MA. JEAN B.

CASTAEDA
Criminal Law 2 (Sunday 8:00-12:00)
CASE #1
JACUTIN vs. PEOPLE
G.R. No. 140604
March 6, 00
!ACTS"
On 01 December 1995, in Cagayan de Oro City, Ms. Juliet Q. Yee, a young year!
old "oman, single and #res$ graduate in %ac$elor o# &cience in 'ursing soug$t #or
em(loyment in t$e o##ice o# t$e City )ealt$ O##icer *ico Jacutin. During t$e course o# $er
a((lication #or em(loyment, Dr. Jacutin unla"#ully and criminally re+uested se,ual #avors
#rom $er by demanding t$at s$e s$ould e,(ose $er body and allo" $er (rivate (arts to be
mas$ed and stimulated by t$e accused. &aid se,ual #avor "as made as a condition #or t$e
em(loyment o# Ms. Yee in t$e -amily .rogram o# t$e O##ice o# t$e accused. /$e
&andiganbayan #ound t$e accused, Dr. *ico Jacutin, guilty o# t$e crime o# &e,ual
)arassment under *e(ublic 0ct 'o. 1211.
ISSUE"
3$et$er or not t$e accused is guilty o# t$e crime c$arged.
#ELD"
/$e &u(reme Court $eld t$at t$e accused is guilty o# t$e crime o# &e,ual )arassment
de#ined and (unis$ed under *e(ublic 0ct 'o. 1211, (articularly &ections 4 and 1 t$ereo#. 5n
t$e case at bar, t$e se,ual #avor "as made by t$e accused as a condition in t$e $iring or
em(loyment o# t$e victim. )ence, t$e decision o# t$e &andiganbayan "as a##irmed by t$e
&u(reme Court. )o"ever, a"ard o# moral and e,em(lary damages are MOD5-56D. /$e
accused is ordered to indemni#y t$e o##ended (arty, Juliet Yee, in t$e amount o# .40,000.00
and .0,000.00 #or moral and e,em(lary damages.
MA. JEAN B. CASTAEDA
1
Criminal Law 2 (Sunday 8:00-12:00)
CASE #
PAISTE vs. MAMENTA
A.M. No. P$0%$16&'
Oc(o)*r 1, 00%
!ACTS"
/$ese consolidated administrative cases arose #rom t"o di##erent com(laints #iled against
res(ondent 0(roniano 7. Mamenta, Jr., Cler8 o# Court 55, Munici(al Circuit /rial Court o#
/ayug!&an 'icolas, .angasinan. 5n an a##idavit!com(laint #iled "it$ t$e O##ice o# t$e C$ie#
Justice,
91:
dated 0ugust 10, 001, com(lainant Joanne &. ;oltiao c$arged $im "it$ gambling
and drin8ing li+uor during o##ice $ours, se,ual $arassment, arrogance and acts unbecoming
o# a government o##icial. 5n anot$er a##idavit!com(laint #iled "it$ t$e O##ice o# t$e Court
0dministrator,
9:
dated 0ugust 2, 001, t$e ot$er com(lainant Jocelyn C. .aiste c$arged $im
"it$ conduct unbecoming o# a (ublic o##icer and "it$ violation o# t$e 0nti!;ra#t and Corru(t
.ractices 0ct
94:
#or $is #ailure to issue o##icial recei(t.
0#ter res(ondent denied t$e accusations against $im in se(arate letters,
9<:
"e resolved
95:
to
re#er bot$ cases to )on. =lysses %utuyan, 6,ecutive Judge o# t$e *egional /rial Court o#
/ayug, .angasinan #or investigation, re(ort and recommendation.
9>:
&e(arate investigations
o# t$e com(laints "ere conducted.
5n 0.M. 'o. .!04!1>99 ?#ormerly OC0 5...5. 'o. 01!10!.@, evidence s$o"s t$at com(lainant
;oltiao is a &tenogra($er 5 o# t$e MC/C o# /ayug!&an 'icolas since 1991. &$e
testi#ied
91:
t$at on 0ugust 1, 000, at about 4A00 (.m., a re(resentative #rom t$e .laridel
5nsurance Co. came to t$eir o##ice see8ing clearance. &$e immediately (re(ared t$e
necessary #orm and, toget$er "it$ t$e re(resentative, "ent to see res(ondent in t$e
courtroom to obtain $is signature. 3$en s$e as8ed $im to sign t$e document, res(ondent,
"$o "as at t$at time (laying tong-its ?a card game@ at t$e la"yersB table "it$ unnamed
individuals, got angry and t$re" $is cards. )e s$outed at $erA C3$y did you bring t$em "it$
youD Did you li8e t$em to bring me to t$e &u(reme CourtDE &$e res(onded t$at suc$ "as not
$er intention and reminded $im o# $is re+uirement t$at $e must #irst see t$e a((licants be#ore
$e sign t$eir clearance. )e did not sign t$e clearance, sent t$en out and s$outed
C%ulls$it kaFE at $er t$rice. /$ey all t$en "ent out o# t$e courtroom and (roceeded bac8 to
t$e sta## room. &$e "ent to $er table and buried $er #ace in $er $ands, crying. *es(ondent
#ollo"ed $er and continued uttering unsavory remar8sA C%ulls$it kaF 7ulva o# your
mot$erF 3$y did you ta8e t$e client t$ere and even raised your voiceD ?Bullshit ka! Okinnam
nga babai! Apay ta innalam dagita kliyente idiay sanak to rinayawan!@E &$e re(lied t$at $er
(arents taug$t t$em not to ans"er bac8 at older (eo(le. )e still s$outedA C7ulva o# your
mot$erF 5 "is$ you "ill die no"F 3$om are you bragging o#D 3e "ill try eac$
ot$er. ?Okinnam nga babai! Matay ka koma itattan! Apay sinno aya ti paglaslastog mo? Sige,
agpipinnadas tayo.@E /$erea#ter, $e as8ed t$e utility aide to buy $im #our bottles o# beer.
;oltiao declared t$at $er "or8ing relations$i( "it$ t$e res(ondent is Csometimes good and
sometimes bad because o# $is ill tem(er.E
92:
)e easily gets mad at $er even #or small, trivial
mista8es. /$is situation started, according to $er, "$en s$e told $im to sto( courting and
sending $er love notes as s$e is already a married "oman. &$e related an incident "$ic$
$a((ened early one morning "$en $e as8ed $er to see $im inside t$e GudgeBs c$amber. 0t
t$at time, t$e designated Gudge "as not around. Once inside, s$e "as told to sit in one o# t$e
c$airs in #ront o# t$e GudgeBs table. /$e res(ondent, "$o "as sitting at t$e GudgeBs c$air, t$en
e,tended $is $and to $er, as i# $e "anted to s$a8e $er $ands. &$e reci(rocated by
e,tending $er $ands and Go8ingly (ut $is $ands on $er #ore$ead ?agmanmano@. &$e
2
a#ter"ards tried to #ree $er $ands o## $is but $e "ould no let $er. 5nstead, $e told $er, C3ait
#or a "$ile, 5 "ould Gust li8e to tell you somet$ing. 5 love you, is t$at o8ayD /ell me t$at you
love me too. 'o strings attac$ed.E &$e retorted, C0s i# you are my #at$er.E &(urned, $e got
mad. /$is 8ind o# incident $a((ened at least ten more times.
-urt$ermore, res(ondent sent $er love notes. )e "rote $is love messages on (ieces o#
(a(er in #ront o# $er and $anded t$em to $er.
99:
&$e 8ne" t$at t$ey "ere intended #or $er as
t$ere "as nobody else (resent "$en $e gave t$e notes to $er. )e "ould also call $er at $er
mot$erBs $ouse. &$e did not res(ond a##irmatively to $is dis(lay o# a##ection as bot$ o# t$em
are married. -inally, s$e e,(lained t$at s$e #iled a com(laint against $im only on 0ugust 10,
001 because o# t$e 0ugust 1, 001 incident, "$en s$e got #ed u( at t$e "ay $e treated $er.
Marilyn de Heon, also a court stenogra($er o# MC/C /ayug!&an 'icolas, corroborated t$e
testimony o# ;oltiao.
910:
&$e stated t$at s$e "itnessed t$e incident on 0ugust 1, 001, "$en
res(ondent became angry at ;oltiao a#ter t$e latter "ent to as8 #or $is signature "$ile $e
"as (laying tong-its. &$e $eard res(ondent s$out #oul "ords at ;oltiao. &$e added t$at
res(ondent gets mad at everyone at t$e o##ice on trivial matter. &$e, too, received love notes
#rom t$e res(ondent.
Court stenogra($er ;lenda C. *amireI also corroborated t$e testimony o# ;oltiao.
911:
&$e
declared t$at s$e "itnessed t$e incident on 0ugust 1, 001 at t$eir o##ice. &$e observed t$at
res(ondent "as #uming mad at ;oltiao, "$en t$e latter as8ed $im to sign a clearance
#orm. &$e $eard res(ondent s$out at ;oltiao inside t$e courtroom and at t$e sta##
room. *es(ondent got mad "$en ;oltiao allo"ed t$e re(resentatives o# t$e insurance
com(any to enter t$e courtroom, "$ere $e "as (laying tong-its. &$e related t$at s$e also
received love notes #rom $im. One time, a#ter res(ondent signed $er travel order s$e noticed
t$e #ollo"ing message "ritten on t$e orderA C1A40 in t$e evening, Jollibee.E &$e did not go
out "it$ $im. &$e c$ose $im as a (rinci(al s(onsor on $er "edding in t$e $o(e t$at $e
"ould treat $er li8e $is o"n c$ild and t$at $e "ould sto( sending notes to $er. /$is did not
$a((en even as res(ondent continued to easily get mad at $er #or sim(le la(ses.
*enato *omba"a, a utility "or8er at t$e court, sa" t$e incident on 0ugust 1, 001, "$en
res(ondent got mad at ;oltiao inside t$e courtroom.
91:
)e did not 8no" "$y $e became
#urious. 0t t$e time o# t$e incident, res(ondent "as (laying tong-its.
6sti#anio 0costa, Cler8 555 at t$e MC/C, stated t$at $e li8e"ise sa" res(ondent got mad
"$en ;oltiao tried to obtain $is signature #or a clearance #orm.
914:
*es(ondent, $e recalled,
"as at t$at time (laying tong-its. )e 8ne" t$at res(ondent gives love notes to ;oltiao and
;lenda *amireI, as t$e t"o revealed t$is secret to $im.
Hastly, David Jagaoan testi#ied t$at at about 4A00 oBcloc8 in t$e a#ternoon o# 0ugust 1, 001,
somebody came to get a clearance #rom t$e court.
91<:
/$e clearance #orm "as (re(ared by
;oltiao "$o "ent to see t$e res(ondent at t$e courtroom. )e t$en $eard s$outs o# Cvulva o#
your mot$er, get out o# $ereFE #rom t$e room. )e t$oug$t it came #rom t$e res(ondent, "$o
"as t$en (laying tong-its. *omba"a, t$e utility "or8er, "ent inside t$e courtroom and
broug$t t$e sobbing ;oltiao out. )e stated t$at com(lainant s$o"ed $im some o# t$e love
notes res(ondent gave $er. )e 8no"s it came #rom res(ondent as $e is #amiliar "it$ $is
signature.
*es(ondent denied t$e allegations against $im.
915:
)e admitted s$outing at ;oltiao because
s$e, too, s$outed at $im. )e declared t$at t$e com(laint "as intended to $arass $im and (ut
$im into s$ame and to remove $im #rom o##ice. )e said t$at ;oltiao and $er "itnesses resent
$is strictness and t$ey "ant to continue "it$ t$eir bad "ays in t$e o##ice. ;oltiao, *amireI
and de Heon come to o##ice late but ;oltiaoBs daily time record does not re#lect $er
tardiness. &$e sells stenogra($ic notes "it$out remitting a single centavo to t$e Judiciary
Develo(ment -und ?JD-@. 3itness *omba"a does not "or8 in t$e o##ice #rom A00 to 5A00
oBcloc8 in t$e a#ternoon. 3itness 0costa is a $abitual absentee, re(orts at 10A00 oBcloc8 and
leaves a#ter only an $our. )e t$en returns at A00 oBcloc8 in t$e a#ternoon. )e is $ired by
one %obby ;o as a driver. 3itness Jagaoan is a $abitual latecomer as $e attends to $is
3
agricultural business #irst be#ore going to t$e court. )e adds t$at "itnesses *omba"a,
0costa and Jagaoan all (lay tong-its eit$er at t$e session $all o# t$e court or t$e #irst #loor o#
t$e building.
On rebuttal, com(lainant ;oltiao revealed t$at res(ondent invited $er several times #or a date
at Jollibee, instructing $er not to tell $er $usband about it.
