Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
The Court affirms the decision of the CA with the following For the prosecution, the Solicitor General argued that
modifications: (1) death penalty is reduced to reclusion the Hernandez ruling should be abandoned and that it
should be ruled that rebellion cannot absorb more serious Canasares), staged a robbery at the New Iloilo Lumber
crimeslike murder. Yard
-They were armed with homemade guns and a hand
ISSUES: grenade
1. Whether or not the Hernandez ruling should be -On their way inside the establishment, they met Rodita
abandoned. Habiero, an employee there who was on her way out for
2. Whether or not Judge Salazar personally determined her meal break, and informed her that it was a hold-up.
probable cause in the case at bar. -They went inside the office and the petitioner pointed his
gun at Severino Choco, the owner, and his two daughters,
HELD: Mary and Mimmie. They informed Severino that all they
1. No, the said case is still good law. The Supreme Court needed was money.
also noted that there was actually a previous law (P.D. -Severino asked Mary to get a paper bag wherein he
942) which sought to abandon the Hernandez doctrine. placed P20,000 cash (P5000 acc to the defense) and
The said law provided that graver crimes may not be handed it to the petitioner.
complexed with rebellion. However, President Corazon -Simplicio Canasares took the wallet and wristwatch of
Aquino repealed said law (by virtue of the power granted Severino after which the latter, his 2 daughters and Rodita
to her by the 1986 Freedom Constitution). That being, the were kept inside the office.
Hernandez doctrine, which reflects the rebellion law under -According to the appellant, he stopped Severino from
the Revised Penal Code, still stands. The courts cannot getting the wallet and watches.
change this because courts can only interpret laws. Only -At about 2:00 of the same day, the appellant told
Congress can change the rebellion law (which the SC Severino to produce P100,000 so he and the other
suggested in order to strengthen the rebellion law). But as hostages can be released. Severino told him it would be
it stands, Enrile is correct, there is no such crime as hard to do that since banks are closed because it was a
rebellion with murder. Common crimes such as murder Saturday
are absorbed. He can only be charged with rebellion – -The police and military authorities had surrounded the
which is bailable. lumber yard. Major Melquiades Sequio, Station
Commander of the INP of Iloilo City, negotiated with the
2. Yes. There is nothing irregular on the fact that Judge accused and appealed to them to surrender. The accused
Salazar only took an hour and twenty minutes to issue the refused to surrender and release the hostages.
warrant from the time the case was raffled to him despite
-Rosa Caram, OIC Mayor of Iloilo City, joined the
the fact that the prosecution transmitted quite a
negotiations. Appellant demanded P100,000, a coaster,
voluminous record from the preliminary investigation it
and some raincoats. Caram offered P50,000
conducted. It is sufficient that the judge follows established
instead. Later, the accused agreed to receive the same
procedure by personally evaluating the report and the
and to release Rodita to be accompanied by Mary in going
supporting documents submitted by the
out of the office. One of the accused gave a key to Mayor
prosecutor. Just because Judge Salazar had what some
Caram and with the key,Mayor Caram unlocked the door
might consider only a relatively brief period within which to
and handed to Rodita P50,000, which Rodita gave to one
comply with that duty, gives no reason to assume that he
of the accused.
had not, or could not have, so complied; nor does that
-Rodita was later set free but Mary was herded back to the
single circumstance suffice to overcome the legal
office.
presumption that official duty has been regularly
-The police and military authorities decided to assault the
performed.
place when the accused still wouldn’t budge after more
ultimatums. This resulted to injuries to the girls, as well as
to the accused Ronaldo and Reynaldo Canasares. Mary’sr
ight leg had to be amputated due to her injuries.
-The appellant maintained that the money, wallet and
watches were all left on the counter and were never
touched by them. He also claimed that they never fired on
the military because they intended to surrender.
PEOPLE VS SALVILLA
April 26, 1990 Issues:
Melencho – Herrera, J -WON the crime of robbery was consummated
-WON there was a mitigating circumstance of voluntary
Facts: surrender
-Petitioner: Bienvenido Salvilla
-April 12, 1986, at about noon time – Petitioner, together Ratio:
with Reynaldo, Ronaldo and Simplicio (all surnamed
-Yes. The robbery shall be deemed consummated if
the unlawful “taking” is complete. Subject Matter: Application and Computation of Penalties:
Service of Sentence (Specific Rules)
Unlawful taking of personal property of another is an
essential part of the crime of robbery. The respondent FACTS: Arturo Mejorada was found guilty beyond
claimed that none of the items (money, watches and reasonable doubt of violating Section3(E) of RA. 3019,
wallet) were recovered from them. However, based aka Anti-Graft and Corrupt Practices Act. Mejorada was a
on the evidence, the money demanded, the wallet right-away agent whose duty was to process the claims for
and the wristwatch were within the dominion and compensation of
control of the appellant and his co-accused and damagesof property owners affected by highway construct
thus the taking was completed. ion and improvements. He required the claimants to sign
blank copies of Sworn Statements and Agreements to
It is not necessary that the property be taken into the Demolish, where it appeared that the properties of the
hands of the robber or that he should have actually claimants have higher values than the actual value being
carriedthe property away, out of the physical claimed by them. However, the claimants didnot bother
presence of the lawful possessor, or that he should reading through the paper because they very much
have made his escapewith it. interested in the compensation of damages. After
processing the claims, instead of giving to the claimants
-No. The “surrender” of the appellant and his co-accused the proper amount, Mejorada gave one of them Php 5,000
cannot be considered in their favour to mitigate their and the rest, Php 1,000 each, saying that there are many
liability. who would share in said amounts. The claimants weren’t
To be mitigating, a surrender must have the following able to complain because they were afraid of the accused
requisites: that the offender had not been and his armed companion. The Sandiganbayan
actuallyarrested, that the offender surrendered sentenced Mejorada 56 years and8 years of imprisonment
himself to a person in authority or to his agent, and which is equivalent to the eight (8) penalties for the eight
that the surrender wasvoluntary. The “surrender” by (8) informations filed against him.
the appellant and his co-accused hardly meets these
requirements. There is novoluntary surrender to Contention of the State: Section 3 of RA 3019 states that
speak of. Mejorada should be punished with “imprisonment for not
less than 1 year nor more than 10 years” asstated in Sec 9
Note: The nature of the linked offenses (robbery with of the same Act. In this case, there are 8 charges against
serious physical injuries and serious illegal detention) was him and each charge should be served with the penalty
also discussed. The detention in the case at bar was not prescribed by the law. Contention of the Accused:
only incidental to the robbery but was a necessary means Mejorada states that the penalty imposed upon him is
to commit the same so the nature of the offense was contrary to the three-fold rule and states that the duration
affirmed. should not exceed 40years. This is in accordance to
Article 70 of the RPC.
Held: Judgment appealed is AFFIRMED
ISSUE: WON the penalty imposed upon him violates the
three-fold rule under Article 70 of the RPC.