credibility
of witnesses.
○ The nature of the crime fits within Article 267
of the Revised Penal Code, even though there
was no physical enclosure.
○ The conspiracy between Domasian and Tan was
proven.

4
The concept of "impossible crimes" in criminal law refers to of his liberty, even before the ransom note was
actions that cannot logically achieve the intended criminal received. The note itself, while it could increase
result, often because of inherent impossibility or the use of the severity of the crime, did not constitute an
ineffective means. Here’s how the case of G.R. No. 95322 impossible crime.
relates to this topic: ○ Reasoning: The court emphasized that the act
of kidnapping and detention was completed
Impossible Crimes: regardless of the ransom note. The crime had
already been committed through the restraint
1. Definition and Scope: and detention of Enrico, and the ransom note
○ Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code defines did not negate the criminality of the act. The
impossible crimes as those acts which would be note was considered an additional element that
criminal if they could achieve their intended did not alter the fundamental nature of the
result but are inherently impossible to kidnapping.
accomplish or are performed with inadequate 4. Legal Principle:
means. For example, if someone attempted to ○ The case demonstrates that an impossible crime
steal something but the item didn't exist, it requires the result to be inherently unattainable.
might be considered an impossible crime. Here, the crime of kidnapping was not
2. Case Context: impossible because the victim was indeed
○ In G.R. No. 95322, Dr. Samson Tan argued that detained and the ransom was demanded, even if
the sending of the ransom note could be the note was delivered after the victim's release.
considered an impossible crime because he
believed that the ransom demand, after the In summary, while Tan tried to argue that the ransom note
rescue of the victim, did not align with the constituted an impossible crime, the Supreme Court clarified
requirements of an "impossible crime." that the essence of the crime—kidnapping and illegal
3. Court’s Response: detention—was not impossible and had been effectively
○ The Supreme Court rejected Tan’s argument. completed by Domasian's actions. The delivery of the ransom
The court clarified that the crime of kidnapping note did not change the fact that the primary criminal act was
with serious illegal detention was already carried out.
consummated when Domasian deprived Enrico

5
Case Digest: Sulpicio Intod vs. Court of Appeals and Ruling:
People of the Philippines
● Legal Impossibility vs. Factual Impossibility: The
G.R. No. 103119 Court distinguished between legal and factual
October 21, 1992 impossibility. Legal impossibility occurs when the
Facts: intended act, even if completed, would not constitute a
crime. Factual impossibility arises when circumstances
● On February 4, 1979, Sulpicio Intod, Jorge Pangasian, unknown to the actor prevent the consummation of the
Santos Tubio, and Avelino Daligdig visited Salvador crime.
Mandaya in Katugasan, Lopez Jaena, Misamis ● Article 4(2) of the Revised Penal Code: This
Occidental. They asked Mandaya to accompany them to provision penalizes acts that would constitute a crime
Bernardina Palangpangan’s house and to assist in but are impossible due to inherent reasons or ineffectual
killing her due to a land dispute. Mandaya was means. The Court highlighted that in Philippine law,
threatened with death if he refused. both factual and legal impossibility are recognized as
● That evening, the group, armed with firearms, went to forms of impossible crimes, unlike U.S. law where
Palangpangan’s house. Mandaya indicated the location impossibility is a defense rather than a separate crime.
of Palangpangan’s bedroom. Intod and his companions ● Decision: The Court ruled that the crime committed by
then fired shots at the room, but Palangpangan was Intod was an impossible crime because it was
absent. Her house was occupied by her son-in-law and inherently impossible to achieve the intended result due
his family, who were unharmed. to Palangpangan’s absence. Therefore, the act was
● Witnesses identified the accused, who made threats penalized under Article 4(2) of the Revised Penal Code
before leaving. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) rather than as an attempted murder.
convicted Intod of attempted murder, a decision
affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Conclusion: The Court modified the decision of the Court of
Appeals. Intod was found guilty of an impossible crime as
Issue: Whether Intod is guilty of attempted murder or an defined under Articles 4(2) and 59 of the Revised Penal Code.
impossible crime under Article 4(2) of the Revised Penal Code, He was sentenced to six months of arresto mayor and ordered
which deals with criminal responsibility when an act is to pay costs.
inherently impossible to accomplish.

6
Key Takeaway: In Philippine criminal law, the concept of
impossible crimes is recognized and punished under Article
4(2) of the Revised Penal Code. The distinction between What is the case all about?
factual and legal impossibility is crucial, with factual
impossibility not exempting the actor from liability if the act is The case of Sulpicio Intod vs. Court of Appeals and People
of the Philippines involves Sulpicio Intod and his
still considered criminally relevant. accomplices who, armed with firearms, attempted to kill
Bernardina Palangpangan by shooting at her house.
However, Palangpangan was not present at the time; her
home was occupied by her son-in-law and his family. The
Regional Trial Court convicted Intod of attempted murder,
which was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Intod contested
this, arguing that the crime should be classified as an
impossible crime due to Palangpangan’s absence.

How is the case related to the topic of impossible crimes?

The case relates to impossible crimes because Intod's defense

argued that the crime of attempted murder should be
considered an impossible crime under Article 4(2) of the
Revised Penal Code. This article addresses acts that are
inherently impossible to accomplish, such as shooting at a
place where the intended victim is not present. The Supreme
Court agreed with this view, ruling that Intod's actions
constituted an impossible crime rather than an attempted
murder, as the intended crime could not be completed due to
circumstances beyond his control.

7
Timeline: Sulpicio Intod vs. Court of Appeals and People of ● After the Shooting:
the Philippines ○ No one is hit or injured by the gunfire as
Palangpangan was not present.
February 4, 1979 ○ Before leaving the scene, the group, including
Intod, threatens a witness, saying they will
● Morning:
return to kill the witness and Bernardina
○ Sulpicio Intod, Jorge Pangasian, Santos Tubio,
Palangpangan if they are not injured.
and Avelino Daligdig visit Salvador Mandaya in
Katugasan, Lopez Jaena, Misamis Occidental. February 5, 1979 and Onward:
○ They ask Mandaya to accompany them to
Bernardina Palangpangan’s house and to help in ● The incident is reported, and the accused are identified
killing her due to a land dispute. Mandaya is by witnesses.
threatened with death if he refuses.
● Late Evening (Around 10:00 PM): Trial Proceedings:
○ Intod, Mandaya, Pangasian, Tubio, and
● Regional Trial Court (RTC):
Daligdig, all armed with firearms, arrive at
○ The RTC conducts the trial and hears the
Palangpangan’s house in Katugasan, Lopez
evidence.
Jaena, Misamis Occidental.
○ The RTC finds Intod guilty of attempted murder
○ Mandaya points out the location of
and convicts him based on the evidence and
Palangpangan’s bedroom to Intod and his
testimonies.
companions.
● Court of Appeals:
● Subsequently:
○ The Court of Appeals reviews the RTC's
○ Intod, Pangasian, Tubio, and Daligdig fire shots
decision and affirms it in toto, holding Intod
at the indicated bedroom of Palangpangan’s
guilty of attempted murder.
house.
○ It is later discovered that Palangpangan is not at Petition to the Supreme Court:
her house; she is in another city. Her house is
occupied by her son-in-law and his family. ● Sulpicio Intod:
○ Files a petition for review with the Supreme
Court, arguing that the crime should be

8
 classified as an impossible crime under Article
4(2) of the Revised Penal Code, citing the
inherent impossibility due to Palangpangan’s
absence.
● Respondent (People of the Philippines):
○ Argues that the crime was not impossible but an
attempt to commit murder, contending that the
failure to consummate the crime was due to a
cause not inherent to the act.

Supreme Court Decision:

● October 21, 1992:

○ The Supreme Court rules in favor of Intod,
modifying the decision of the Court of Appeals.
○ The Court holds Intod guilty of an impossible
crime as defined under Articles 4(2) and 59 of
the Revised Penal Code.
○ Intod is sentenced to six months of arresto
mayor and ordered to pay costs.