91>:
*es(ondent countered t$at
every time $e invites $er, it "as "it$ de Heon, *amireI and ot$er court (ersonnel.
911:
5n 0.M. 'o. .!04!1>91 ?#ormerly OC0 5...5. 'o. 01!119>!.@, com(lainant .aiste is t$e o"ner
o# JC.1 5nsurance 0gency, and as its (ro(rietor, $as transactions "it$ t$e MC/C /ayug!
&an 'icolas.
912:
&$e testi#ied t$at on 0(ril 4, 001 at about A00 (.m. s$e "ent to t$e court,
toget$er "it$ a client, to (ost bail. 3$en t$ey arrived, t$ey could not #ind t$e res(ondent. 0n
em(loyee named Marilyn accom(anied t$en to one o# t$e rooms at t$e $all o# Gustice "$ere
t$e res(ondent "as $olding game cards and (laying tong-its "it$ some (eo(le. Marilyn
called res(ondentBs attention telling $im t$at somebody "ants to (ost bail. *es(ondent
retorted, CYou Gust go a$ead u(stairs. 3$y, could you not "aitDE /$ey "ent a$ead and
res(ondent #ollo"ed #i#teen minutes a#ter. &$e noticed t$at $e "as mad. /$ey told $im t$ey
"ant to (ost bail and $e as8ed #or t$e records o# t$e case. 0#ter e,amining t$e records, $e
slammed it and said, CYou go to *osalesF /$at is not our "or8FE )e also became angry "$en
t$ey #ollo"ed $im.
On 0(ril 0, 001, .aiste, an o##icemate and a client again "ent to t$e MC/C in /ayug!&an
'icolas to (ost bail in connection "it$ Criminal Case 'o. 1<>1. /$e res(ondent instructed
t$em to go to t$e $ouse o# Judge .astor. /$ey "ent t$ere as told but t$e Gudge reGected t$eir
(a(ers. /$ey returned t$e ne,t day, a &aturday, a#ter com(leting t$eir documents. /$ey
came #rom t$e court "$ere t$ey met res(ondent, "$o accom(anied t$em to t$e GudgeBs
$ouse. /$e Gudge a((roved t$e surety bond.
919:
Hater, t$ey $anded t$ree t$ousand (esos
?.4,000.00@ to t$e res(ondent, t"o t$ousand #our $undred (esos ?.,<00.00@ o# "$ic$ "as
#or t$e JD-. /$ey gave $im t$e remaining si, $undred (esos ?.>00.00@ a#ter $e as8ed t$em,
CPaano naman yung sa akin?E /$ey understood t$at to mean t$at $e "as e,(ecting some
#orm o# com(ensation as $e accom(anied t$em outside t$e o##ice on a non!"or8ing
day. /$ey t$en demanded an o##icial recei(t #or t$e t"o t$ousand #our $undred (esos
?.,<00.00@ t$ey (aid $im corres(onding to t$e amount o# t$e JD-. )e told t$em to go to t$e
court and get it t$e #ollo"ing Monday. /$at Monday, s$e sent one o# $er sta## to get t$e
recei(t, but t$e latter re(orted to $er t$at $e did not issue one. &$e added t$at t$is is not t$e
only time t$at $e #ailed to issue $er a recei(t. 5n ot$er cases, $e also neglected to do so
even a#ter s$e $as (aid t$e mandatory JD- #ees.
0 sta## member o# t$e MC/C /ayug!&an 'icolas, 6sti#anio 0costa, veri#ied t$e records o#
Criminal Case 'o. 1<>1 and stated t$at no o##icial recei(t a((ears on #ile alt$oug$ t$e
(ersonal bail bonds issued by t$e JC.1 5nsurance 0gency, bearing t$e date 0(ril 1, 001,
in #avor o# t$e several accused in t$e case "ere a((roved by t$e acting (residing Gudge o#
t$e court.
90:
-or $is (art, res(ondent merely denied t$e #oregoing allegations in o(en court and "aived
(resentation o# evidence.
91:
0#ter investigation, t$e investigating Gudge rendered a Consolidated *e(ort and
*ecommendation
9:
#inding res(ondent guilty o# serious misconduct and accordingly
(ro(osed t$at $e be sternly re(rimanded and #ined ten t$ousand (esos ?.10,000.00@, t$usA
'onet$eless, on t$e basis o# t$e evidence adduced, barely re#uted by t$e res(ondent, t$e
undersigned #inds $im guilty o# serious misconduct in o##ice, consisting o# abundantly
substantiated o##enses t$usA
1. Ma8ing undue advances t$roug$ love notes to #emale subordinatesK
. 5ndulging in card games during o##ice $oursK
4. =sing abusive language in dealing "it$ subordinates as "ell as "it$ t$ird (ersons
see8ing $is services as cler8 o# courtK and
4
<. *eceiving (ayments #or court #ees "it$out (rom(tly issuing t$e corres(onding
recei(ts t$ere#ore.
3)6*6-O*6, all o# t$e #oregoing (remises and circumstances considered, t$e undersigned
$ereby res(ect#ully recommends t$at res(ondent be sternly re(rimanded, and #ined in t$e
amount o# .10,000.00, #or serious misconduct.
94:
/$e re(ort "as #or"arded to t$e O##ice o# t$e Court 0dministrator ?OC0@. 0#ter evaluating t$e
re(ort and t$e records, t$e OC0 (ro(osed t$at a sti##er (enalty must be im(osed on
res(ondent. On t$e basis o# &ections 5, 5< and 55 o# Memorandum Circular 'o. 19, series
o# 1999 o# t$e Civil &ervice Commission,
9<:
it recommended t$at t$e t"o com(laints be
consolidated and doc8eted as a regular administrative case and t$at res(ondent be
C&=&.6'D6D #or a (eriod o# one ?1@ year $aving been #ound ;uilty o# various o##enses
including t$e ?si@ ;rave O##enses and disgrace#ul and immoral conduct.E
95:
0 (ainsta8ing e,amination o# t$e records o# t$e cases convinces us t$at t$e res(ondent is
guilty o# t$e o##enses c$arged against $im.
/$e evidence in 0.M. 'o. .!04!1>99 ade+uately establis$es t$at $e "as guilty o# gambling,
using abusive language and se,ually $arassing $is #emale subordinates. 3e #ind credible
t$e categorical and straig$t#or"ard testimonies o# com(lainant ;oltiao and $er
"itnesses. /$eir #ran8 and candid testimonies, uns$a8en by cross!e,amination and
un#la"ed by inconsistencies or contradictions in t$eir material (oints, deserve our #ull #ait$
and belie#.
9>:
5n contrast, "e are not (ersuaded by t$e denial (ut #or"ard by t$e res(ondent. /$e
(ur(orted motive $e im(utes against com(lainant and $er "itnesses #or #iling t$is case is not
"ort$y o# attention. )e asserts t$at t$ey Gust "ant $im removed so t$ey can continue "it$
t$eir Cbad "ays in t$e o##ice.E 5t stri8es us strange t$at $e allo"ed t$ese bad "ays #or a long
time "it$out ta8ing any measures or re(orting t$em to t$e OC0.
/ime and again, "e $ave em($asiIed t$at court o##icers, circumscribed "it$ $eavy
res(onsibility, must be t$e (aragon o# (ro(riety and good be$avior.
91:
/$is is es(ecially true
#or a cler8 o# court li8e t$e res(ondent. 0s a ran8ing o##icer o# t$e court, it is incumbent u(on
$im to set an e,am(le to $is co!em(loyees as to $o" t$ey s$ould conduct t$emselves in
o##iceK to see to it t$at $is subordinates "or8 e##iciently in accordance "it$ t$e rules and
regulations o# t$e civil service and t$e GudiciaryK and to (rovide t$en "it$ a $ealt$y "or8ing
atmos($ere "$erein co!"or8ers treat eac$ ot$er "it$ res(ect, courtesy and coo(eration, so
t$at in t$e end (ublic interest "ill be bene#ited.
92:
*es(ondent #ailed to measure u( to t$ese standards. )is use o# o##ensive language to"ards
com(lainant ;oltiao re#lects $is im(oliteness and lac8 o# decorum. )e s$outed (ro#anity at
$er, verbally abused $er and even disres(ected $er mot$er. )e did t$is in t$e (resence o# so
many em(loyees and clients o# t$e court. 3orse, t$ere "as no reason #or $im to unleas$ to
$er a #ury o# t$is 8ind. &$e "as merely as8ing $im to sign a clearance #orm and to e,amine
t$e a((licant (ursuant to $is s(eci#ic instruction t$at $e s$ould #irst see t$e a((licant #or t$e
clearance be#ore $e sign t$e #orm. 5n #ine, s$e "as Gust doing $er Gob. /$e trut$ is, $e got
mad at $er out o# $is #ear t$at t$e client s$e broug$t along mig$t re(ort $im to t$is court "$en
t$ey caug$t $im in !lagrante delito gambling.
&imilarly obGectionable is res(ondentBs (enc$ant #or (laying tong-its ?a card game@ and
gambling "it$ ot$er em(loyees o# t$e court. ;ambling is illegal and is absolutely #orbidden at
court (remises during o##ice $ours.
99:
5t generates un"$olesome conse+uences on t$e
gambler as it diverts $is attention #rom t$e more im(ortant res(onsibilities o# $is Gob.
940:
*es(ondent $imsel# "as very muc$ a"are o# t$is (ro$ibition and t$is is e,actly t$e reason
"$y $e castigated t$e com(lainant #or a((roac$ing $im "$ile $e "as (laying cards, t$usA
C3$y did you bring t$en "it$ youD Did you li8e t$em to bring me to t$e &u(reme CourtDE
941:
3orse, res(ondent "as (laying cards and gambling during o##ice $ours at t$e session $all o#
t$e courtroom, "$ic$ is $ardly t$e (lace #or suc$ undesirable activities. 0 courtroom is
generally loo8ed u(on by (eo(le "it$ $ig$ res(ect and regarded as a sacred (lace "$ere
5
"itnesses testi#y under oat$, "$ere con#licts are resolved, rig$ts adGudicated, and Gustice
solemnly dis(ensed.
94:
Ma8ing it a game room and a casino area diminis$es its sanctity and
dignity.
944:
/$e undue advances res(ondent made to com(lainant ;oltiao betrays $is t"isted sense o#
(ro(riety. Many times, $e declared $is #eelings #or $er and $anded $er love notes. )e "ould
t$en beseec$ $er to say t$e same t$ings to $im. )e (ro(osed to $ave dinner dates "it$ $er
at Jollibee. /$ere "ere times t$at $e cornered $er at t$e GudgeBs c$amber and unnecessarily
$eld $er $and. 3$ile (ro#essing oneBs amorous intention is not somet$ing t$at usually
causes a $ullabaloo, it becomes indecent and im(ro(er in t$is case considering $e is
com(lainant ;oltiaoBs su(erior and bot$ o# t$em are married. )is dissoluteness told itsel#
"$en $e "ent to t$e e,tent o# calling $er at $er mot$erBs $ouse and (ersuading $er not to tell
$er $usband about t$ese incidents.
5t a((ears too t$at t$e com(lainant "as not t$e e,clusive obGect o# res(ondentBs
advances. 3itnesses Marilyn de Heon and ;lenda *amireI testi#ied t$at t$ey also received
love notes and invitations #or dinner #rom $im. Hi8e a $unter out on t$e (ro"l, $e victimiIed
ot$er #emale "or8ers unabas$edly (ro#essing $is alleged #eelings #or t$em in utter disregard
o# t$e #act t$at t$ey "ere $is subordinates, t$ey "ere married and t$ey "ere young enoug$
to be $is daug$ters. 5nstead o# $e being in loo parentis over $is subordinate em(loyees, $e
(reyed on t$em as $e too8 advantage o# $is su(erior (osition.
94<:
=nder t$e circumstances, "e #ind res(ondent guilty o# se,ual $arassment. )is severely
outrageous acts, "$ic$ are an a##ront to "omen, constitute se,ual $arassment because t$ey
necessarily result in an intimidating, $ostile, and o##ensive "or8ing environment #or $is #emale
subordinates.
945:
)e abused t$e (o"er and aut$ority $e e,ercises over t$em, "$ic$ is t$e
gravamen o# t$e o##ense in se,ual $arassment.
94>:
&e,ual $arassment in t$e "or8(lace is not
about a man ta8ing advantage o# a "oman by reason o# se,ual desire L it is about (o"er
being e,ercised by a su(erior over $is "omen subordinates.
941:
/$at (o"er emanates #rom
t$e #act t$at $e can remove t$em i# t$ey re#use $is amorous advances.