9
Case Digest: People of the Philippines v. Nicasio Enoja @ ● Nicasio Enoja, Jose Enoja, and Antonio Galupar:
"Nick", et al. Reclusion perpetua.
● Yolly Armada: 10 years and 1 day of prision mayor to
G.R. No. 102596, December 17, 1999 18 years, 8 months, and 1 day of reclusion temporal.
● Ronnie Enoja: 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor to
Facts:
12 years and 1 day of reclusion temporal.
● Accused-Appellants: Nicasio Enoja @ "Nick", Jose
The accused were also ordered to pay the victim's heirs
Enoja @ "Moros", Antonio Galupar @ "Tony", Ronnie
₱30,000 for death indemnity and ₱19,200 for actual damages.
Enoja @ "Bud-oy", and Yolly Armada.
● Victim: Siegfred Insular. Appeal and Issues: The appellants challenged the decision on
● Incident Date: July 2, 1987. the following grounds:
● Location: Barangay Caraudan, Janiuay, Iloilo.
1. Conspiracy: They argued that there was no conspiracy,
Background: The victim, Siegfred Insular, was suspected to be citing inconsistencies in witness testimonies.
an NPA commander. Prior to the incident, there were hostile 2. Guilt: They contended they were not guilty, with some
acts against the Enoja family attributed to the NPA. On the day asserting self-defense or presenting alibis.
of the incident, Insular and his wife were walking when they 3. Impossibility of Crime: They argued that their actions,
encountered Yolly Armada carrying a firearm. Armada if any, were superfluous since the victim was already
suddenly shot Insular, and the other accused—Nicasio Enoja, dead.
Jose Enoja, Antonio Galupar, and Ronnie Enoja—appeared and
took turns firing at the victim, leaving him mortally wounded. Supreme Court Ruling: The Supreme Court upheld the trial
court’s decision with modifications:
Paterna Insular, the victim's wife, and Teodoro Salamanca, a
witness, testified to the brutal attack. The prosecution argued 1. Conspiracy: The Court found ample evidence of
that the attack was premeditated and executed with treachery conspiracy, as all appellants acted in concert to kill
and conspiracy among the accused. Insular.
2. Credibility of Witnesses: The testimonies of Paterna
Trial Court Decision: The Regional Trial Court convicted all Insular and Teodoro Salamanca were deemed credible
five accused of murder. Sentences varied among the appellants: despite the defense’s claims of inconsistencies.

10
 3. Treachery and Abuse of Superior Strength: The
Court affirmed the presence of treachery and the What is the case all about?
aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength.
4. Penalty and Damages: The case involves the murder of Siegfred Insular on July 2,
○ The indemnity amount was increased to 1987, in Barangay Caraudan, Janiuay, Iloilo. Nicasio Enoja,
Jose Enoja, Antonio Galupar, Ronnie Enoja, and Yolly
₱50,000.
Armada are accused of killing Insular. The prosecution
○ The actual damages of ₱19,200 were deleted presented evidence that the accused, armed with firearms,
due to lack of sufficient proof. fatally shot Insular in a premeditated attack. The case also
involved issues of witness testimonies, self-defense claims,
Final Ruling: The conviction of Nicasio Enoja and Ronnie and the eventual conviction of the accused.
Enoja was affirmed, with the modification in the indemnity
amount and removal of actual damages. The appeal by Yolly How is the case related to the Topic of Impossible
Armada and Jose Enoja was dismissed due to their escape and Crimes?
subsequent abandonment of their appeal.
The case is not directly related to impossible crimes.
Impossible crimes involve acts that are technically
impossible to commit under the law, such as attempting to
commit a crime that cannot be accomplished due to the
circumstances. In this case, the crime of murder was fully
realized with a successful prosecution and conviction of the
accused, which does not fit the concept of impossible crimes.
Instead, it deals with the prosecution of a completed crime
involving multiple perpetrators and legal proceedings.

11
Timeline of the Case: People of the Philippines vs. Nicasio ● Approximately 4:50 PM: After the shooting, the
Enoja, et al. assailants attempt to shoot Paterna, but she is saved by
Teodoro Salamanca, who pleads with the assailants.
Before the Incident ● Around 5:00 PM: Jose Enoja fires at his brother
Antonio Enoja, hitting him in the thigh. Jose then
● Prior to July 1, 1987: The house of Catelina Enoja, the
places a gun near Siegfred's body and puts live bullets
mother of the Enojas, was allegedly burned by the New
in Siegfred’s pocket.
People's Army (NPA).
● Shortly After: A hammock is brought to the scene, and
● July 1, 1987: The house of Romulo Enoja, brother of
Antonio is taken to the hospital, while Siegfred’s body
the Enojas, was allegedly sprayed with bullets by the
is left on the ground.
NPA, resulting in the deaths of Romulo's daughter and
● 5:15 PM: Nicasio Enoja and the others bring Paterna
son.
and Teodoro Salamanca to the house of Patria
July 2, 1987 (Day of the Incident) Alcantara, warning them not to leave.
● Around 6:00 PM: Paterna and Teodoro are confined at
● Around 4:30 PM: Siegfred Insular and his wife, Patria Alcantara's house. They remain there until police
Paterna, are walking home from the market along a and PC soldiers arrive the next morning.
ricefield in Barangay Caraudan, Janiuay, Iloilo.
● 4:30 PM: They encounter Yolly Armada, who is July 3, 1987
carrying a long firearm. Paterna initially does not
● Around 8:00 AM: A joint PC-INP team, led by P.C. Lt.
recognize him but is reassured by Siegfred that it is
Pangina and Sgt. Reynaldo Soroñgon, conducts an
Yolly Armada.
investigation at the crime scene. They recover several
● Around 4:45 PM: As they reach the ricemill of
empty shell casings and a short homemade firearm near
Teodoro Salamanca near the chapel, Yolly Armada
Siegfred’s body.
blocks their path and points his firearm at Siegfred.
Armada fires at Siegfred, who tries to flee but is hit and
falls to the ground.
● Immediately After the Initial Shots: Nicasio Enoja,
Jose Enoja, Antonio Galupar, and Ronnie Enoja arrive
and take turns shooting Siegfred.

12
Subsequent Events Final Decision

● March 11, 1998: Provincial Fiscal Vicente E. Aragona ● December 17, 1999: The Supreme Court affirms the
files an Information for murder against Nicasio Enoja, decision of the trial court with modifications. The court
Jose Enoja, Antonio Galupar, Ronnie Enoja, and Yolly increases the indemnity to P50,000.00 and deletes the
Armada. Three other accused are still at large. award of actual damages.
● August 5, 1988: The accused are arraigned and plead
not guilty. This timeline captures the essential details and progression of
● During the Trial: the case from the incident through the various legal
○ Testimonies: Key witnesses, including Teodoro proceedings.
Salamanca, Paterna Insular, Dr. Tito D.
Doromal, and various police officers, testify
about the events and the autopsy results.
○ Defense: The defense presents witnesses and
claims of alibi, self-defense, and denial.
○ October 31, 1990: The Regional Trial Court of
Iloilo City, Branch 26, renders its decision
convicting the accused of murder.

Post-Trial Events

● September 25, 1996: Yolly Armada escapes from New

Bilibid Prison. His appeal is dismissed, and the
judgment against him becomes final and executory on
January 9, 1997.
● March 21, 1997: Jose Enoja jumps bail, and his appeal
is also dismissed. The judgment against him becomes
final and executory.
● September 1997: Antonio Galupar dies pending
appeal, extinguishing his criminal and civil liability.

13
Relation to Impossible Crimes

The case involves an attempt by the accused to claim that the

shooting of Siegfred Insular constituted an "impossible crime."
The appellants argued that, even if they participated in the
shooting, their actions should be considered an impossible
crime under Article 4, Paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code,
which addresses acts that cannot result in the intended crime
due to the circumstances.

Specifically, the appellants contended that since the victim was

already shot and presumably dead from Armada's initial shots,
their subsequent shooting of the victim amounted to the
"impossible crime" of killing a person who was already dead.
This argument was used to suggest that their actions, while
unlawful, could not have resulted in any additional harm
because the victim was already deceased.

However, the court rejected this argument, finding that the

claim of an impossible crime was inconsistent with the defense
of alibi and denial put forth by the appellants. The court also
emphasized that the impossible crime defense contradicts the
evidence and testimony presented, which clearly identified the
appellants' active participation in the murder of the victim.