942:
/$ere is li8e"ise su##icient evidence in 0.M. 'o. .!04!1>91 to $old res(ondent
administratively liable #or $is #ailure to issue o##icial recei(t a#ter receiving court #ees and #or
discourtesy. /$e testimony o# com(lainant .aiste is "ort$y o# belie#. 3e #ind $er categorical
and consistent declarations credible, es(ecially "$en vie"ed in t$e lig$t o# t$e #act t$at no ill!
motive on $er (art "as establis$ed.
949:
0gainst $er (ositive testimony, su((orted by
documentary evidence based on o##icial court records, t$e mere uncorroborated denial o# t$e
res(ondent deserves scant considerations.
9<0:
/$e evidence s$o"s t$at on 0(ril 1, 001, com(lainant .aiste gave to t$e res(ondent t$e
amount o# t"o t$ousand #our $undred (esos ?.,<00.00@ as bail bond o# t$e accused in
Criminal Case 'o. 1<>1. 3$en s$e as8ed #or an o##icial recei(t, $e told $er to get it t$e
#ollo"ing Monday at t$e court. &$e sent an o##ice re(resentative t$at Monday as told but
res(ondent did not issue any recei(t. -urt$er veri#ication #rom t$e records o# Criminal Case
'o. 1<>1 reveals t$at no co(y o# t$e o##icial recei(t a((ears on #ile indicating t$at no recei(t
"as ever issued to com(lainant .aiste.
=ndoubtedly, res(ondent s$ould $ave issued an o##icial recei(t "$en $e received t$e sum o#
money #rom com(lainant .aiste. )is #ailure to do so is a violation o# t$e 'ational 0ccounting
and 0uditing Manual "$ic$ mandates t$at no (ayment o# any nature s$all be received by a
collecting o##icer "it$out immediately issuing an o##icial recei(t, in ac8no"ledgment t$ereo#.
9<1:
5t bears em($asis t$at t$ere is no valid reason #or $is non!issuance o# a recei(t. 6ven i#
$e argues t$at $e could not issue an o##icial recei(t to t$e com(lainant .aiste as t$e
transaction trans(ired on a &aturday and outside court (remises, still, $is #ailure to issue a
recei(t t$e #ollo"ing Monday is totally unGusti#ied.
3e also #ind t$e rude and booris$ manner res(ondent treated com(lainant .aiste and $er
client on 0(ril 4, 001 uncalled #or. )is demeanor bordered on arrogance. )e made t$em
"ait #or #i#teen minutes be#ore $e attended to t$eir concern as t$ey #ound $im (laying cards
6
and gambling. )e "as very irritable t$e "$ole time $e "as tal8ing to t$em. 0#ter $e
e,amined t$e record, $e slammed it an told t$em to go to t$e court at *osales. )e t$en got
annoyed "$en t$ey #ollo"ed $im. /o be sure, t$is is no "ay to treat court users.
)ig$ strung and belligerent be$avior $as no (lace in government, es(ecially in t$e Gudiciary,
"$ere t$e (ersonnel are enGoined to act "it$ sel#!restraint and civility at all times, even "$en
con#ronted "it$ rudeness and insolence.
9<:
/$ey are e,(ected to e,tend (rom(t, courteous
and ade+uate service to t$e (eo(le.
9<4:
&uc$ conduct is e,acted #rom t$em so t$at t$ey "ill
earn and 8ee( societyBs $ig$ regard #or and con#idence in t$e Gudicial service.
9<<:
Conduct
violative o# t$is standard +uic8ly and surely corrodes res(ect #or t$e courts. 5t is t$e
im(erative and sacred duty o# everyone c$arged "it$ t$e dis(ensation o# Gustice, #rom t$e
Gudge to t$e lo"liest cler8, to u($old t$e courtBs good name and standing as true tem(les o#
Gustice.
9<5:
3e do not agree "it$ bot$ t$e investigating Gudge and t$e OC0 "$en t$ey im(osed a single
(enalty on t$e res(ondent #or t"o cases. 0lt$oug$ consolidated, t$e t"o cases are distinct
and eac$ one contains di##erent c$arges. *es(ondent, as a conse+uence, must be
se(arately $eld liable and (enaliIed #or t$e c$arges in eac$ case.
/$is brings us to t$e individual (enalties "$ic$ must be im(osed on t$e res(ondent #or eac$
case. 5n 0.M. 'o. .!04!1>99, "e $old t$at t$e gross discourtesy, gambling and se,ual
$arassment $e committed constituted serious misconduct and conduct (reGudicial to t$e
interest o# t$e service "$ic$ "arrant $is dismissal #rom o##ice. )e $as been s$o"n to lac8
t$e re+uisite (ro#essional and moral +uali#ications to continue as an em(loyee in t$e
Gudiciary. 5n 0.M. 'o. .!04!1>91, $is #ailure to issue a recei(t amounted to gross neglect o#
duty "$ile $is grossly discourteous be$avior is conduct unbecoming o# a (ublic o##icer. -or
t$is reason, "e im(ose on $im a sus(ension o# one ?1@ mont$.
5' 7563 3)6*6O-, *6&.O'D6'/ 0(roniano 7. Mamenta, Jr. is #ound ;uilty o# gross
discourtesy, gambling, and se,ual $arassment in 0.M. 'o. .!04!1>99 and is accordingly
D5&M5&&6D #rom t$e service "it$ (reGudice to re!em(loyment in any branc$, agency, or
instrumentality o# t$e ;overnment, including government!o"ned and controlled cor(orations.
)e is li8e"ise #ound ;uilty o# gross discourtesy and #ailure to issue an o##icial recei(t in 0.M.
'o. .!04!1>91 and is meted t$e (enalty o# sus(ension #or a (eriod o# One ?1@
Mont$. Considering, $o"ever, t$at "e already ordered $is dismissal in 0.M. 'o. .!04!1>99,
$is sus(ension is moot.
&O O*D6*6D.
7
MA. JEAN B. CASTAEDA
Criminal Law 2 (Sunday 8:00-12:00)
CASE #%
TE+ES vs. PEOPLE a,- BONGALON
G.R. No. 1..''/
A0102( 4, 011
!ACTS"
On December 10, 001, Cenon *. /eves being (reviously united in la"#ul marriage
on 'ovember >, 199 "it$ /$elma %. Jaime and "it$out t$e said marriage $aving legally
dissolved, $ad unla"#ully and #eloniously contracted a second marriage "it$ one 6dita /.
Calderon, "$o coo(erated in t$e e,ecution o# t$e o##ense by marrying Cenon *. /eves,
des(ite 8no"ledge o# t$e e,istence o# t$e marriage o# t$e latter "it$ /$elma %. Jaime. /eves
"as c$arged "it$ %igamy. During t$e (endency o# t$e said criminal case, t$e marriage o#
(etitioner and /$elma "as declared by t$e Court as null and void (ursuant to 0rticle 4> o# t$e
-amily Code. /$erea#ter, t$e */C #ound /eves guilty beyond reasonable doubt o# t$e crime
o# %igamy. /$e Court o# 0((eals 0--5*M6D t$e said conviction in /O/O. /$e case "as
elevated to t$e &u(reme Court.
8
ISSUE"
3$et$er or not t$e accused is guilty o# t$e crime o# %igamy.
#ELD"
Yes. /$e instant case $as all t$e elements o# t$e crime o# bigamyA ?1@ /$at t$e
o##ender $as been legally marriedK ?@ /$at t$e marriage $as not been legally dissolved or, in
case $is or $er s(ouse is absent, t$e absent s(ouse could not yet be (resumed dead
according to t$e Civil CodeK ?4@ /$at $e contracts a second or subse+uent marriageK and ?<@
/$at t$e second or subse+uent marriage $as all t$e essential re+uisites #or validity.
.etitioner "as legally married to /$elma on > 'ovember 199. )e contracted a
second or subse+uent marriage "it$ 6dita on 10 December 001. 0t t$e time o# $is second
marriage "it$ 6dita, $is marriage "it$ /$elma "as legally subsisting considering t$at t$e #inal
decision declaring t$e nullity o# $is #irst marriage "it$ /$elma "as only on 1 June 00> or
about #ive ?5@ years a#ter $is second marriage to 6dita.
0ccordingly, t$e &u(reme Court 0--5*M6D in toto t$e conviction o# t$e accused.
MA. JEAN B. CASTAEDA
Criminal Law 2 (Sunday 8:00-12:00)
CASE #4
NOLLORA 32. PEOPLE
G.R. No. 1&14/
S*4(*5)*r ', 011
!ACTS"
On December 2, 001 in QueIon City, 0/5H0'O O. 'OHHO*0, J*., being t$en
legally married to one J6&=&0 .5'0/ 'OHHO*0, and as said marriage $as not been legally
dissolved and still subsisting, $ad contracted a subse+uent or second marriage "it$
*O36'0 .. ;6*0HD5'O, "$o consented and agreed to be married to 'OHHO*0, des(ite
8no"ledge o# $im being a married man. 'ollora and ;eraldino "ere c$arged o# t$e crime o#
%igamy. /$e trial court convicted 'ollora o# t$e crime c$arged, "$ile ;eraldino "as ac+uitted
#or #ailure o# t$e (rosecution to (rove $er guilt. /$e C0 a##irmed t$e trial courtBs decision. /$e
case "as elevated to t$e &u(reme Court.
ISSUE"
9
3$et$er or not 'ollora is guilty beyond reasonable doubt o# t$e crime o# bigamy.
#ELD"
Yes. /$e circumstances in t$e (resent case satis#y all t$e elements o# bigamy. ?1@
'ollora is legally married to .inatK ?@ 'ollora and .inatBs marriage $as not been legally
dissolved (rior to t$e date o# t$e second marriageK ?4@ 'ollora admitted t$e e,istence o# $is
second marriage to ;eraldinoK and ?<@ 'ollora and ;eraldinoBs marriage $as all t$e essential
re+uisites #or validity e,ce(t #or t$e lac8 o# ca(acity o# 'ollora due to $is (rior marriage.
3)6*6-O*6, t$e &u(reme Court a##irmed t$e Decision o# t$e Court o# 0((eals.
.etitioner 0tilano O. 'ollora, Jr. "as #ound guilty beyond reasonable doubt o# %igamy. )e
"as sentenced to su##er t$e (enalty o# im(risonment "it$ a term o# t"o years, #our mont$s
and one day o# prision orreional as minimum to eig$t years and one day o# prision
mayor as ma,imum o# $is indeterminate sentence, as "ell as t$e accessory (enalties
(rovided by la".
MA. JEAN B. CASTAEDA
Criminal Law 2 (Sunday 8:00-12:00)
CASE #/
BRILLANTE vs. CA a,- PEOPLE
G.R. No2. 11.'/' 6 11/'1
Oc(o)*r 1&, 004
!ACTS"
On January 1, 1922, %rillante, t$en a candidate #or t$e (osition o# Councilor in Ma8ati,
$eld a (ress con#erence at t$e Ma8ati &(orts Club "$ic$ "as attended by some 50
Gournalists. 5n t$e course o# t$e (ress con#erence, %rillante accused %inay o# (lotting t$e
assassination o# &yGuco. )e #urt$er accused %inay o# terrorism, intimidation and $arassment
o# t$e Ma8ati electorate. %rillante also circulated among t$e Gournalists co(ies o# an o(en
letter to .resident 0+uino "$ic$ discussed in detail $is c$arges against %inay.
-our "n!ormations #or libel "ere #iled by %inay against %rillante and several co!accused "it$
t$e */C o# Manila. %rillanteBs co!accused in t$ese cases "ereA %uan, 6ditor!in!C$ie# o#
t$e People#s $ournal%

Macasaet, .ublis$er, and 0lbano, 6ditor, o# t$e Malaya% &ison, .ublic
*elations O##icer and .ascual, .ublis$er and 6,ecutive 6ditor o# t$e Philippine &aily "n'uirerK
and &ison, .ublic *elations O##icer and Quimlat, .ublis$er and 6ditor!in!C$ie# o# Balita.
10
%uan eluded arrest and "as not arraigned. /$e c$arges against .ascual, Quimlat,
Macasaet and 0lbano "ere dismissed u(on motion o# t$e (rosecution. Only %rillante and
&ison remained as accused. /$e */C!Manila ac+uitted &ison but #ound %rillante guilty o#
libel on #our counts. /$e C0 a##irmed t$e said decision. 5n t$e meantime, %rillante "as
li8e"ise convicted #or libel on #ive counts by t$e */C!Ma8ati. /$e Court o# 0((eals also
a##irmed t$e said decision.
ISSUES"
3$et$er or not %rillante is guilty beyond reasonable doubt o# libel.
#ELD"
Yes. /$ere could be no dis(ute as to t$e e,istence o# t$e #irst t$ree elements o# libel
in t$e cases at barA ?a@ t$e allegation o# a discreditable act or condition concerning anot$erK
?b@ (ublication o# t$e c$argeK ?c@ identity o# t$e (erson de#amedK and ?d@ e,istence o# malice.
/$us, t$e determination o# %rillanteBs cul(ability #or libel $inges on t$e +uestion o#
"$et$er $is statements "ere made "it$ malice. =nder 0rticle 45< o# t$e *.C, C6very
de#amatory im(utation is (resumed to be malicious, even i# true, i# no good intention and
Gusti#iable motive is s$o"nE. 0lt$oug$, t$e (resum(tion o# malice is done a"ay "it$ "$en t$e
de#amatory im(utation +uali#ies as (rivileged communication, t$e re+uisites o# a (rivileged
communication under 0rticle 45< "ere not establis$ed in t$e caseA ?1@ t$e (erson "$o made
t$e communication $ad a legal, moral, or social duty to ma8e t$e communication, or at least,
$ad an interest to (rotect, "$ic$ interest may eit$er be $is o"n or o# t$e one to "$om it is
madeK ?@ t$e communication is addressed to an o##icer or a board, or su(erior, $aving some
interest or duty in t$e matter, and "$o $as t$e (o"er to #urnis$ t$e (rotection soug$tK and ?4@
t$e statements in t$e communication are made in good #ait$ and "it$out malice.
MA. JEAN B. CASTAEDA
Criminal Law 2 (Sunday 8:00-12:00)
CASE #6
BUATIS vs. PEOPLE a,- PIERA7
G.R. NO. 14/0&
March 4, 006
!ACTS"
%e#ore us is a (etition #or revie" on ertiorari #iled by Jose 0lemania %uatis, Jr.
?(etitioner@ see8ing to set aside t$e Decision
1
dated January 12, 000 o# t$e Court o# 0((eals
?C0@ in C0!;.*. C*. 'o. 0922 "$ic$ a##irmed t$e decision o# t$e *egional /rial Court
?*/C@, %ranc$ 1>1 o# .asig City, convicting $im o# t$e crime o# libel. 0lso assailed is t$e
a((ellate courtBs *esolution

dated Marc$ 14, 000 denying (etitionerBs Motion #or

*econsideration.
/$e #acts o# t$e case, as summariIed by t$e a((ellate court, are as #ollo"sA
On 0ugust 12, 1995, t$e "i#e o# (rivate!com(lainant 0tty. Jose J. .ieraI ?0tty. .ieraI@,
retrieved a letter #rom t$eir mailbo, addressed to $er $usband. /$e letter "as o(en, not
contained in an envelo(e, and 0tty. .ieraIB "i#e (ut it on $er $usbandBs des8. On t$at same
day, 0tty. .ieraI came u(on t$e letter and made out its content. 5t readsA
11
DO' )6*MO;6'6& *OD*5;=6M Y *6Y6& 6&/0/6
O##ice o# t$e 0sst. Court 0dministrator
'o. 10>4 Jamias &t., %gy. Mangga$an, .asig City,
Metro Manila
0ugust 12, 1995
0//Y. JO&6 J. .56*0M
Counsel #or %enGamin 0. Monroy
N2 Quirino &t., Hi#e )omes &ubdivision
*osario , .asig City, Metro Manila
&ubGectA 0nent your letter dated 0ugust 12, 1995
addressed to one Mrs. /eresita Quingco
0tty. .ieraIA
/$is $as re#erence to your lousy but inutile t$reatening letter dated 0ugust 12, 1995,
addressed to our clientK using carabao 6nglis$.
May "e remind you t$at any attem(t on your (art to continue $arassing t$e (erson o# Mrs.
/eresita Quingco o# 'o. 152 Mngo &t., %gy. Mangga$an, .asig City, Metro Manila!!!
undersigned muc$ to $is regrets s$all be constrainedOcom(elled to #ile t$e necessary
com(laint #or disbarment against you.
You may (roceed t$en "it$ your stu(idity and su##er t$e #ull conse+uence o# t$e la".
'eedless #or you to cite s(eci#ic (rovisions o# t$e *evised .enal Code, as t$e same is
irrelevant to t$e (resent case. 0s a matter o# #act, t$e same s$all be used by no ot$er t$an
t$e (erson o# Mrs. Quingco in #iling administrative c$arge against you and all (ersons be$ind
t$ese ne#arious activities.
-inally, it is a "elcome o((ortunity #or t$e undersigned to #ace you s+uarely in any courts o#
Gustice, so as "e can (rove P"$o is "$oP once and #or all.
/rusting t$at you are (ro(erly in#orm ?sic@ regarding t$ese matters, 5 remain.
Yours in &atan nameK
?&igned@
JO&6 0H6M0'50 %=0/5&, J*.
0tty!in! -act o# t$e (resent
Court 0dministrator o# t$e entire
5ntestate 6state o# Don )ermogenes
*odrigueI Y. *eyes.
Co(y #urnis$edA
0ll concerned.
'ot (ersonally 8no"ing "$o t$e sender "as, 0tty. .ieraI, nevert$eless, res(onded and sent
a communication by registered mail to said %uatis, Jr., accused!a((ellant. 5n re(ly, %uatis, Jr.
dis(atc$ed a second letter dated 0ugust <, 1995 to 0tty. .ieraI.
*eacting to t$e insulting "ords used by %uatis, Jr., (articularlyA P&atan, senile, stu(id,
96:nglis$ carabao,P 0tty. .ieraI #iled a com(laint #or libel against accused!a((ellant. &ubGect
letter and its contents came to t$e 8no"ledge not only o# $is "i#e but o# $is c$ildren as "ell
and t$ey all c$ided $im telling $imA P(inagawa ka lang gago dito.P
0side #rom t$e monetary e,(enses $e incurred as a result o# t$e #iling o# t$e instant case,
0tty .ieraIB #rail $ealt$ "as li8e"ise a##ected and aggravated by t$e letter o# accused!
a((ellant.
/$e de#ense #or"arded by accused!a((ellant %uatis, Jr. "as denial. 0ccording to $im, it "as
at t$e be$est o# t$e (resident o# t$e organiIation P)agkakaisang Samahan )g Mga *aga
ManggahanP or )ASA*AMA, and o# a member, /eresita Quingco, t$at $e $ad dictated to one
o# $is secretaries, a comment to t$e letter o# (rivate!com(lainant in t$e second "ee8 o#
0ugust 1995.
5nitially during $is testimony, %uatis, Jr. could not recall "$et$er $e $ad signed t$at letter!
comment or i# it "as even addressed to 0tty. .ieraI. 'eit$er could $e remember i# $e $ad
12
made and sent anot$er letter, t$is time dated 0ugust <, 1995, to 0tty. .ieraI. Con#ronted in
court "it$ t$e counter!a##idavit "$ic$ $e #iled be#ore t$e .asig City .rosecutorBs O##ice,
$o"ever, %uatis, Jr. could not deny its contents, among "$ic$ "as $is admission t$at indeed,
$e $ad sent subGect letter o# 0ugust 12 and t$e letter dated 0ugust <, 1995 to 0tty. .ieraI.
4
0#ter trial on t$e merits, t$e */C rendered its Decision dated 0(ril 40, 1991
<
#inding (etitioner
guilty o# t$e crime o# libel, t$e dis(ositive (ortion o# "$ic$ readsA
3)6*6-O*6, Gudgment is $ereby rendered #inding t$e accused Jose 0lemania %uatis, Jr.
;=5H/Y o# t$e crime o# H5%6H de#ined in 0rt. 454 and (enaliIed under 0rt. 455 o# t$e *evised
.enal Code and is $ereby sentenced to an indeterminate (enalty o# im(risonment o# -our ?<@
Mont$s and One ?1@ Day, as minimum, to /"o ?@ Years, 6leven ?11@ Mont$s and /en ?10@
Days, as ma,imumK to indemni#y t$e o##ended (arty in t$e amount o# .0,000.00, by "ay o#
com(ensatory damagesK t$e amount o# .10,000.00, as and #or moral damages, and anot$er
amount o#.10,000.00, #or e,em(lary damagesK to su##er all accessory (enalties (rovided #or
by la"K and, to (ay t$e costs.
5
/$e trial court ruled t$atA calling a la"yer PinutilP, stu(id and ca(able o# using only carabao
6nglis$, is intended not only #or t$e consum(tion o# res(ondent but similarly #or ot$ers as a
co(y o# t$e libelous letter "as #urnis$ed all concernedK t$e letter "as (reGudicial to t$e good
name o# res(ondent and an a##ront to $is standing as a la"yer, "$o, at t$e time t$e letter "as
addressed to $im, "as re(resenting a client in "$ose #avor $e sent a demand letter to t$e
(erson re(resented by (etitionerK t$e letter is libelous per se since a de#ect or vice im(uted is
(lainly understood as set against t$e entire message soug$t to be conveyedK (etitioner #ailed
to reverse t$e (resum(tion o# malice #rom t$e de#amatory im(utation contained in t$e letterK
t$e letter could $ave been couc$ed in a civil and res(ect#ul manner, as t$e intention o#
(etitioner "as only to advice res(ondent t$at demand "as not (ro(er and legal but instead
(etitioner "as seet$ing "it$ $ate and contem(t and even in#luenced by satanic intention.
/$e */C also #ound t$at since t$e letter "as made 8no"n or broug$t to t$e attention and
notice o# ot$er (ersons ot$er t$an t$e o##ended (arty, t$ere "as (ublicationK and t$at t$e
element o# identity "as also establis$ed since t$e letter "as intended #or res(ondent. 5t
reGected (etitionerBs stance t$at t$e libelous letter resulted #rom mista8e or negligence since
(etitioner boldly admitted t$at $e $ad to re(ly to res(ondentBs letter to Mrs. Quingco, it being
$is duty to do as t$e latter is a member o# (etitionerBs association.
/$e */C #ound res(ondent entitled to recover com(ensatory damages as t$e immediate
tendency o# t$e de#amatory im(utation "as to im(air res(ondentBs re(utation alt$oug$ no
actual (ecuniary loss $as in #act resulted. 5t also a"arded moral damages as "ell as
e,em(lary damages since t$e (ublication o# t$e libelous letter "as made "it$ s(ecial ill "ill,
bad #ait$ or in a rec8less disregard #or t$e rig$ts o# res(ondent.
&ubse+uently, (etitioner a((ealed t$e */CBs decision to t$e C0 "$ic$, in a Decision dated
January 12, 000, a##irmed in its entirety t$e decision o# t$e trial court.
/$e C0 #ound t$at t$e "ords used in t$e letter are uncalled #or and de#amatory in c$aracter
as t$ey im(eac$ed t$e good re(utation o# res(ondent as a la"yer and t$at it is malicious. 5t
reGected (etitionerBs claim t$at t$e letter is a (rivileged communication "$ic$ "ould e,cul(ate
$im #rom liability since $e #ailed to come u( "it$ a valid e,(lanation as to "$y $e $ad to
resort to name calling and do"ngrading a la"yer to t$e e,tent o# ridiculing $im "$en $e could
$ave disc$arged $is so called PdutyP in a more toned do"n #as$ion. 5t #ound also t$at t$ere
"as (ublication o# t$e letter, t$us, it cannot be classi#ied as (rivileged.
/$e C0 denied (etitionerBs motion #or reconsideration in a *esolution dated Marc$ 14, 000.
)ence t$e instant (etition #or revie" on certiorari #iled by (etitioner, raising t$e #ollo"ing
issuesA
0. C0' /)6*6 %6 M0H5C6 5' -0C/, 0& O'6 O- /)6 6H6M6'/& O- H5%6H,
0//*5%=/6D /O 0 *6&.O'D5'; =*%0' .OO* H60D6* 0C/5'; 0& CO='&6H,
D6-6'D5'; 0 M6M%6* O- 0' 0&&OC50/5O' ='D6* /)*60/ O- 6J6C/M6'/ -*OM
)6* D36HH5'; .H0C6D
13
%. 3)6/)6* O* 'O/ /)6 0..6HH0/6 CO=*/ 6**6D 5' 'O/ -5'D5'; /)6 0HH6;6D
H5%6HO=& H6//6* 0& O'6 O- /)O&6 -0HH5'; ='D6* /)6 .=*7563 O- .*575H6;6
?sic@ COMM='5C0/5O'D
C. 3)6/)6* O* 'O/ /)6 0..6HH0/6 CO=*/ 6**6D 5' 'O/ -5'D5'; /)0/A /)6
.6/5/5O'6* C0' 'O/ %6 M0D6 /O 0CC6./ -=HH *6&.O'&5%5H5/Y /)0/ 3)0/ )6
D5D 5& 0 C*5M6D
>
/$e O##ice o# t$e &olicitor ;eneral #iled its Comment in be$al# o# t$e .eo(le and res(ondent
#iled $is o"n Comment (raying #or t$e a##irmance o# t$e C0 decision. 0s re+uired by us, t$e
(arties submitted t$eir res(ective memoranda.