14
Acharon vs. People Case Summary (G.R. No. 224946) beyond reasonable doubt that Christian willfully
refused to provide financial support with the intention
of causing mental or emotional anguish.
Case Background and Facts

● The case involves Christian Pantonial Acharon who Interpretation of the Law
was charged with causing psychological or emotional
● The Supreme Court clarified the elements and
anguish to his wife by failing to provide financial
requirements for a conviction under Section 5 (i) of the
support.
Anti-Violence Against Women and their Children Act.
● Christian and his wife got married in September 2011,
● The Court emphasized that the mere failure or inability
and shortly after, Christian left to work in Brunei as a
to provide financial support is not enough to constitute
delivery rider.
a violation of the law.
● AAA, Christian's wife, testified that he did not
● The Court discussed the distinction between Section 5
regularly send money to support her and their loan from
(e) and Section 5 (i) of the law.
their godmother. She also claimed that Christian had a
● Section 5 (e) pertains to acts of economic abuse that
paramour in Brunei, causing her emotional distress.
control or restrict the woman's or her child's movement
● Christian denied the accusations and stated that he had
or conduct.
valid reasons for not providing regular financial
● Section 5 (i) deals with the denial of financial support
support.
with the intention of causing mental or emotional
anguish.
Conviction and Acquittal ● The Court abandoned previous rulings that allowed the
application of the variance doctrine to convict a person
● The Regional Trial Court (RTC) convicted Christian of
under either section.
violating Section 5 (i) of the Anti-Violence Against
Women and their Children Act, which pertains to the
denial of financial support causing mental or emotional Conclusion
anguish.
● The Supreme Court acquitted Christian of the charges,
● The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC's decision.
stating that the prosecution failed to prove his willful
● However, the Supreme Court acquitted Christian of the
charges, stating that the prosecution failed to prove

15
 refusal to provide financial support with the intention of
causing mental or emotional anguish. What the case is all about
● The Court clarified the elements and requirements for a
conviction under the Anti-Violence Against Women The case involves Christian Pantonial Acharon, who was
and their Children Act, emphasizing that the mere charged with violating the Anti-Violence Against Women
failure or inability to provide financial support is not and Their Children Act for failing to provide financial
enough to constitute a violation of the law. support to his wife, causing her emotional distress. The
Supreme Court acquitted him, stating that the prosecution
did not prove he willfully intended to cause emotional
anguish through his non-support.

How is the case related to the topic—nature of felonies:

mala in se and mala prohibita

The case relates to mala prohibita crimes, which are

offenses defined by statute rather than inherent morality. The
crime in question, under the Anti-Violence Against Women
and Their Children Act, is not inherently immoral but is
illegal because it is specifically prohibited by law. The
Supreme Court's decision clarified the statutory requirements
for proving such offenses.

16
Christian Pantonial Acharon vs. People of the Philippines caused AAA emotional distress. AAA learned of this
(G.R. No. 224946) Timeline relationship from Christian's manager and a board mate.
4. Legal Action
- January 25, 2012 - Present (as of filing): An Information
1. Marriage and Initial Events was filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Valenzuela City,
- September 30, 2011: Christian Pantonial Acharon accusing Christian of causing mental and emotional anguish to
(Christian) and AAA were married in a civil ceremony AAA by failing to provide financial support, a violation of
officiated by Mayor Gatchalian. Section 5(i) of Republic Act No. 9262 (Anti-Violence Against
- October 6, 2011: Six days after the wedding, Christian left Women and Their Children Act).
for Brunei to work at Pizza Hut as a delivery rider. - Trial: Christian pleaded not guilty and claimed that he
- Borrowing of Money: To cover the placement fee for could not consistently provide financial support due to a fire at
Christian’s job, the couple borrowed PHP 85,000 from their his apartment in Brunei and a vehicular accident. He
godmother, Emelina So, agreeing to monthly payments of PHP maintained that he attempted to pay off the debt, sending a total
9,633. of PHP 71,500. He denied the accusations of womanizing and
stated that he had encouraged AAA to move on and seek
2. Alleged Financial Issues another partner.
- October 2011 - April 2013: Christian intermittently sent
money to AAA but did not regularly fulfill his financial 5. RTC Ruling
obligations. He sent a total of PHP 71,500, leaving an unpaid - August 26, 2014: The RTC convicted Christian for
balance of PHP 13,500. AAA claimed to have felt embarrassed violating Section 5(i) of R.A. 9262. He was sentenced to two
about the unpaid debt. years, four months, and one day of *prisión correccional* as a
- January 2012: Communication between Christian and minimum penalty and six years and one day of *prisión
AAA ceased, and he allegedly stopped sending financial mayor* as a maximum penalty. He was also fined PHP 100,000
support. and required to undergo psychological counseling.

3. Accusations of Infidelity 6. Appeal to the Court of Appeals (CA)

- Period in Brunei: Christian allegedly maintained a - Appeal Filed: Christian appealed the decision to the Court
relationship with a paramour, Melete Domalaon, which further of Appeals (CA), arguing that his inability to provide

17
consistent financial support did not constitute psychological emotional harm, while Section 5(e) involves using financial
violence under R.A. 9262. control as a means to restrict the woman’s autonomy.
- February 17, 2016: The CA affirmed the RTC's conviction, 9. Conclusion
finding that Christian’s failure to provide financial support - Christian was acquitted and the case against him was
amounted to economic abuse and caused psychological distress dismissed, emphasizing that the inability to provide financial
to AAA. support without intent to cause harm does not constitute
criminal liability under the VAWC law.
7. Appeal to the Supreme Court
- Petition Filed: Christian filed a Petition for Review on
Certiorari under Rule 45, questioning the CA's decision and
arguing that the failure to provide financial support was not
willful but due to circumstances beyond his control.
- May 31, 2016: The CA denied Christian’s motion for
reconsideration, prompting the continuation of the appeal
process.

8. Supreme Court Ruling

- November 9, 2021: The Supreme Court granted Christian's
appeal and reversed the decisions of the RTC and CA,
acquitting him of the charge.
- Rationale: The Supreme Court ruled that mere failure or
inability to provide financial support, without malice or intent
to cause psychological harm, is not punishable under Section
5(i) of R.A. 9262. The court emphasized that intent to cause
emotional or psychological harm through willful denial of
support must be proven for a conviction.
- Clarification: The court also clarified that denial of
financial support under Section 5(i) and 5(e) of R.A. 9262 are
distinct, with Section 5(i) involving the willful intent to cause

18
Nature of Felonies: Summary:

1. Mala in Se: These are crimes that are inherently wrong ● Nature of Crime: Mala Prohibita
or evil, such as murder or theft. They are universally ● Legal Framework: The Anti-Violence Against Women
recognized as immoral, regardless of whether they are and Their Children Act establishes the crime, defining
prohibited by law. and regulating it by statute.
2. Mala Prohibita: These are acts that are not inherently ● Court's Role: The Supreme Court clarified the
immoral but are considered illegal because they are requirements for proving the violation, emphasizing the
prohibited by statute. The wrongful nature of these acts need for intent rather than merely the act of
is determined by law rather than their intrinsic morality. non-support.
Examples include certain regulatory offenses or
violations of administrative codes.

Case Relation:

The case of Christian Pantonial Acharon deals with a

violation of the Anti-Violence Against Women and Their
Children Act, specifically Section 5(i), which criminalizes the
denial of financial support causing mental or emotional
anguish. This is considered mala prohibita because the
wrongful nature of the act is defined by statute rather than by
inherent morality. The law defines and prohibits this conduct
due to its specific legal and social implications.

The Supreme Court's decision highlights that the statute

requires proof of willful intent to cause emotional distress
through the denial of support. Failure to provide support alone
does not automatically constitute a violation; it must be shown
that the refusal was done with the intent to cause emotional
harm.