/$e (rinci(al issue #or resolution is "$et$er or not (etitioner is guilty o# t$e crime o# libel.
5n $is Memorandum, (etitioner claims t$atA t$e C0 #ailed to a((ly t$e ruling in People +.
,elaso
1
t$at Pi# t$e actOmatter c$arged as libelous is only an incident in 9an: act "$ic$ $as
anot$er obGective, t$e crime is not libelKP "$en $e made $is re(ly to res(ondentBs letter to
Mrs. Quingco ma8ing a demand #or $er to vacate t$e (remises, $is obGective "as to in#orm
res(ondent t$at Mrs. Quingco is one o# t$e recogniIed tenants o# t$e *odrigueI estate "$ic$
is claiming o"ners$i( over t$e area o# %rgy. Mangga$an, .asig City, and (etitioner is t$e
attorney!in!#act o# t$e administrator o# t$e *odri+ueI estateK communication in "$atever
language, eit$er verbal or "ritten o# a la"yer under obligation to de#end a clientBs cause is but
a (rivileged communicationK t$e instant case is a +uali#ied (rivileged communication "$ic$ is
lost only by (roo# o# malice, $o"ever, res(ondent #ailed to (resent actual (roo# o# maliceK t$e
e,istence o# malice in #act may be s$o"n by e,trinsic evidence t$at (etitioner bore a grudge
against t$e o##ended (arty, or t$ere "as ill "ill or ill #eeling bet"een t$em "$ic$ e,isted at t$e
time o# t$e (ublication o# t$e de#amatory im(utation "$ic$ "ere not at all indicated by
res(ondent in $is com(laintK contrary to t$e #indings o# t$e C0, t$ere "as Gusti#iable motive in
sending suc$ a letter "$ic$ "as to de#end t$e vested interest o# t$e estate and to abate any
move o# res(ondent to eGect Mrs. Quingco.
.etitioner #urt$er argues t$at i# t$e "ords used in t$e libelous letter!re(ly "ould be #ully
scrutiniIed, t$ere is Gusti#ication #or t$e use o# t$ose "ords, to "itA Plousy but inutile
t$reatening letterQusing carabao 6nglis$P "as due to t$e #act t$at t$e demand letter "as
indeed a t$reatening letter as it does not serve its (ur(ose as res(ondentBs client $as no
legal rig$t over t$e (ro(erty and res(ondent did not #ile t$e eGectment suitK t$at res(ondent is
Gust ma8ing a moc8ery out o# Mrs. Quingco, t$us $e is stu(idK t$at t$e "ords PYours in &atan
nameP is only a com(lementary greeting used in an ordinary communication letter, "$ic$ is
re#lected to t$e sender but not to t$e (erson being communicated and "$ic$ is Gust t$e
reverse o# saying PYours in C$ristP.
3e deny t$e (etition.
0rticle 454 o# t$e *evised .enal Code de#ines libel as a (ublic and malicious im(utation o# a
crime, or o# a vice or de#ect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission, condition, status, or
circumstance tending to cause t$e dis$onor, discredit, or contem(t o# a natural or Guridical
(erson, or to blac8en t$e memory o# one "$o is dead.
-or an im(utation to be libelous, t$e #ollo"ing re+uisites must concurA ?a@ it must be
de#amatoryK ?b@ it must be maliciousK ?c@ it must be given (ublicityK and ?d@ t$e victim must be
identi#iable.
2
/$e last t"o elements $ave been duly establis$ed by t$e (rosecution. /$ere is (ublication in
t$is case. 5n libel, (ublication means ma8ing t$e de#amatory matter, a#ter it is "ritten, 8no"n
to someone ot$er t$an t$e (erson against "$om it $as been "ritten.
9
.etitionerBs subGect
letter!re(ly itsel# states t$at t$e same "as co(y #urnis$ed to all concerned. 0lso, (etitioner
$ad dictated t$e letter to $is secretary. 5t is enoug$ t$at t$e aut$or o# t$e libel com(lained o#
$as communicated it to a t$ird (erson.
10
-urt$ermore, t$e letter, "$en #ound in t$e mailbo,,
"as o(en, not contained in an envelo(e t$us, o(en to (ublic.
/$e victim o# t$e libelous letter "as identi#iable as t$e subGect letter!re(ly "as addressed to
res(ondent $imsel#.
14
3e s$all t$en resolve t$e issues raised by (etitioner as to "$et$er t$e im(utation is
de#amatory and malicious.
5n determining "$et$er a statement is de!amatory, t$e "ords used are to be construed in
t$eir entirety and s$ould be ta8en in t$eir (lain, natural and ordinary meaning as t$ey "ould
naturally be understood by (ersons reading t$em, unless it a((ears t$at t$ey "ere used and
understood in anot$er sense.
11
-or t$e (ur(ose o# determining t$e meaning o# any (ublication alleged to be libelous, "e laid
do"n t$e rule in$imene- +. .eyes,
1
to "itA
5n /a"ney vs. &imonson, 3$itcomb R )urley Co. ?109 Minn., 4<1@, t$e court $ad t$e
#ollo"ing to say on t$is (ointA P5n determining "$et$er t$e s(eci#ied matter is libelous per se,
t"o rules o# construction are cons(icuously a((licableA ?1@ /$at construction must be ado(ted
"$ic$ "ill give to t$e matter suc$ a meaning as is natural and obvious in t$e (lain and
ordinary sense in "$ic$ t$e (ublic "ould naturally understand "$at "as uttered. ?@ /$e
(ublis$ed matter alleged to be libelous must be construed as a "$ole.P
5n a((lying t$ese rules to t$e language o# an alleged libel, t$e court "ill disregard any subtle
or ingenious e,(lanation o##ered by t$e (ublis$er on being called to account. /$e "$ole
+uestion being t$e e##ect t$e (ublication $ad u(on t$e minds o# t$e readers, and t$ey not
$aving been assisted by t$e o##ered e,(lanation in reading t$e article, it comes too late to
$ave t$e e##ect o# removing t$e sting, i# any t$ere be, #rom t$e "ords used in t$e
(ublication.
14
;auging #rom t$e aboveLmentioned tests, t$e "ords used in t$e letter dated 0ugust 12, 1995
sent by (etitioner to res(ondent is de#amatory. 5n using "ords suc$ as PlousyP, PinutileP,
Pcarabao 6nglis$P, Pstu(idityP, and PsatanP, t$e letter, as it "as "ritten, casts as(ersion on t$e
c$aracter, integrity and re(utation o# res(ondent as a la"yer "$ic$ e,(osed $im to ridicule.
'o evidence aliunde need be adduced to (rove it. 0s t$e C0 said, t$ese very "ords o#
(etitioner $ave caused res(ondent to (ublic ridicule as even $is o"n #amily $ave told $imA
P(inagawa ka lang gago dito.P
1<
0ny o# t$e im(utations covered by 0rticle 454 is de#amatoryK and, under t$e general rule laid
do"n in 0rticle 45<, every de#amatory im(utation is (resumed to be malicious, even i# it be
true, i# no good intention and Gusti#iable motive #or ma8ing it is s$o"n. /$us, "$en t$e
im(utation is de#amatory, t$e (rosecution need not (rove malice on t$e (art o# (etitioner
?malice in #act@, #or t$e la" already (resumes t$at (etitionerBs im(utation is malicious ?malice
in la"@.
15
0 reading o# (etitionerBs subGect letter!re(ly s$o"ed t$at $e malevolently castigated
res(ondent #or "riting suc$ a demand letter to Mrs. Quingco. /$ere "as not$ing in t$e said
letter "$ic$ s$o"ed (etitionerBs good intention and Gusti#iable motive #or "riting t$e same in
order to overcome t$e legal in#erence o# malice.
.etitioner, $o"ever, insists t$at $is letter "as a (rivate communication made in t$e
(er#ormance o# $is moral and social duty as t$e attorney!in!#act o# t$e administrator o# t$e
*odrigueI estate "$ere Mrs. Quingco is a recogniIed tenant and to "$om res(ondent $ad
"ritten t$e demand letter to vacate, t$us in t$e nature o# a (rivileged communication and not
libelous.
3e are not (ersuaded.
0rticle 45< o# t$e *evised .enal Code (rovidesA
0rt. 45<. *e+uirement #or (ublicity.S 6very de#amatory im(utation is (resumed to be
malicious, even i# it be true, i# no good intention and Gusti#iable motive #or ma8ing it is s$o"n,
e,ce(t in t$e #ollo"ing casesA
1. 0 (rivate communication made by any (erson to anot$er in t$e (er#ormance o# any legal,
moral, or social dutyK and
. 0 #air and true re(ort, made in good #ait$, "it$out any comments or remar8s, o# any
Gudicial, legislative, or ot$er o##icial (roceedings "$ic$ are not o# con#idential nature, or o# any
statement, re(ort, or s(eec$ delivered in said (roceedings, or o# any ot$er act (er#ormed by
(ublic o##icers in t$e e,ercise o# t$eir #unctions.
15
Clearly, t$e (resum(tion o# malice is done a"ay "it$ "$en t$e de#amatory im(utation is a
+uali#ied (rivileged communication.
5n order to (rove t$at a statement #alls "it$in t$e (urvie" o# a +uali#ied (rivileged
communication under 0rticle 45<, 'o. 1, as claimed by (etitioner, t$e #ollo"ing re+uisites
must concurA ?1@ t$e (erson "$o made t$e communication $ad a legal, moral, or social duty
to ma8e t$e communication, or at least, $ad an interest to (rotect, "$ic$ interest may eit$er
be $is o"n or o# t$e one to "$om it is madeK ?@ t$e communication is addressed to an o##icer
or a board, or su(erior, $aving some interest or duty in t$e matter, and "$o $as t$e (o"er to
#urnis$ t$e (rotection soug$tK and ?4@ t$e statements in t$e communication are made in good
#ait$ and "it$out malice.
1>
3$ile it "ould a((ear t$at t$e letter "as "ritten by (etitioner out o# $is social duty to a
member o# t$e association "$ic$ $e $eads, and "as "ritten to res(ondent as a re(ly to t$e
latterBs demand letter sent to a member, $o"ever, a reading o# t$e subGect letter!re(ly
addressed to res(ondent does not s$o" any e,(lanation concerning t$e status o# Mrs.
Quingco and "$y s$e is entitled to t$e (remises as against t$e claim o# res(ondentBs client.
/$e letter merely contained insulting "ords, i.e, PlousyP and Pinutile letter using carabao
6nglis$P, Pstu(idityP, and PsatanP, "$ic$ are totally irrelevant to $is de#ense o# Mrs. QuingcoBs
rig$t over t$e (remises. /$e "ords as "ritten $ad only t$e e##ect o# maligning res(ondentBs
integrity as a la"yer, a la"yer "$o $ad served as legal o##icer in t$e De(artment o#
6nvironment and 'atural *esources #or so many years until $is retirement and a#ter"ards as
consultant o# t$e same agency and also a notary (ublic. /$e letter "as cra#ted in an inGurious
"ay t$an "$at is necessary in ans"ering a demand letter "$ic$ e,(osed res(ondent to
(ublic ridicule t$us negating good #ait$ and s$o"ing malicious intent on (etitionerBs (art.
Moreover, t$e la" re+uires t$at #or a de#amatory im(utation made out o# a legal, moral or
social duty to be (rivileged, suc$ statement must be communicated only to t$e (erson or
(ersons "$o $ave some interest or duty in t$e matter alleged, and "$o $ave t$e (o"er to
#urnis$ t$e (rotection soug$t by t$e aut$or o# t$e statement.
11
0 "ritten letter containing
libelous matter cannot be classi#ied as (rivileged "$en it is (ublis$ed and circulated among
t$e (ublic.
12
5n t$is case, (etitioner admitted t$at $e dictated t$e letter to one o# $er
secretaries "$o ty(ed t$e same and made a (rint out o# t$e com(uter.
19
3$ile (etitioner
addressed t$e re(ly!letter to res(ondent, t$e same letter s$o"ed t$at it "as co(y #urnis$ed to
all concerned. )is lac8 o# selectivity is indicative o# malice and is anat$ema to $is claim o#
(rivileged communication.
0
&uc$ (ublication $ad already created u(on t$e minds o# t$e
readers a circumstance "$ic$ broug$t discredit and s$ame to res(ondentBs re(utation.
&ince t$e letter is not a (rivileged communication, malice is (resumed under 0rticle 45< o#
t$e *evised .enal Code. /$e (resum(tion "as not success#ully rebutted by (etitioner as
discussed above.
/$us, "e #ind t$at t$e C0 did not commit any error in a##irming t$e #indings o# t$e trial court
t$at (etitioner is guilty o# t$e crime o# libel.
0n a((eal in a criminal case t$ro"s t$e entire case #or revie" and it becomes our duty to
correct any error, as may be #ound in t$e a((ealed Gudgment, "$et$er assigned as an error
or not.
1
3e #ind t$at t$e a"ard o# .0,000.00 as com(ensatory damages s$ould be deleted
#or lac8 o# #actual basis. /o be entitled to actual and com(ensatory damages, t$ere must be
com(etent (roo# constituting evidence o# t$e actual amount t$ereo#.

*es(ondent $ad not

(resented evidence in su((ort t$ereo#.
0rticle 455 o# t$e *evised .enal Code (enaliIes libel by means o# "ritings or similar means
"it$ prision orreional in its minimum and medium (eriods or a #ine ranging #rom 00 to
>,000 (esos, or bot$, in addition to t$e civil action "$ic$ may be broug$t by t$e o##ended
(arty.
/$e courts are given t$e discretion to c$oose "$et$er to im(ose a single (enalty or
conGunctive (enaltiesK t$at is, "$et$er to im(ose a (enalty o# #ine, or a (enalty o#
im(risonment only, or a (enalty o# bot$ #ine and im(risonment.
16
5n ,aa +. /ourt o! Appeals,
4
"$ere (etitioners t$erein "ere convicted o# %... "$ic$
(rovides #or alternative (enalties o# #ine or im(risonment or bot$ #ine and im(risonment, "e
deleted t$e (rison sentence im(osed u(on (etitioners and instead ordered t$em only to (ay
a #ine e+uivalent to double t$e amount o# t$e c$ec8. 3e $eldA
.etitioners are #irst!time o##enders. /$ey are -ili(ino entre(reneurs "$o (resumably
contribute to t$e national economy. 0((arently, t$ey broug$t t$is a((eal, believing in all good
#ait$, alt$oug$ mista8enly, t$at t$ey $ad not committed a violation o# %... %lg. . Ot$er"ise,
t$ey could sim(ly $ave acce(ted t$e Gudgment o# t$e trial court and a((lied #or (robation to
evade (rison term. 5t "ould best serve t$e ends o# criminal Gustice i# in #i,ing t$e (enalty
"it$in t$e range o# discretion allo"ed by T1, (ar. 1, t$e same ($iloso($y underlying t$e
5ndeterminate &entence Ha" is observed, namely, t$at o# redeeming valuable $uman
material and (reventing unnecessary de(rivation o# (ersonal liberty and economic use#ulness
"it$ due regard to t$e (rotection o# t$e social order.
<
5n t$e subse+uent case o# 0im +. People,
5
"e did t$e same and deleted t$e (enalty o#
im(risonment and merely im(osed a #ine #or violation o# %... , concluding t$at suc$ "ould
best serve t$e ends o# criminal Gustice.
0do(ting t$ese cases, "e issued 0dministrative Circular 'o. 1!000. On -ebruary 1<, 001,
"e issued 0dministrative Circular 14!001 "$ic$ modi#ied 0dministrative Circular 'o. 1!
000 by stressing t$at t$e clear tenor o# 0dministrative Circular 'o. 1!000 is not to remove
im(risonment as an alternative (enalty, but to lay do"n a rule o# (re#erence in t$e a((lication
o# t$e (enalties (rovided #or in %... .
3$ile ,aa case is #or violation o# %... , "e #ind t$e reasons be$ind t$e im(osition o# #ine
instead o# im(risonment a((licable to (etitionerBs case o# libel. 3e note t$at t$is is
(etitionerBs #irst o##ense o# t$is nature. )e never 8ne" res(ondent (rior to t$e demand letter
sent by t$e latter to Mrs. Quingco "$o t$en soug$t $is assistance t$ereto. )e a((ealed #rom
t$e decision o# t$e */C and t$e C0 in $is belie# t$at $e "as merely e,ercising a civil or moral
duty in "riting t$e letter to (rivate com(lainant. 5n #act, (etitioner could $ave a((lied #or
(robation to evade (rison term but $e did not do so believing t$at $e did not commit a crime
t$us, $e a((ealed $is case. 3e believe t$at t$e &tate is concerned not only in t$e im(erative
necessity o# (rotecting t$e social organiIation against t$e criminal acts o# destructive
individuals but also in redeeming t$e individual #or economic use#ulness and ot$er social
ends.
>
Conse+uently, "e delete t$e (rison sentence im(osed on (etitioner and instead
im(ose a #ine o# si, t$ousand (esos.
/$is is not t$e #irst time t$at "e removed t$e (enalty o# im(risonment and im(osed a #ine
instead in t$e crime o# libel. 5n Sa-on +. /ourt o! Appeals,
1
(etitioner "as convicted o# libel
and "as meted a (enalty o# im(risonment and #ineK and u(on a (etition #iled "it$ us, "e
a##irmed t$e #indings o# libel but c$anged t$e (enalty im(osed to a mere #ine.
3)6*6-O*6, t$e decision o# t$e Court o# 0((eals is $ereby 0--5*M6D "it$
t$e MOD5-5C0/5O'& t$at, in lieu o# im(risonment, t$e (enalty to be im(osed u(on t$e
(etitioner s$all be a #ine o# &i, /$ousand ?.>,000.00@ .esos "it$ subsidiary im(risonment in
case o# insolvency. /$e a"ard o# com(ensatory damages is D6H6/6D.
&O O*D6*6D.
17
MA. JEAN B. CASTAEDA
Criminal Law 2 (Sunday 8:00-12:00)
CASE #'
OGIE DIA7 vs. PEOPLE
G.R. No. 1/&'.'
Ma8 /, 00'
!ACTS"
On December 2, 1991, in t$e City o# Manila, Manny .ic$el and Ogie DiaI ?Ogie
-rias in real li#e@, being t$en t$e Managing 6ditor and "riter, res(ectively o# %andera, a
ne"s(a(er o# general circulation, "it$ t$e malicious (ur(ose o# im(eac$ing t$e integrity,
$onor and re(utation o# one -HO*5'D0 %0;0Y, and "it$ t$e evident intent o# e,(osing $er
to (ublic interest, $atred, contem(t, and ridicule, #eloniously "rote and (ublis$ed in t$e movie
section o# said ne"s(a(er an article, in "$ic$ "ords and ($rases, meant and conveyed #alse
and malicious im(utations against -lorinda %agay. 0n 5n#ormation #or t$e crime o# libel "as
18
#iled against .ic$el and DiaI. /$e trial court convicted t$em o# t$e same. On a((eal, t$e C0
sustained t$e conviction o# DiaI but ac+uitted .ic$el.
ISSUE"
3$et$er or not t$e DiaI committed libel.
#ELD"
-or an im(utation to be libelous, t$e #ollo"ing re+uisites must be (resentA ?a@ it must
be de#amatoryK ?b@ it must be maliciousK ?c@ it must be given (ublicityK and ?d@ t$e victim must
be identi#iable. 0bsent one o# t$ese elements, a case #or libel "ill not (ros(er.
5n t$e (resent case, t$e #irst t$ree elements o# libel "ere establis$ed. )o"ever, t$e
(rosecution #ailed to (rove t$e last elementA /$at t$e victim is identi#ied or identi#iable #rom
t$e contents o# t$e libelous article. 3$ile re#erring to CMiss &,E /$e subGect article #ails to
s$o" t$at CMiss &E and -lorinda %agayare is one and t$e same (erson.
5n 1y*ioo +. 2ang Shu 3en, it "as ruled t$at "$ere t$e re+uirement #or an identi#ied
or identi#iable victim $as not been com(lied "it$, t$e case #or libel must be dismissed.
3)6*6-O*6, .etitioner Ogie DiaI is 0CQ=5//6D o# t$e crime o# libel.
MA. JEAN B. CASTAEDA
Criminal Law 2 (Sunday 8:00-12:00)
CASE #.
ALCANTARA vs. PONCE a,- PEOPLE
G.R. No. 1/61.%
!*)r0ar8 ., 00'
/$is is a (etition #or revie" on certiorari
1
#rom a decision

and resolution
4
o# t$e Court o#
0((eals ?C0@.
5n 1991, res(ondent 7icente C. .once #iled a string o# criminal com(laints against (etitioner
'icasio 5. 0lcantara and $is #amily, $erea#ter t$e 0lcantaras, including one #or esta#a against
(etitioner in t$e Ma8ati .rosecutorBs O##ice doc8eted as 5.&. 'o. 91!495<1. 5n essence,
res(ondent .once alleged t$at (etitioner $ad s"indled $im out o# 4,000,000 s$ares o# -loro
Cement Cor(oration.
19
5t "as in t$e course o# t$e (reliminary investigation o# t$e com(laint #or esta#a t$at
res(ondent .once, s$ortly a#ter giving $is sur!reGoinder a##idavit,
<
submitted to t$e
investigating (rosecutor a ne"sletter
5
(ur(orting to be a belated anne, to t$e a##idavit. 5t "as
(re#aced "it$ t$e +uotation P-or every e,traordinary #ortune t$ere is a great crimeP and t$e
te,tA
0n e,am(le is Marcos. 3e need not discuss t$is.
&econd e,am(le is t$e 0lcantaras.
a@ Overs$i(ment o# logK b@ Hand grabbingK
c@ Corru(tion o# (ublic o##iceK d@ Cor(orate grabbing.
/$e ne"sletter t$en "ent on to discuss &6C Case 'o. 501 "$ic$, in t$e sur!reGoinder
a##idavit, res(ondent .once described as being t$e #ore#at$er o# all t$e cases $e $ad #iled
against t$e 0lcantaras. 5n &6C Case 'o. 501 "$ic$ t$e &ecurities and 6,c$ange
Commission en ban decided against $im, .once accused t$e 0lcantaras o# de#rauding $im
o# $is s$ares in 5ligan Cement Cor(oration.
On December 4, 1991, (etitioner #iled a com(laint #or libel against res(ondent .once "it$ t$e
Ma8ati .rosecutorBs O##ice
>
in connection "it$ t$e a#oresaid ne"sletter. )e claimed t$atA ?1@
t$e statements t$erein "ere de#amatoryK ?@ res(ondent $ad circulated it in t$e Ma8ati
.rosecutorBs O##ice and ?4@ t$e ne"sletter could not be considered an anne, to t$e sur!
reGoinder because res(ondent $ad not attac$ed it to t$e said a##idavit but $ad given it
t$erea#ter.
/$e (reliminary investigation "as conducted by City .rosecutor 5melda ..
&aulog.4awphi4.net On Marc$ 11, 1992, .rosecutor &aulog issued a resolution
1
#inding
(robable cause #or libel and recommending t$e #iling o# an in#ormation
2
in court. /$erea#ter,
t$e case "as #iled "it$ t$e *egional /rial Court o# Ma8ati and ra##led to Judge /ran+uil
&alvador o# %ranc$ >4.
)o"ever, res(ondent .once #iled a (etition #or revie" "it$ t$e &ecretary o# Justice, "$o
reversed t$e City .rosecutor in a resolution dated -ebruary 2, 000.
9
/$is reversal "as
based on t$e #inding t$at t$e ne"sletter "as a (rivileged communication, $aving been
submitted to t$e investigating (rosecutor %enGamin *. %autista as an intended anne, to
res(ondentBs sur!reGoinder. /$e &ecretary o# Justice t$us directed t$e "it$dra"al o# t$e
in#ormation.
.etitioner #iled a motion #or reconsideration
10
but it "as denied.
11
.etitioner elevated t$e matter +ia (etition #or certiorari to t$e C0 "$ere it "as doc8eted as
C0!;.*. &. 'o. >15<4. 5n a decision dated 0ugust 9, 00, t$e C0 #ound t$at t$e &ecretary
o# Justice committed grave abuse o# discretion, set aside t$e latterBs resolution and directed
t$e reinstatement o# t$e criminal case.
1
0#ter unsuccess#ully moving #or reconsideration in
t$e De(artment o# Justice, res(ondent .once attem(ted to elevate t$e matter to t$e &u(reme
Court by "ay o# a (etition #or revie" on certiorari. /$e case "as doc8eted as ;.*. 'o.
151105. )o"ever, "e denied res(ondent .onceBs motion #or e,tension #or time to #ile $is
(etition
14
as "ell as $is subse+uent motions #or reconsideration.
20
5n t$e meantime, $o"ever, be#ore C0!;.*. &. 'o. >15<4 "as decided, t$e O##ice o# t$e
Ma8ati City .rosecutor, in de#erence to t$e resolution o# t$e Justice &ecretary, #iled a motion
to "it$dra" in#ormation, "$ic$ t$e trial court granted on &e(tember 2, 001.