19
De Vera v. People G.R. No. 246231, January 20, 2021 Section 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610. This section punishes any act
of child abuse not specifically covered by other provisions of
Facts: the law. The Court ruled that petitioner's act was not just a
private matter but was committed with the intent to debase and
Petitioner Allan De Vera y Ante was accused of violating demean the victim, fitting the definition of "lascivious
Section 5(b) of Republic Act (R.A.) No. 7610, which deals conduct" and psychological abuse as per the Implementing
with child abuse. The charge stemmed from an incident on July Rules and Regulations of R.A. No.
7, 2012, where petitioner allegedly masturbated in the presence 7610.
of AAA, a 16-year-old student. Petitioner was initially
convicted of this charge by the Regional Trial Court (RTC). 2. Penalty and Damages:
The Court of Appeals (CA) modified the RTC's decision, The Court found the CA's sentencing appropriate. The penalty
convicting him instead under Section 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610 for violation of Section 10(a) is prision mayor in its minimum
for other forms of child abuse. period, which the CA correctly imposed within the range
provided by law. The Court also increased the civil indemnity
Issues: and moral damages awarded to the victim to P50,000.00 each
and reinstated the exemplary damages to P50,000.00. The
1. Whether the CA erred in convicting petitioner under increased amounts reflect the seriousness of the psychological
Section 10(a) of R.A. trauma suffered by the victim.
No. 7610. Summary:
2. Whether the penalties and damages awarded were
appropriate. The Supreme Court affirmed the CA's conviction of petitioner
for psychological abuse under Section 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610.
Rulings:
It ruled that the act of masturbating in front of the minor was
sufficient to constitute child abuse under the law. The Court
1. Conviction Under Section 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610:
also adjusted the damages awarded to better reflect the extent
The Supreme Court upheld the CA's decision. It agreed that
of harm caused to the victim.
although petitioner was charged under Section 5(b), the
evidence supported a conviction under Section 10(a) of R.A.
No. 7610. The Court held that the act of masturbating in front
of a minor constitutes psychological abuse, which falls under

20
Key Takeaway:

The Court emphasizes that psychological abuse and acts that

debase or demean a child's dignity, even if not explicitly
charged, fall under the protection of child abuse laws. The
severity of the crime and the impact on the victim justify the
imposed penalties and damages.

What is the case about?

The case involves Allan De Vera y Ante, who was convicted

of violating Section 10(a) of Republic Act No. 7610, the
Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation,
and Discrimination Act. The case centers on his act of
masturbating in the presence of a 16-year-old student, which
was found to constitute psychological abuse under the law.

How is the case related to the nature of felonies: mala in

se and mala prohibita, where does it fall under?

The crime in this case falls under mala prohibita. This

classification means the act is considered criminal not
because it is inherently immoral but because it is prohibited
by statute. In this case, masturbation in the presence of a
minor is punishable under Republic Act No. 7610, which
aims to protect children from various forms of abuse.

21
Timeline of the Case: Allan De Vera y Ante vs. People of August 3, 2012
the Philippines • Formal Charge: Petitioner is charged with the crime of
Violation of Section
July 7, 2012 5(b) of R.A. No. 7610.
• Incident: Allan De Vera y Ante (petitioner) allegedly commits
an act of masturbation in the presence of AAA, a 16-year-old Trial Phase
student, in the Mini-Library of XXX University. • RTC Ruling: The Regional Trial Court (RTC) finds the
Post-Incident Actions petitioner guilty of the crime of Violation of Section 5(b) of
R.A. No. 7610, sentencing him to imprisonment and ordering
○ AAA's Reaction: After witnessing the act, AAA leaves him to pay damages.
the Mini-Library, informs her classmate CCC, who
advises her to report the incident to the University September 27, 2018
Security Office. • Court of Appeals (CA) Decision: The CA partly grants the
○ Reporting: AAA's mother, BBB, is contacted and petitioner's appeal, finding the petitioner guilty of child abuse
subsequently goes to the university where the petitioner under Section 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610, rather than Section 5(b).
is detained by the security officers. They then proceed The CA reduces the damages awarded and modifies the
to the police station to file a formal complaint. sentence.

July 8, 2012
January 20, 2021
• Petitioner's Arrest: Allan De Vera y Ante is arrested and his
• Supreme Court Ruling: The Supreme Court rules that the
underwear is inspected for traces of discharge, but none are
CA's decision is within the bounds of law. The court finds that
found.
the act of masturbation in the presence of a minor constitutes
psychological abuse under Section 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610. The
July 10, 2012
Court upholds the CA's conviction but modifies the damages
• University Disciplinary Action: XXX University forms an ad
awarded to AAA. The Court imposes increased amounts for
hoc disciplinary committee that clears the petitioner of the
civil indemnity and moral damages, and reinstates the award
alleged masturbation incident.
for exemplary damages.

22
Key Legal Findings

○ Violation of Section 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610: The

Supreme Court confirms that the act of masturbation in
the presence of a minor constitutes psychological abuse
and is punishable under this provision of the law.
○ Credibility of Victim: The Court finds the testimony of
AAA credible despite the petitioner's claims of
inconsistencies.
○ Penalty and Damages: The penalty imposed by the CA
is affirmed, and the Court increases the awards for civil
indemnity, moral damages, and reinstates exemplary
damages.

23
The case of Allan De Vera y Ante v. People of the Section 5(b) pertains to acts that involve a child being
Philippines relates to the topic of the nature of felonies with a exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse,
specific focus on mala in se and mala prohibita offenses. which is an explicit statutory definition of child abuse.
Here's a breakdown of how it fits into these categories:
Case Development
Nature of Felonies: Mala in Se vs. Mala Prohibita
● Initial Charge: The petitioner was charged under
1. Mala in Se: These are crimes that are inherently Section 5(b) of R.A. 7610, but the court found
immoral or wrong by their very nature, such as murder insufficient evidence for this specific charge.
or theft. They are considered wrong in themselves, ● Revised Conviction: On appeal, the Court of Appeals
regardless of whether they are prohibited by law. convicted the petitioner under Section 10(a) of R.A.
2. Mala Prohibita: These are acts that are considered 7610, which deals with "any other acts of child abuse"
wrong because they are prohibited by law, not because not covered by other provisions of the same law. This
they are inherently immoral. They are offenses defined section is also mala prohibita as it defines and
by statutes or regulations and do not necessarily involve punishes additional forms of child abuse specifically
a moral wrongdoing in themselves. Examples include under the statute.
regulatory offenses and certain crimes under special
laws. Analysis

● Mala in Se: The case does not fall under mala in se

The Case and Its Classification because the crime involved is not inherently immoral
but rather prohibited by law.
In the Allan De Vera case, the petitioner was initially charged
● Mala Prohibita: The acts of masturbating in the
under Section 5(b) of Republic Act No. 7610 (R.A. 7610),
presence of a minor, though morally concerning, are
which deals with "other acts of child abuse." This section is
classified under mala prohibita as they fall under
generally considered mala prohibita because it criminalizes
specific statutory definitions of child abuse. The
specific acts that are defined by the statute rather than being
legislature has designated these acts as criminal
inherently immoral.
offenses to protect children, reflecting a societal
judgment that these actions are harmful and should be
penalized.

24
In summary, the offense in this case is categorized as mala
prohibita, as it involves specific statutory prohibitions aimed at
protecting children from various forms of abuse. The case
highlights how even acts that are not inherently immoral but
are explicitly prohibited by law can still lead to criminal
convictions under special statutes.

25
Case Title: 3. Intent to Debase or Demean - Whether de Vera had
Allan de Vera y Ante v. People of the Philippines the specific intent to debase, degrade, or demean AAA.
G.R. No. 246231, October 9, 2023
Supreme Court Ruling:
Facts:
Petitioner Allan de Vera was charged with lascivious conduct ● The Court’s majority opinion reversed the previous
for allegedly fondling his penis and masturbating next to a ruling based on a lack of evidence regarding de Vera's
16-year-old minor (referred to as AAA) while she was taking conduct in the presence of AAA, the severity of
an exam at XXX University in Quezon City on July 7, 2012. psychological harm, and intent to demean the minor.
The complaint alleged that this act prejudiced AAA's ● Dissenting Opinion: Justice Leonen disagreed with the
psychological and physical development and demeaned her reversal, arguing that the trial court's findings and the
dignity. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found de Vera guilty CA’s decision on the credibility of AAA’s testimony
of sexual abuse under Section 5(b) of Republic Act No. 7610, and the psychological impact on her should be upheld.
citing the minor's testimony and psychiatric findings of Justice Leonen emphasized:
post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). The Court of Appeals ○ Credibility of AAA’s Testimony: AAA’s
(CA) modified the verdict to other acts of child abuse under consistent and detailed testimony, despite minor
Section 10(a) of the same Act and adjusted the damages inconsistencies, was credible. The RTC and CA
awarded. The Supreme Court initially upheld this decision but correctly assessed her testimony as reliable.
later reversed it upon reconsideration, leading to an acquittal of ○ Severity of Psychological Harm: The
de Vera. psychological damage, as evidenced by AAA’s
PTSD and the expert testimony, was substantial
Issues:
and aligned with the legal standards for
1. Credibility of Witness Testimony - Whether AAA’s psychological abuse under Republic Act No.
testimony regarding de Vera’s conduct was credible and 7610.
consistent. ○ Intent to Demean: De Vera’s actions were
2. Severity of Psychological Harm - Whether the intended to debase and demean AAA, which
psychological harm inflicted upon AAA was serious or was evident from the nature of the act and its
severe. impact on her.

26
Significance:
The case highlights the importance of evaluating witness What is this case all about?
credibility and psychological impact in child abuse cases. It
underscores that minor inconsistencies in testimony do not The case Allan de Vera y Ante vs. People of the
necessarily discredit a victim's account, and that psychological Philippines involves Allan de Vera y Ante, who was
convicted of acts of lascivious conduct against minors under
harm need not be labeled as "severe" to be recognized as abuse
Republic Act No. 7610. The Supreme Court reviewed
under the law. The dissenting opinion stresses the role of the whether the evidence sufficiently supported the conviction
RTC’s and CA’s findings, advocating for the weight of detailed and whether the lower courts properly applied the law.
testimonies and expert evaluations in establishing abuse and
intent. How is this case related to the topic of the nature of
felonies—mala in se and mala prohibita?

This case relates to mala prohibita felonies. The crime of

acts of lascivious conduct against minors is not inherently
immoral (mala in se) but is prohibited by law (mala
prohibita) to protect children from abuse and exploitation.
The case examines whether the statutory requirements and
evidence met the standards set by the law.

27
Timeline of Events sexual abuse under Section 5(b) of
Republic Act No. 7610, based on AAA's
1. July 7, 2012 testimony.
○ Incident Date: Allan de Vera y Ante allegedly ■ Ruling: The RTC gives credence to
committed acts of lascivious conduct in Quezon AAA’s testimony and the psychiatrist’s
City, Philippines, by fondling his penis and findings, determining that de Vera y
masturbating while the 16-year-old minor, Ante’s acts affected AAA’s
AAA, was taking her examination at the XXX psychological and physical development
University. .
5. Court of Appeals Decision:
2. Post-Incident (Date Unknown) ○ Appeal Outcome: The Court of Appeals
○ Victim's Report: AAA reports the incident to modifies the RTC decision by convicting de
authorities. Her testimony states she saw de Vera y Ante of other acts of child abuse under
Vera y Ante masturbating and was traumatized Section 10(a) of Republic Act No. 7610, rather
by the act. than sexual abuse due to lack of evidence of
coercion.
3. Pre-Trial ○ Civil Indemnity and Moral Damages:
○ Investigation: Police conduct an investigation Increases civil indemnity and moral damages to
based on AAA’s report. A sworn statement is PHP 50,000.00 each and adds exemplary
taken from AAA. damages of PHP 50,000.
○ Psychiatric Evaluation: AAA is examined by
Dr. Halili-Jao, who diagnoses her with 6. Supreme Court Decision:
post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) linked to ○ Initial Decision: The Supreme Court affirms the
the incident. Court of Appeals’ decision with modifications,
agreeing that de Vera y Ante’s actions
4. Trial constituted psychological abuse, but increasing
○ Regional Trial Court (RTC) Decision: damages.
■ Finding: The RTC finds Allan de Vera y ○ Motion for Reconsideration: De Vera y Ante
Ante guilty beyond reasonable doubt of files a Motion for Reconsideration and

28
 Supplement to Motion for 8. Subsequent Actions (Date Unknown)
Reconsideration/Memorandum of Additional ○ Final Status: Following the Supreme Court's
Authorities. decision, Allan de Vera y Ante is acquitted of
○ Reversal: The Supreme Court reverses its the charges. The dissenting opinion remains a
previous decision and acquits de Vera y Ante significant record of judicial disagreement on
due to: the case’s interpretation.
■ Credibility Issues: Questioning AAA’s
testimony inconsistencies. This detailed timeline captures the key events and legal
■ Lack of Serious Psychological Harm: proceedings of the case involving Allan de Vera y Ante and
Determining that the psychological harm highlights the judicial analysis and different interpretations
was not severe or directly caused by the leading up to the final decision.
alleged masturbation.
■ Specific Intent: Finding insufficient
proof of de Vera y Ante’s intent to
debase, degrade, or demean AAA.

7. Dissenting Opinion by Justice Leonen:

○ Credibility of AAA’s Testimony: Emphasizes
the RTC’s and Court of Appeals’ findings that
AAA’s testimony was credible and consistent.
○ Psychological Harm: Disagrees with the
Court’s restrictive interpretation of
psychological harm and the severity required to
constitute child abuse.
○ Intent to Debase: Argues that de Vera y Ante’s
actions demonstrated a specific intent to debase,
degrade, or demean AAA.

29
The case Allan de Vera y Ante vs. People of the Philippines 2. How the Case Relates to These Categories
touches on the nature of felonies, which can be classified into
two main categories: mala in se and mala prohibita. Here’s In the Allan de Vera y Ante case, the nature of the offense
how this case relates to these concepts: falls under the classification of mala prohibita, specifically in
the context of child abuse and sexual misconduct under
1. Nature of Felonies: Mala in Se and Mala Prohibita Philippine law. Here’s how:

● Mala in Se: ● Legal Framework:

○ Definition: Felonies that are inherently wrong ○ Republic Act No. 7610: The law penalizing
or evil, regardless of whether they are prohibited child abuse, exploitation, and discrimination,
by law. These crimes are considered immoral defines specific acts that are considered abusive
and harmful to society by their nature, such as towards minors. The case deals with violations
murder, rape, or theft. of this statute, which are considered mala
○ Characteristics: The wrongful nature of the act prohibita. The wrongdoing is based on the
is intrinsic and universally recognized. The act infringement of the law designed to protect
is condemned irrespective of legal statutes. minors rather than the act being intrinsically
● Mala Prohibita: immoral.
○ Definition: Felonies that are not inherently ● Felony Classification:
wrong but are prohibited by statute or ○ Acts of Lascivious Conduct: Allan de Vera y
regulation. The wrongness of the act is Ante’s actions were evaluated under this law,
determined by its violation of the law rather which includes acts that may not be inherently
than its inherent nature. Examples include evil but are prohibited due to their harmful
illegal parking, selling alcohol without a license, effect on minors and the protection of societal
or operating a business without proper permits. norms.
○ Characteristics: The crime is considered ○ Judicial Review: The Supreme Court’s
wrongful because it violates a legal rule or decision, which ultimately acquitted de Vera y
regulation, not because it is morally wrong by Ante, hinged on the interpretation of whether
itself. the specific acts constituted a violation of the
statutory provisions protecting minors. The
focus was on whether the statutory definition

30
 and intent of the law were met, reflecting the Summary
mala prohibita nature of the crime.
● Court's Analysis: The case of Allan de Vera y Ante y Ante is an example of
○ Evidence and Intent: The Supreme Court’s how mala prohibita offenses are treated in the legal system.
scrutiny centered on the sufficiency of evidence The focus is on whether the actions violated specific statutory
to prove that de Vera y Ante’s actions met the provisions meant to safeguard minors. While the crime is not
criteria established by the law. The decision considered inherently evil (mala in se), it is subject to legal
emphasized the importance of intent and the penalties due to its prohibition under the law. The case reflects
specifics of statutory interpretation rather than the complexities of interpreting and applying statutes designed
the inherent morality of the act. to address societal issues and protect vulnerable individuals.
● Impact on Legal Interpretation:
○ Dissenting Opinion: The dissenting opinion by
Justice Leonen underscores that even in cases
involving mala prohibita offenses, the
underlying intent and psychological impact
should be considered. This highlights the
ongoing debate about how strictly statutes
should be interpreted in the context of
protecting victims.