1<
/$e trial court
ruled t$at t$e absence o# t$e essential element o# (ublicity (recluded t$e commission o# t$e
crime o# libel. .etitioner moved #or reconsideration o# t$e "it$dra"al but t$e trial court denied
t$e motion in an order dated Marc$ 1, 00.
15
On June 11, 00, (etitioner #iled anot$er (etition #or certiorari in t$e C0, doc8eted as C0!
;.*. &. 'o. 11129. 5n t$is case, t$e C0 rendered t$e assailed decision.
/$e (rinci(al +uestion #or our consideration is "$et$er or not t$e C0, in its decision in C0!
;.*. &. 'o. 11129, gravely erred in #inding t$at Judge &alvador $ad not committed grave
abuse o# discretion #or granting t$e "it$dra"al o# t$e in#ormation #or libel against res(ondent
.once.
/$e crime o# libel, as de#ined in 0rticle 454 o# t$e *evised .enal Code,
1>
$as t$e #ollo"ing
elementsA
?1@ im(utation o# a crime, vice or de#ect, real or imaginary, or any act, omission,
condition, status or circumstanceK
?@ (ublicity or (ublicationK
?4@ maliceK
?<@ direction o# suc$ im(utation at a natural or Guridical (erson, or even a dead (erson
and
?5@ tendency to cause t$e dis$onor, discredit or contem(t o# t$e (erson de#amed.
/$e #actual antecedents are undis(uted. /$e only issue is "$et$er or not t$e controversial
ne"sletter constituted (rivileged communication, "$ic$ "ould e,em(t it #rom libel.
0ccording to t$e &(ecial -i#t$ Division o# t$e C0A
5t is a settled (rinci(le in t$is Gurisdiction t$at statements made in t$e course o# Gudicial
(roceedings are absolutely (rivileged. /$is absolute (rivilege remains regardless o# t$e
de#amatory tenor and t$e (resence o# malice i# t$e same are rele+ant, pertinent or material to
t$e cause in $and or subGect o# t$e in+uiry. /$e lone re+uirement im(osed to maintain t$e
cloa8 o# absolute (rivilege is t$e test o! rele+any.
5n t$is case, a reading o# t$e &ur!*eGoinder 0##idavit, contrary to (etitionerBs submission,
instantly s$o"s t$at t$ere "as su##icient re#erence to t$e Pne"sletterP "$ic$ Gusti#ied t$e
Justice &ecretary and res(ondent Judge in $olding t$at (rivate res(ondent actually intended
t$e said article to be included as an anne, attac$ed to said (leading and t$at t$e same "as
merely omitted and belatedly submitted to .rosecutor %autista during t$e (reliminary
investigation. &uc$ Psu##icient re#erenceP is s$o"n by t$e #act t$at t$e ne"sletter is about
&6C Case 'o. 501 t$e very same case being discussed by (rivate res(ondent in (ages 2 to
1 o# $is &ur!*eGoinder 0##idavit and $ence, (etitionerBs claim t$at 0nne, P-P mentioned
toget$er "it$ 0nne, P6P, bot$ articles s$o"ing t$e Pdevious maneuveringP o# (etitioner in t$e
said case, re#ers to anot$er article. 0nd even i# t$e su((osed 6,$ibit P-P could re#er also to
21
t$at article P&o /$e .ublic May Jno",P suc$ circumstance "ill not e,clude t$e subGect
Pne"sletterP as an intended anne, to t$e said (leading as in #act (rivate res(ondent e,(licitly
mentioned ParticlesP "it$out stating t$at t$ere "ere only t"o ?@ (articular articles being
re#erred or "$ic$ o# t$ose articles caused to be (ublis$ed by $is counsel.
0s t$e Justice &ecretary o(ined and "$ic$ (osition t$e res(ondent Judge ado(ted, t$e
Pne"sletterP containing t$e de#amatory statement is relevant and (ertinent to t$e criminal
com(laint #or esta#a t$en under (reliminary investigation. /$e crime o# esta#a involves deceit,
dis$onesty and ot$er #raudulent acts. /$e inclusion in t$e &ur!*eGoinder 0##idavit o# t$e
Pne"sletterP discussing t$e alleged Pcor(orate grabbingP by (etitioner "ill tend to su((ort
(rivate res(ondentBs case o# esta#a against (etitioner inso#ar as suc$ alleged Pcor(orate
grabbingP "ill $ig$lig$t or mani#est (etitionerBs (ro(ensity #or dis$onest dealing or #raudulent
mac$inations. /$ere is t$ere#ore no doubt t$at t$e subGect Pne"sletterP is relevant and
(ertinent to t$e criminal com(laint #or esta#a, and $ence t$e same comes "it$in t$e
(rotective cloa8 o# absolutely (rivileged communications as to e,em(t (rivate res(ondent
#rom liability #or libel or damages.
5n determining t$e issue o# relevancy o# statements made in Gudicial (roceedings, courts $ave
ado(ted a liberal attitude by resolving all doubts in #avor o# relevancy. /$us, in People +s.
A'uino, our &u(reme Court $as em($asiIed t$at Pit is t$e rule t$at "$at is relevant or
(ertinent s$ould be liberally construed to #avor t$e "riter, and t$e "ords are not to be
scrutiniIed "it$ microsco(ic intensity. /$e doctrine o# (rivileged communication $as a
(ractical (ur(ose.
,,, ,,, ,,,
.ublication in libel means ma8ing t$e de#amatory matter, a#ter it $as been "ritten, 8no"n to
someone ot$er t$an t$e (erson to "$om it $as been "ritten. /$ere is (ublication i# t$e
material is communicated to a t$ird (erson. 3$at is material is t$at a t$ird (erson $as read or
$eard t$e libelous statement, #or Pa manBs re(utation is t$e estimate in "$ic$ ot$ers $old $im,
not t$e good o(inion "$ic$ $e $as o# $imsel#.P Our &u(reme Court $as establis$ed t$e rule
t$at "$en a (ublic o##icer, in t$e disc$arge o# $is or $er o##icial duties, sends a communication
to anot$er o##icer or to a body o# o##icers, who ha+e a duty to per!orm with respet to the
sub5et matter o! the ommuniation, suh ommuniation does not amount to publiation.
0((lying t$is rule by analogy to t$e (resent case, (rivate res(ondentBs submission o# t$e
Pne"sletterP intended as an anne, to $is &ur!*eGoinder 0##idavit in 5.&. 'o. 91!495<1 to
.rosecutor %autista "$o "as t$en conducting t$e (reliminary investigation in said case, does
not amount to (ublication #or t$e reason t$at t$e sending o# suc$ material "as made
s(eci#ically #or t$e (ur(ose o# including t$e same as evidence in t$e (reliminary investigation.
/$at suc$ submission "as belatedly made does not ta8e out t$e material #rom t$e absolutely
(rivileged communication rule. .rosecutor %autista $ad a legal duty to (er#orm "it$ res(ect
to t$e subGect communication, "$ic$ is to consider t$e same along "it$ t$e ot$er evidence
submitted by (rivate res(ondent as com(lainant in 5.&. no. 91!495<1, in determining the
e6istene o! probable ause !or the ommission o! the rime o! esta!a and that petitioner as
aused-de!endant therein should be tried !or suh o!!ense. =nder t$e circumstances and in
t$e la"#ul e,ercise o# (rivate res(ondentBs rig$t to (resent evidence in su((ort o# $is
accusations against (etitioner in t$e criminal com(laint #or esta#a, 3e #ail to see $o" suc$
submission o# documentary evidence omitted #rom t$e anne,es to t$e &ur!*eGoinder 0##idavit,
could amount to (ublication t$at "ould give rise to (rivate res(ondentBs liability #or a libel
c$arge es(ecially "$en t$ere is no (roo# o# t$e alleged circulation o# co(ies o# t$e subGect
Pne"sletterP e,ce(t to t$e City .rosecutorBs O##ice o# Ma8ati "$erein 5.&. 'o. 91!495<1 "as
t$en in t$e (reliminary investigation stage. .etitionerBs #eeble argument t$at .rosecutor
22
%autista remains a t$ird (erson because t$e subGect Pne"sletterP "as never included or
#ormally o##ered as evidence, $ardly convinces =s to $old t$at t$ere "as actual (ublication #or
(ur(ose o# #inding a prima !aie case #or libel against t$e (rivate res(ondent. )e must be
reminded t$at t$e case #or esta#a "as still at t$e (reliminary investigation stage and t$ere is
no re+uirement o# a P#ormal o##erP o# suc$ documentary evidence or su((orting documents to
establis$ (robable cause ?citations omitted@.
11
&ince t$e ne"sletter "as (resented during t$e (reliminary investigation, it "as vested "it$ a
(rivileged c$aracter. 3$ile .$ili((ine la" is silent on t$e +uestion o# "$et$er t$e doctrine o#
absolute (rivilege e,tends to statements made in (reliminary investigations or ot$er
(roceedings (re(aratory to t$e actual trial, t$e =.&. case o# Borg +. Boas
12
ma8es a
categorical declaration o# t$e e,istence o# suc$ (rotectionA
5t is $ornboo8 learning t$at t$e actions and utterances in Gudicial (roceedings so #ar as t$e
actual (artici(ants t$erein are concerned and (reliminary ste(s leading to Gudicial action o# an
o##icial nature $ave been given absolute (rivilege. O# (articular interest are (roceedings
leading u( to (rosecutions or attem(ted (rosecutions #or crime ,,, 90: "ritten c$arge or
in#ormation #iled "it$ t$e (rosecutor or t$e court is not libelous alt$oug$ (roved to be #alse
and un#ounded. -urt$ermore, t$e in#ormation given to a (rosecutor by a (rivate (erson #or
t$e (ur(ose o# initiating a (rosecution is (rotected by t$e same cloa8 o# immunity and cannot
be used as a basis #or an action #or de#amation. ?6m($asis ours@
/$e ruling in Borg is (ersuasive in t$is Gurisdiction. 3e see no reason "$y "e s$ould not
ado(t it.
-urt$ermore, t$e ne"sletter +uali#ied as Pa communication made bona !ide u(on any subGect!
matter in "$ic$ t$e (arty communicating $as an interest . . . made to a (erson $aving a
corres(onding interest or duty, alt$oug$ it contained 9in:criminatory matter "$ic$ "it$out t$is
(rivilege "ould be slanderous and actionable.P
19
3$ile t$e doctrine o# (rivileged communication can be abused, and its abuse can lead to
great $ards$i(s, to allo" libel suits to (ros(er strictly on t$is account "ill give rise to even
greater $ards$i(s. /$e doctrine itsel# rests on (ublic (olicy "$ic$ loo8s to t$e #ree and
un#ettered administration o# Gustice.
0
5t is as a rule a((lied liberally.
1
/$e one obstacle t$at t$ose (leading t$e de#ense o# (rivileged communication must $urdle is
t$e test o# relevancy. =nder t$is test, a matter alleged in t$e course o# t$e (roceedings need
not be in every case material to t$e issues (resented but s$ould be legitimately related to t$e
issues or be so (ertinent to t$e controversy t$at it may become t$e subGect o# in+uiry in t$e
course o# trial.

)ere, t$e controversial statements "ere made in t$e conte,t o# a criminal com(laint against
(etitioner, albeit #or ot$er, se(arate acts involving greed and deceit, and "ere disclosed only
to t$e o##icial investigating t$e com(laint. Hiberally a((lying t$e (rivileged communication
doctrine, t$ese statements "ere still relevant to t$e com(laint under investigation because,
li8e t$e averments t$erein, t$ey also involved (etitionerBs alleged ra(acity and deceit#ulness.
3)6*6-O*6, t$e instant (etition is $ereby D6'56D and t$e &e(tember 14, 00 decision
and 'ovember 1, 00 resolution o# t$e Court o# 0((eals in C0!;.*. &. 'o.
11129 0--5*M6D.
23
Costs against (etitioner.
MA. JEAN B. CASTAEDA
Criminal Law 2 (Sunday 8:00-12:00)
CASE #&
CRISTINELLI S. !ERMIN vs. PEOPLE
G.R. No. 1/'64%
March ., 00.
!ACTS"
Cristy -ermin is t$e (ublis$er and %ogs /ugas is t$e editor!in!c$ie# o# ;ossi( /abloid.