31
ATTEMPTED STAGE The Court further reasoned that acts capable of dual
interpretation, which could either be innocent or criminal,
Case Digest: People vs. Aurelio Lamahang (G.R. No. cannot alone justify a conviction for attempted or frustrated
L-43530) crimes. The penalty for attempted trespass to dwelling was
imposed, considering aggravating circumstances like nighttime
Facts: and his prior criminal record.

On March 2, 1935, Aurelio Lamahang was caught by a Doctrine:

policeman making an opening in the wall of a store using an
iron bar. The store owner, Tan Yu, was inside the store asleep. To constitute an attempted crime, the overt acts must have an
The accused had only broken a board and unfastened another immediate and necessary relation to the offense intended, and it
when he was apprehended. He was charged with attempted must be clearly proven that the perpetrator’s objective was to
robbery. commit a specific offense. Acts that could be interpreted in
multiple ways do not automatically justify punishment for an
Issue: attempted crime.

Whether or not the acts of the accused constituted attempted

robbery.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court held that the accused was not guilty of
attempted robbery. For an attempt to be punishable, the overt
acts must have an unavoidable connection to the crime
intended. In this case, while it was clear that Lamahang
intended to enter the store, there was no concrete evidence
proving that he intended to commit robbery upon entry. As
such, the Court found the correct charge to be attempted
trespass to dwelling, not attempted robbery.

32
Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution - Attempted
Stage

This case is a good illustration of the “attempted stage” in

criminal law, where the accused has begun to execute the crime
but has not yet completed it due to external factors. The Court
clarified that the attempted stage requires the presence of overt
acts that have a direct and necessary connection to the
commission of the intended crime. In this case, the accused’s
act of breaking the store’s wall was considered an overt act, but
since there was no concrete evidence to show that he intended
to rob, the act did not qualify as attempted robbery. Instead, the
Court ruled it as attempted trespass to dwelling.

This highlights the importance of distinguishing the attempted

stage from mere preparation. For a crime to be in the attempted
stage, there must be clear evidence of intent tied to the specific
crime.

33
Case Digest: People vs. Freddie Lizada (G.R. Nos. circumstances of minority and relationship were not properly
143468-71) alleged in the information. For the attempted rape, Lizada was
sentenced to a lesser penalty.
Facts:
Doctrine:
Freddie Lizada was charged with four counts of qualified rape
involving Analia Orillosa, a minor. The incidents occurred An attempted crime occurs when the offender begins the
between 1996 and 1998 when Lizada repeatedly sexually execution of a crime by overt acts but does not complete the
abused Analia by force, intimidation, and threats. In November crime due to external causes, not by the offender's voluntary
1998, one of the incidents was interrupted when Analia's desistance. In cases of sexual assault, if the accused is stopped
brother, Rossel, witnessed Lizada on top of her. Lizada was before full penetration occurs, the crime is attempted rape.
convicted by the trial court of four counts of qualified rape and Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution - Attempted Stage
sentenced to death. He appealed the decision.

Issue:

Whether Lizada was guilty of qualified rape for the four

incidents, including the one interrupted by Rossel.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court found Lizada guilty of three counts of

simple rape and one count of attempted rape. For three of the
incidents, the evidence supported the conviction for simple
rape. However, for the November 5, 1998 incident, the Court
ruled that Lizada committed only attempted rape because he
was interrupted by Rossel before the crime could be fully
consummated. The death penalty was reduced to reclusion
perpetua for the three counts of rape because the qualifying

34
Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution - Attempted
Stage

In this case, the attempted stage is clearly illustrated in the

November 1998 incident. Lizada had commenced the crime by
engaging in overt acts, such as positioning himself on top of
Analia, touching her, and removing her clothes. These acts
were a direct movement towards the commission of rape.
However, his attempt was interrupted by the sudden
appearance of Rossel, causing Lizada to stop before
completing the act. This interruption transformed the crime
from a consummated rape into an attempted rape.

The attempted stage in criminal law is defined by the

commencement of overt acts that are directly linked to the
commission of the crime, but the completion is hindered by an
external force, not by the offender's voluntary desistance.
Lizada's actions, interrupted by Rossel, demonstrate this stage
of execution, where the crime was in progress but left
incomplete.

35
Case Digest: Esmeraldo Rivera, Ismael Rivera, Edgardo Ruling:
Rivera vs. People of the Philippines (G.R. No. 166326)
Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of
Facts: Appeals convicting the accused of attempted murder. The
Court ruled that all elements of an attempted felony were
On May 3, 1998, in Dasmariñas, Cavite, Ruben Rodil was present: the brothers commenced the execution of the crime
assaulted by Esmeraldo, Ismael, and Edgardo Rivera. The directly by overt acts (the physical assault and use of the
altercation began with Ruben being boxed by Esmeraldo and hollow block), but were unable to complete the crime due to
Ismael. While Ruben was already lying on the ground, Edgardo the arrival of the police. Intent to kill was clearly shown by the
struck him three times on the head with a hollow block. coordinated attack and the use of a dangerous weapon (hollow
Although Ruben sustained head injuries, he managed to escape block). The attack was deemed treacherous as it was sudden
due to the timely arrival of the police. The attackers were later and left the victim defenseless.
charged with attempted murder.
Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution (Attempted
The trial court initially convicted the Rivera brothers of Stage):
frustrated murder, but on appeal, the Court of Appeals
modified the conviction to attempted murder. The accused The case illustrates the attempted stage of a felony, particularly
claimed they did not have the intent to kill and that the injury attempted murder. Under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code,
sustained by Ruben was superficial. However, the courts ruled an attempt occurs when the offender begins executing the
that intent to kill was established based on their coordinated crime by overt acts but does not complete all acts of execution
attack and use of a hollow block, which could have resulted in due to a cause other than their own desistance. In this case, the
death if not for external intervention. Rivera brothers clearly intended to commit murder, but their
actions were interrupted by the arrival of the police. Therefore,
Issue: the crime did not reach the consummated or frustrated stage,
but remained in the attempted stage due to the lack of a fatal
Whether the accused were guilty of attempted murder. result and the intervention of an external cause.

36
Case Digest: Eliseo Araneta, Jr. vs. People of the Ruling:
Philippines (G.R. No. L-43527)
The Supreme Court ruled that Araneta should be convicted of
Facts: attempted homicide, not homicide. The Court recognized that
the wound inflicted by Araneta was non-fatal and did not
In March 1972, Manuel Esteban Jr. was killed after being shot materially contribute to Esteban’s death. However, because
twice—once by petitioner Eliseo Araneta, Jr. and once by Araneta fired a gun at Esteban, his intent to kill was evident,
co-accused Benjamin Bautista. During a confrontation at a making him liable for attempted homicide rather than mere
restaurant, Araneta shot Esteban in the back, causing a slight physical injuries. The Court also emphasized that there
superficial injury. Shortly after, Bautista shot Esteban in the was no conspiracy between Araneta and Bautista, which meant
chest, inflicting a fatal wound. Araneta argued that his shot did each should be held accountable only for their respective
not cause the death of Esteban and thus he should be liable actions. As a result, Bautista was found guilty of homicide for
only for slight physical injuries, not homicide. inflicting the fatal wound, while Araneta was convicted of
attempted homicide.
The trial court found Araneta and Bautista guilty of homicide,
citing the cumulative effect of both gunshot wounds as the Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution—Attempted
cause of death. On appeal, the Court of Appeals affirmed the Stage
decision but modified the civil damages. Araneta further
appealed to the Supreme Court, maintaining that he should not This case is relevant to the discussion of the attempted stage in
be held responsible for the victim’s death. the commission of a felony. Under Article 6 of the Revised
Penal Code, a crime is considered “attempted” when the
Issue: offender begins the execution of the crime by overt acts but
does not complete all acts of execution due to causes other than
Whether Araneta should be held liable for homicide or only for their voluntary desistance. In this case, Araneta’s actions
attempted homicide, given that his shot did not cause the showed intent to kill (by shooting the victim), but the
victim’s death. result—Esteban’s death—was not caused by his shot.
Therefore, Araneta did not perform all the acts necessary to
consummate the crime, and his liability was reduced to
attempted homicide.

37
Case Digest: Renato Baleros Jr. vs. People of the Ruling:
Philippines (G.R. No. 138033)
The Supreme Court acquitted Baleros of attempted rape but
Facts: convicted him of unjust vexation (light coercion). The Court
ruled that, while Baleros’ actions were highly suspicious and
On December 13, 1991, around 1:50 AM, Martina Lourdes distressing for the victim, they did not rise to the level of
Albano (Malou), a medical student, was awakened by a attempted rape. The pressing of a chemical-soaked cloth on
chemical-soaked cloth pressed on her face, rendering her Malou’s face was not considered an overt act leading directly
unable to move. She struggled and eventually freed herself by to the consummation of rape. There was no evidence of sexual
grabbing the assailant’s genitals, causing him to flee. She did advances, such as attempts to undress or touch her private
not see her attacker’s face but identified the feeling of his parts, indicating a clear intent to rape.
clothes—cotton on top and satin-like shorts. Investigations led
to the discovery of incriminating items in a bag belonging to The Court also noted that the facts were largely circumstantial
Renato Baleros Jr., such as a handkerchief and shorts that and did not conclusively establish beyond reasonable doubt
matched the description of what Malou felt. Chloroform was that Baleros intended to commit rape. Thus, while the actions
found on both the handkerchief and Malou’s clothing. were unjust and caused distress to Malou, they did not satisfy
the legal definition of attempted rape under Article 335 of the
The trial court convicted Baleros of attempted rape, reasoning Revised Penal Code.
that the attacker’s actions indicated an intent to incapacitate
Malou and commit rape. Baleros appealed, arguing that the
evidence against him was circumstantial and insufficient to
prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Issue:

Whether the actions of Baleros constituted attempted rape.

38
Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution—Attempted
Stage

This case is a key example of the attempted stage in criminal

law. Under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code, a crime is
considered attempted when the offender begins to execute the
crime by overt acts but is unable to complete all the acts
necessary for its consummation due to causes other than their
voluntary desistance. In this case, the Court ruled that Baleros’
actions, while suspicious and indicative of malicious intent, did
not meet the criteria for an overt act directly leading to rape.
Thus, the crime remained at a preparatory stage and did not
progress to the attempted stage, highlighting the distinction
between preparation and actual execution in determining
criminal liability.

39
Case Digest: People of the Philippines vs. Efren Agao y Ruling:
Añonuevo (G.R. No. 248049)
The Supreme Court upheld the conviction for consummated
Facts: rape. The Court ruled that any slight penetration of the labia
majora is sufficient to establish consummated rape, even if full
Efren Agao y Añonuevo was charged with two counts of penetration is not achieved. It emphasized that rape is
statutory rape involving his stepdaughter, a minor named AAA. consummated as soon as the penis touches the labia of the
The accusations arose from incidents that occurred when AAA victim, regardless of whether full penetration occurs. Agao's
was 10 and 13 years old. In both instances, Agao allegedly actions of undressing the victim and attempting to insert his
attempted to insert his penis into the victim's vagina, but AAA penis were considered to have crossed the line from attempt to
resisted, preventing full penetration. During trial, AAA consummation once his penis made contact with the labia.
testified that Agao undressed her and tried to penetrate her, but
he was unable to complete the act because she fought back.
However, the Court held that the slight penetration of the labia
was sufficient to constitute consummated rape. Agao was
convicted by the trial court of two counts of statutory rape,
which was affirmed by the Court of Appeals.
On appeal to the Supreme Court, Agao argued that since there
was no full penetration, he should be convicted only of
attempted rape.

Issue:

Whether the actions of Agao constituted consummated rape or

should be downgraded to attempted rape due to the absence of
full penetration.

40
Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution-Attempted Stage

This case is highly relevant to the topic of the stages of

execution in criminal law, specifically the distinction between
attempted and consummated crimes. Under Article 6 of the
Revised Penal Code, a crime is considered attempted when the
offender begins to execute the crime by overt acts but does not
perform all the acts of execution due to reasons other than
voluntary desistance. In this case, Agao argued that his actions
only amounted to attempted rape because there was no full
penetration.

However, the Supreme Court clarified that the slightest touch

of the penis to the labia is sufficient to constitute consummated
rape. This ruling underscores the fine line between attempted
and consummated crimes and illustrates how overt acts, once
they reach a certain threshold, result in consummation rather
than mere attempt. The case demonstrates that the
determination of whether a crime is attempted or consummated
hinges on the degree of completion of the acts necessary to
achieve the crime's objective.

41
Case Digest: People of the Philippines vs. Sy Pio alias cause death. The victim escaped, and Sy Pio did not pursue
Policarpio de la Cruz (G.R. No. L-5848) him further. Since Sy Pio did not believe he had completed all
the acts of execution necessary to cause death, the crime did
Facts: not reach the frustrated stage. Therefore, the Court found Sy
Pio guilty of attempted murder and reduced his sentence
In the early morning of September 3, 1949, Sy Pio entered a accordingly.
store and fired a .45 caliber pistol, shooting several individuals.
One of the victims, Tan Siong Kiap, asked why Sy Pio was Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution—Frustrated
shooting, and in response, Sy Pio shot him, hitting his shoulder. Stage
Kiap fled and was treated in the hospital, where he stayed for
nine days. The trial court found Sy Pio guilty of frustrated This case illustrates the distinction between the frustrated and
murder, and the case was brought on appeal. attempted stages of a crime. In criminal law, a crime reaches
the frustrated stage when the offender has performed all the
The defense argued that the wound was not fatal and claimed acts of execution necessary to produce the felony but the felony
Sy Pio should only be held liable for less serious physical is not consummated due to external causes. In contrast, a crime
injuries. They also argued that the intent to kill was not fully is in the attempted stage when not all the acts necessary to
executed since the victim survived. complete the crime are performed. In this case, the Court
determined that Sy Pio’s actions did not reach the frustrated
Issue: stage because he did not perform all the acts necessary to cause
death and was aware that his victim had survived. This case
Whether the defendant should be convicted of frustrated highlights the importance of intent and the degree of execution
murder or attempted murder. in determining whether a crime is attempted or frustrated.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court modified the conviction from frustrated

murder to attempted murder. The Court ruled that while the
intent to kill was clear, the wound inflicted was not fatal, and
Sy Pio knew that he had not completed all the acts necessary to

42
Case Digest: United States vs. Protasio Eduave (G.R. No. cause the victim’s death, believing he had succeeded in killing
L-12155) her. The fact that the victim survived was due to causes
independent of Eduave’s will, which is the definition of
Facts: frustrated felony under the Penal Code. The Court clarified that
the distinction between frustrated and attempted felonies lies in
Protasio Eduave attacked a girl with a sharp bolo, striking her whether the offender completed all the acts of execution. In this
in the back and producing a severe wound measuring 8.5 case, Eduave had completed all the acts necessary to produce
inches long and 2 inches deep. Eduave believed he had killed death, making the crime frustrated murder rather than
the girl and discarded her body in the bushes. He later attempted murder.
surrendered, declaring that he had killed her. However, the
victim survived the attack. Eduave was charged with frustrated Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution—Frustrated
murder. Stage

The prosecution argued that the intent to kill was evident, as This case exemplifies the frustrated stage of a felony as defined
Eduave used a deadly weapon and targeted a vital part of the under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code. A crime is
body. The crime was qualified as murder due to the presence of classified as frustrated when the offender has performed all the
alevosia (treachery), as the attack was sudden and from behind. acts necessary to produce the intended result (in this case,
Eduave contested the charge, claiming that the crime should death), but the result does not occur due to causes independent
only be considered attempted murder, not frustrated murder. of the offender’s will. In this case, Eduave believed he had
killed the victim, but external factors (such as medical
Issue: intervention) prevented the crime from being consummated.
This case highlights the key difference between the frustrated
Whether Eduave should be convicted of frustrated murder or and attempted stages: in frustrated crimes, the offender has
attempted murder. already performed all the acts necessary for the crime’s
completion, while in attempted crimes, some acts necessary to
Ruling: complete the crime have not been carried out.