/$e June 1<, 1995 $eadline and lead story o# t$e tabloid says t$at it is im(robable #or
0nnabelle *ama to go to t$e =& s$ould it be true t$at s$e is evading $er conviction in an
esta#a case $ere in t$e .$ili((ines #or s$e and $usband 6ddie $ave more (roblemsOcases to
con#ront t$ere. /$is "as said to be due to t$eir, es(ecially 0nnabelleUs, using #ello" -ili(inosB
money, #ailure to remit (roceeds to t$e manu#acturing com(any o# t$e coo8"are t$ey "ere
selling and not being on good terms "it$ t$e latter. 0nnabelle *ama and 6ddie ;utierreI #iled
libel cases against -ermin and /ugas. -ermin and /ugas "ere #ound by t$e */C guilty o#
libel. /$e C0 ac+uitted /ugas on account o# non!(artici(ation but -erminUs conviction "as
a##irmed. -erminUs motion #or reconsideration "as denied. &$e argues t$at s$e $ad no
8no"ledge and (artici(ation in t$e (ublication o# t$e article, t$at t$e article is not libelous and
is covered by t$e #reedom o# t$e (ress.
ISSUE"
3$et$er or not -ermin is guilty o# libelD
#ELD"
Yes. .roo# o# 8no"ledge o# and (artici(ation in t$e (ublication is not re+uired, since
-ermin $as been s(eci#ically identi#ied as Caut$or, editor, or (ro(rietorE or C(rinterO(ublis$erE
o# t$e (ublication but also t$e C(residentE and Cc$air(erson.E /$us, (etitionerBs criminal guilt
s$ould be a##irmed. /$e elements o# libel "ere (resent in t$e caseA ?1@ 6vident im(utation o#
t$e crime o# malversation ?converting money #or (ersonal use@, o# vices or de#ects #or being
#ugitives #rom t$e la" ?evading (rosecution in 0merica@ and o# being a "astrelK ?@ 0ttribution
made (ublicly. (ossip *abloid $ad a nation"ide circulationK ?4@ /$e victims "ere identi#ied
and identi#iableK and ?<@ /$e article ree8s o# malice, as it tends to cause t$e dis$onor,
discredit, or contem(t o# t$e com(lainants. Malice in la" ! t$e article "as malicious in itsel#K
t$e im(utations "ere #alse. Malice in #act ! t$ere "as motive to tal8 ill against com(lainants
during t$e electoral cam(aign as -ermin is a close #riend o# 6ddieUs o((onent in t$e
Congressional race.
3$ile com(lainants are considered (ublic #igures #or being (ersonalities in t$e
entertainment business, Gournalists do not $ave t$e unbridled license to malign t$eir $onor
and dignity by indiscriminately airing #abricated and malicious comments, "$et$er in
broadcast media or in (rint, about t$eir (ersonal lives.
24
MA. JEAN B. CASTAEDA
Criminal Law 2 (Sunday 8:00-12:00)
CASE #10
JASON I+LER vs. JUDGE MODESTO$SAN PEDRO a,- PONCE
G.R. No. 1''16
No3*5)*r 1', 010
!ACTSA
-ollo"ing a ve$icular collision in 0ugust 00<, (etitioner Jason 5vler ?(etitioner@ "as
c$arged be#ore t$e Metro(olitan /rial Court o# .asig City ?Me/C@, "it$ t"o se(arate o##ensesA
?1@ *ec8less 5m(rudence *esulting in &lig$t .$ysical 5nGuries #or inGuries sustained by
res(ondent 6vangeline H. .once ?res(ondent .once@K and ?@ *ec8less 5m(rudence
*esulting in )omicide and Damage to .ro(erty #or t$e deat$ o# res(ondent .onceBs $usband
'estor C. .once and damage to t$e s(ouses .onceBs ve$icle. .etitioner (osted bail #or $is
tem(orary release in bot$ cases.
On 00<, (etitioner (leaded guilty to t$e c$arge on t$e #irst delict and "as meted out
t$e (enalty o# (ublic censure. 5nvo8ing t$is conviction, (etitioner moved to +uas$ t$e
5n#ormation #or t$e second delict #or (lacing $im in Geo(ardy o# second (unis$ment #or t$e
same o##ense o# rec8less im(rudence. /$e Me/C re#used +uas$al, #inding no identity o#
o##enses in t$e t"o cases. /$e (etitioner elevated t$e matter to t$e *egional /rial Court o#
.asig City ?*/C@, in a (etition #or certiorari "$ile 5vler soug$t #rom t$e Me/C t$e sus(ension
o# (roceedings in criminal case, including t$e arraignment $is arraignment as a (reGudicial
+uestion. 3it$out acting on (etitionerBs motion, t$e Me/C (roceeded "it$ t$e arraignment
and, because o# (etitionerBs absence, cancelled $is bail and ordered $is arrest. &even days
later, t$e Me/C issued a resolution denying (etitionerBs motion to sus(end (roceedings and
(ost(oning $is arraignment until a#ter $is arrest. .etitioner soug$t reconsideration but as o#
t$e #iling o# t$is (etition, t$e motion remained unresolved.
ISSUES"
?1@ 3$et$er or not (etitioner #or#eited $is standing to see8 relie# #rom $is (etition #or certiorari
"$en t$e Me/C ordered $is arrest #ollo"ing $is non!a((earance at t$e arraignment in
*ec8less 5m(rudence *esulting in &lig$t .$ysical 5nGuries #or inGuries sustained by
res(ondentK and
?@ 3$et$er or not (etitionerBs constitutional rig$t under t$e Double Jeo(ardy Clause bars
#urt$er (roceedings in *ec8less 5m(rudence *esulting in )omicide and Damage to .ro(erty
#or t$e deat$ o# res(ondent .onceBs $usband.
#ELD"
/$e */C dismissed 5vlerBs (etition #or certiorari, narro"ly grounding its ruling on
(etitionerBs #or#eiture o# standing to maintain said (etition arising #rom t$e Me/CBs order to
arrest (etitioner #or $is non!a((earance at t$e arraignment in t$e second o##ense. /$us,
"it$out reac$ing t$e merits o# t$e said (etition, t$e */C e##ectively a##irmed t$e Me/C.
.etitioner soug$t reconsideration but t$is (roved unavailing.
25
*es(ondent .once #inds no reason #or t$e Court to disturb t$e */CBs decision
#or#eiting (etitionerBs standing to maintain $is (etition in &.C.0. 204. On t$e merits,
res(ondent .once calls t$e CourtBs attention to Guris(rudence $olding t$at lig$t o##enses ?e.g.
slig$t ($ysical inGuries@ cannot be com(le,ed under 0rticle <2 o# t$e *evised .enal Code "it$
grave or less grave #elonies ?e.g. $omicide@. )ence, t$e (rosecution "as obliged to se(arate
t$e c$arge in Criminal Case 'o. 24>> #or t$e slig$t ($ysical inGuries #rom Criminal Case 'o.
24>1 #or t$e $omicide and damage to (ro(erty.
5n t$e *esolution o# > June 001, t$e Court granted t$e O##ice o# t$e &olicitor
;eneralBs motion not to #ile a comment to t$e (etition as t$e (ublic res(ondent Gudge is
merely a nominal (arty and (rivate res(ondent is re(resented by counsel.
Dismissals o# a((eals grounded on t$e a((ellantBs esca(e #rom custody or violation o#
t$e terms o# $is bail bond are governed by t$e second (aragra($ o# &ection 2, *ule 1<, in
relation to &ection 1, *ule 15, o# t$e *evised *ules on Criminal .rocedure aut$oriIing t$is
Court or t$e Court o# 0((eals to Palso, u(on motion o# t$e a((ellee or motu (ro(rio, dismiss
t$e a((eal i# t$e a((ellant esca(es #rom (rison or con#inement, Gum(s bail or #lees to a
#oreign country during t$e (endency o# t$e a((eal.P /$e Pa((ealP contem(lated in &ection 2
o# *ule 1< is a suit to revie" Gudgments o# convictions.
On Double Jeo(ardy ! /$e accusedBs negative constitutional rig$t not to be Pt"ice (ut in
Geo(ardy o# (unis$ment #or t$e same o##enseP (rotects $im #rom, among ot$ers, (ost!
conviction (rosecution #or t$e same o##ense, "it$ t$e (rior verdict rendered by a court o#
com(etent Gurisdiction u(on a valid in#ormation.
.etitioner ado(ts t$e a##irmative vie", submitting t$at t$e t"o cases concern t$e same
o##ense o# rec8less im(rudence. /$e Me/C ruled ot$er"ise, #inding t$at *ec8less
5m(rudence *esulting in &lig$t .$ysical 5nGuries is an entirely se(arate o##ense #rom *ec8less
5m(rudence *esulting in )omicide and Damage to .ro(erty Pas t$e 9latter: re+uires (roo# o#
an additional #act "$ic$ t$e ot$er does not.P
/$e t"o c$arges against (etitioner, arising #rom t$e same #acts, "ere (rosecuted
under t$e same (rovision o# t$e *evised .enal Code, as amended, namely, 0rticle 4>5
de#ining and (enaliIing +uasi!o##enses.
/$e (rovisions contained in t$is article s$all not be a((licable. 5ndeed, t$e notion t$at
+uasi!o##enses, "$et$er rec8less or sim(le, are distinct s(ecies o# crime, se(arately de#ined
and (enaliIed under t$e #rame"or8 o# our (enal la"s, is not$ing ne".
/$e doctrine t$at rec8less im(rudence under 0rticle 4>5 is a single +uasi!o##ense by
itsel# and not merely a means to commit ot$er crimes suc$ t$at conviction or ac+uittal o# suc$
+uasi!o##ense bars subse+uent (rosecution #or t$e same +uasi!o##ense, regardless o# its
various resulting acts, undergirded t$is CourtBs unbro8en c$ain o# Guris(rudence on double
Geo(ardy as a((lied to 0rticle 4>5.
/$ese cases uni#ormly barred t$e second (rosecutions as constitutionally
im(ermissible under t$e Double Jeo(ardy Clause.
Our ruling today secures #or t$e accused #acing an 0rticle 4>5 c$arge a stronger and
sim(ler (rotection o# t$eir constitutional rig$t under t$e Double Jeo(ardy Clause. /rue, t$ey
are t$ereby denied t$e bene#icent e##ect o# t$e #avorable sentencing #ormula under 0rticle <2,
26
but any disadvantage t$us caused is more t$an com(ensated by t$e certainty o# non!
(rosecution #or +uasi!crime e##ects +uali#ying as Plig$t o##ensesP ?or, as $ere, #or t$e more
serious conse+uence (rosecuted belatedly@. 5# it is so minded, Congress can re!cra#t 0rticle
4>5 by e,tending to +uasi!crimes t$e sentencing #ormula o# 0rticle <2 so t$at only t$e most
severe (enalty s$all be im(osed under a single (rosecution o# all resulting acts, "$et$er
(enaliIed as grave, less grave or lig$t o##enses. /$is "ill still 8ee( intact t$e distinct conce(t
o# +uasi!o##enses. Mean"$ile, t$e lenient sc$edule o# (enalties under 0rticle 4>5, be#itting
crimes occu(ying a lo"er rung o# cul(ability, s$ould cus$ion t$e e##ect o# t$is ruling.
3)6*6-O*6, "e ;*0'/ t$e (etition. 3e *676*&6 t$e Orders dated -ebruary
00> and May 00> o# t$e *egional /rial Court o# .asig City, %ranc$ 151. 3e D5&M5&& t$e
5n#ormation in Criminal Case 'o. 24>> against (etitioner Jason 5vler y 0guilar (ending "it$
t$e Metro(olitan /rial Court o# .asig City, %ranc$ 11 on t$e ground o# double Geo(ardy.
MA. JEAN B. CASTAEDA
Criminal Law 2 (Sunday 8:00-12:00)
CASE #11
ED9IN TABAO vs. PEOPLE
G.R. No. 1.'46
J0:8 0, 011
!ACTS"
On January 1, 1994, 6d"in /abao, "$o "as driving $is car ?/oyota Corolla@ along
;overnor -orbes corner ;. /uaIon &treet to"ards 'agta$an, $it a (edestrian named
*oc$elle Hanete. 0s a result, *oc$elle "as t$ro"n into t$e middle o# t$e road, "$ereby $er
body "as ran over by a /oyota Corana driven by Heonardo MendeI. *oc$elle died. /abao
and MendeI "ere c$arged "it$ rec8less im(rudence resulting to $omicide be#ore t$e
*egional /rial Court o# Manila. /$e */C convicted t$em o# t$e crime c$arged. /$e C0
a##irmed t$e said conviction.
27
ISSUE"
3$et$er or not t$e accused is guilty o# t$e crime c$arged.
#ELD"
/$e &u(reme Court "as morally convinced t$at #ollo"ing elements #or conviction to
t$e crime o# rec8less im(rudence "ere establis$ed in t$is caseA ?1@ /$e material damage
su##ered by t$e victimK ?@ /$e #ailure in (recaution on t$e (art o# t$e accusedK and ?4@ /$e
direct lin8 bet"een material damage and #ailure in (recaution.
/$e &C #ound no reason to overturn t$e lo"er courtsB #indings o# #act and conclusions
o# la" #inding t$e (etitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt o# t$e crime c$arged.
28