The Supreme Court upheld the conviction for frustrated

murder. It held that Eduave performed all the acts necessary to

43
Case Digest: People of the Philippine Islands vs. Anastasio Ruling:
Dagman, et al. (G.R. No. L-23133)
The Supreme Court ruled that the crime committed was
Facts: frustrated murder, not attempted murder. The Court found that
the attackers had the intent to kill Magbual, as evidenced by the
On May 2, 1924, Elias Magbual, an employee of the hacienda deadly weapons used, the location and severity of the wounds,
“La Esperanza,” was attacked by a group of about 40 people, and their belief that Magbual had died. The crime was
led by the accused, Anastasio Dagman and others. The frustrated because the attackers performed all the acts
attackers harbored enmity against Magbual due to a previous necessary to cause Magbual’s death, but the result (death) did
judicial order that dispossessed them of land. Magbual was not occur due to Magbual’s feigning death, a circumstance
knocked down by a stone thrown by Dagman and was independent of the attackers’ will. Thus, the subjective phase
subsequently attacked by others with a lance, bolos, and clubs. of the crime was completed, and the failure to consummate the
Magbual was severely injured but managed to survive by crime was due to external factors beyond the control of the
pretending to be dead, which caused the attackers to stop their attackers.
assault.
The Court modified the sentence, ruling that the accused were
The trial court convicted the accused of frustrated homicide, guilty of frustrated murder, considering the presence of
but the Attorney-General recommended that the crime be treachery (alevosia) and the use of prohibited arms.
classified as frustrated murder due to the presence of alevosia
(treachery). The accused appealed, claiming that there was no
intent to kill and that the crime should be classified as
attempted rather than frustrated.

Issue:

Whether the accused should be convicted of frustrated murder

or attempted murder.

44
Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution—Frustrated
Stage

This case illustrates the frustrated stage of a crime, as defined

in Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code. A crime is considered
frustrated when the offender has performed all the acts of
execution necessary to produce the intended result (in this case,
death), but the result does not occur due to causes independent
of the offender’s will. In this case, the attackers believed they
had killed Magbual, but he survived due to pretending to be
dead. The attackers completed all the acts necessary to kill
Magbual, making the crime frustrated murder. This case
highlights the distinction between frustrated and attempted
crimes: in frustrated crimes, the execution is complete, but the
intended result does not occur, while in attempted crimes, not
all acts of execution are completed.

45
Case Digest: Arnel Colinares vs. People of the Philippines Ruling:
(G.R. No. 182748)
The Supreme Court modified the conviction from frustrated
Facts: homicide to attempted homicide. The Court held that while
Colinares intended to kill the victim, as evidenced by the
Arnel Colinares was charged with frustrated homicide after he nature and location of the wounds and the use of a deadly
struck the victim, Rufino Buena, twice on the head with a weapon (the stone), the injuries inflicted were not fatal.
stone, causing the latter to lose consciousness. The victim Medical testimony confirmed that the wounds did not endanger
sustained lacerated wounds on the forehead, which were the victim’s life, meaning that death was not imminent or only
described as serious but not fatal. Colinares claimed prevented by timely medical intervention. Therefore, the crime
self-defense, stating that Rufino and his companions had could only be classified as attempted homicide.
attacked him first, but his claim was not corroborated.
The Court further ruled that Colinares could still apply for
The trial court found Colinares guilty of frustrated homicide, probation, as the modification of his sentence made him
sentencing him to imprisonment. Colinares appealed, arguing eligible for this remedy. The Court held that while probation is
for self-defense and, alternatively, a conviction for attempted not a right, it is a privilege that Colinares should be allowed to
homicide instead of frustrated homicide. The Court of Appeals pursue due to the reduced sentence.
affirmed the trial court’s ruling, prompting Colinares to bring
the case to the Supreme Court.

Issue:

Whether Arnel Colinares should be convicted of frustrated

homicide or attempted homicide, given the nature of the
injuries inflicted on the victim.

46
Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution—Frustrated
Stage

This case illustrates the distinction between frustrated and

attempted stages of a crime. Under Article 6 of the Revised
Penal Code, a crime is frustrated when the offender performs
all the acts necessary to produce the felony but the crime does
not result due to causes independent of the offender’s will. In
contrast, a crime is attempted when not all the acts of execution
are performed.

In this case, the Supreme Court clarified that for a crime to be

classified as frustrated homicide, the injuries inflicted must be
fatal and would have caused death had it not been for external
intervention (e.g., medical assistance). Since the victim’s
injuries were not life-threatening, the crime was downgraded to
attempted homicide, as the acts performed by the offender were
not sufficient to bring about the death of the victim. This case
highlights the importance of the severity of the injuries in
determining whether a crime reaches the frustrated stage or
remains in the attempted stage.

47
Case Digest: Rogelio Roque vs. People of the Philippines from the nature of the weapon used (a gun) and the location of
(G.R. No. 193169) the wounds (head and nape). Although Marquez survived, the
injuries inflicted were serious and could have resulted in death
Facts: had it not been for timely medical intervention. The Court also
found that the defense of self-defense was not sufficiently
Rogelio Roque was charged with frustrated homicide for proven, as there was no clear evidence of unlawful aggression
shooting Reynaldo Marquez in the right ear and nape, followed on the part of Marquez.
by kicking him on the face and back. The prosecution
presented evidence that Roque fired at Marquez following a Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution—Frustrated
misunderstanding, and medical intervention saved Marquez’s Stage
life. The defense, however, argued that Roque acted in
self-defense as Marquez and his brother had earlier threatened This case illustrates the frustrated stage of a crime, particularly
him and initiated the altercation. frustrated homicide. Under Article 6 of the Revised Penal
Code, a crime is classified as frustrated when the offender
The trial court found Roque guilty of frustrated homicide, performs all the acts of execution necessary to cause the felony,
imposing a sentence of six to ten years of imprisonment. Roque but the crime does not occur due to causes independent of the
appealed the decision, claiming that he acted in self-defense offender’s will. In this case, Roque performed all the acts to
and that his conviction should be downgraded to less serious cause death—shooting the victim in the head and nape—yet
physical injuries. the victim survived due to medical intervention. This case
demonstrates that even when death does not occur, if the acts
Issue: performed are sufficient to cause death, the crime is in the
frustrated stage. The case also emphasizes that the gravity of
Whether Rogelio Roque should be convicted of frustrated the injuries and the intent of the offender are key in
homicide or a lesser crime such as physical injuries. determining whether a crime reaches the frustrated stage.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of frustrated

homicide. The Court ruled that the intent to kill was evident

48
Case Digest: Aristotel Valenzuela vs. People of the unlawful taking, defined as the moment the offender gains
Philippines (G.R. No. 160188) possession of the stolen item, even if he has not yet fully
disposed of it. The Court rejected the idea of frustrated theft in
Facts: this case, explaining that the crime of theft is produced once
the offender has deprived the owner of possession of the
Aristotel Valenzuela, along with Jovy Calderon, was charged property. The fact that Valenzuela was caught before he could
with the crime of theft for stealing cases of detergent from a make use of the stolen items did not change the fact that the
supermarket. Valenzuela was apprehended by a security guard theft was consummated.
while loading the stolen items into a taxi. He attempted to flee,
but was eventually caught, and the stolen goods were Relation to the Topic: Stages of Execution—Consummated
recovered. Valenzuela argued that he should be convicted of Stage
frustrated theft rather than consummated theft, claiming that he
had not yet disposed of the stolen items when he was caught. This case is a clear example of the consummated stage in
criminal law, particularly in relation to the crime of theft.
The trial court convicted Valenzuela of consummated theft, Under Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code, a felony is
which was affirmed by the Court of Appeals. Valenzuela consummated when all the acts necessary for its execution and
further appealed to the Supreme Court, arguing that the crime accomplishment are present. In this case, the crime of theft was
was only frustrated since he had not yet freely disposed of the consummated the moment Valenzuela took possession of the
stolen property. stolen goods and deprived the owner of possession, regardless
of whether he was able to dispose of the items. This illustrates
Issue: that the consummated stage is reached once the offender
completes the acts required to achieve the crime, even if the
Whether Valenzuela should be convicted of frustrated theft or intended result (such as profiting from the stolen goods) does
consummated theft. not occur.

Ruling:

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of consummated

theft. The Court held that theft is consummated once there is

49