Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2009 > October 2009 Decisions > G.R. No. 172710 - People of the Philippines v. Alberto Buban :




G.R. No. 172710 - People of the Philippines v. Alberto Buban

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. NO. 172710 : October 30, 2009]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ALBERTO BUBAN, Accused-Appellant.

D E C I S I O N

LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.:

Before the Court for automatic review is the decision1 dated August 31, 2005 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00893 which affirmed, with modification, an earlier decision2 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Irosin, Sorsogon, Branch 55, in Criminal Case Nos. 1185, 1186, 1187 and 1188, finding herein accused-appellant Alberto Buban guilty beyond reasonable doubt of four counts of rape3 committed against AAA,4 and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua on each count of rape, to pay the amount of P200,000.00 as moral damages, and the costs of the suit. However, the CA modified the penalties imposed by the RTC by awarding an amount of P200,000.00 as civil indemnity in addition to the award of P200,000.00 as moral damages.

Accused-appellant was charged with four (4) counts of rape under four (4) separate Informations, allegedly committed against his wife's first cousin AAA on October 12, 1995,5 November 15, 1995,6 January 29, 1996,7 and February 24, 1996.8 Except as to the aforesaid different dates of the commission of the crimes, the Informations are similarly worded. The information in Criminal Case No. 11889 reads:

That on or about the 12th day of October, 1995, at Barangay San Julian, municipality of Irosin, province of Sorsogon, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, did then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously, with lewd designs and thru force and intimidation, had sexual intercourse with AAA, a minor, without her consent and against her will, to her damage and prejudice.

CONTRARY TO LAW.

On August 21, 1996,10 accused-appellant, duly assisted by counsel, entered a plea of not guilty in each of the four (4) cases. The cases were then set for a pre-trial conference. During the said conference, no plea bargaining nor stipulations of facts were arrived at by the parties. Thus, the joint trial on the merits ensued.11

The prosecution presented the testimonies of the victim, AAA; Dr. Nerissa Tagum (Dr. Tagum), Resident Physician of Irosin District Hospital; and EEE, the sister of AAA's father. The prosecution also offered documentary evidence consisting of the medical certificate12 issued by Dr. Tagum to prove that the victim was subjected to a medico-legal examination and the Certificate of Live Birth13 of AAA showing that she was born on May 15, 1978.

The RTC summarized the evidence for the prosecution in its Decision as follows:

The victim AAA declared in court - that she is already an orphan, her parents having died while she was still very young. She has two (2) other siblings named BBB (15 years old) and CCC (the youngest). Her brother BBB is residing with his first cousin in Camarines Norte, while her youngest sister CCC is staying with her uncle DDD. Since she was a small child she had been living with EEE the sister of her father in San Julian, Irosin, Sorsogon. EEE has nine (9) children the eldest of whom named GGG is the one married to the accused in this case Alberto Buban. She had known the accused for a long time being the husband of her cousin GGG. The witness POSITIVELY IDENTIFIED the accused in open court when asked to do so (TSN/AAA, dtd. August 27, 1997, p. 6).

The reason why she is testifying in court is because of the RAPE that was committed on her person by the accused ALBERTO BUBAN. Accordingly, she was raped four (4) times by the accused the first of which happened on October 12, 1995; the second on November 15, 1995; the third on January 29, 1996; and the fourth February 24, 1996. All the four incidents of rape happened inside the house of EEE because the accused and his wife GGG used to live with them in the house of EEE. She was only able to file the cases for rape, on March 20, 1996 because that was the time when EEE noticed that her stomach was getting bigger. Due to the persistent questioning of EEE, she finally told her that she was raped by Alberto Buban. EEE was very angry and got mad at Alberto Buban upon learning about it. She was the one who accompanied her to the police station in order to file the criminal complaint (TSN/AAA, dtd. August 27, 1997, pp. 2 to 9).

The declaration of the aforesaid victim was corroborated by the testimony and the findings of Dr. Nerissa Tagum, medico-legal officer, who examined the offended party, AAA. She made the patient undergo an ultra sound testing in order to determine her gestation. During the examination of the patient on March 19, 1996 it was confirmed from the result thereof that she was five to six months pregnant. According to the doctor, the sexual intercourse which caused said pregnancy could have possibly occurred within the period from September 14, 1995 to October 1995. The witness likewise identified the medical certificate (Exhs. "A" to "A-2") she issued and affirmed the signature appearing therein to be hers (TSN/Dr. Tagum, dtd. February 12, 1997, pp. 3 to 6).

EEE the aunt of AAA corroborated further her testimony when she testified that - she is the sister of the father of AAA whom she took into custody when she was about (5) years old after her father died. The first time she was informed that AAA was sexually molested by the accused Alberto Buban was sometime in the end of February, 1996, when she persistently questioned the victim after noticing that her stomach was bulging. The accused Alberto Buban is the husband of her daughter GGG who stayed with them for a year after their marriage. In the month of February, 1996 the accused and her daughter GGG were already living in a separate house but still visit her very often. Accused Alberto Buban usually passed by her house before reporting for work. She did not tell her daughter GGG about the rape incident although she came to learn about it later. She did not discuss the rape incident with her daughter GGG because the first time she attempted to tell her about it, the latter sided with the accused. In the months of October, 1995 and February, 1996, AAA was about 16 [should be 17] yrs old. From October 12, 1995 to January, 1996 she was able to observe that the stomach of the victim was growing bigger or bulging. At the time the pregnancy of the offended party became apparent, accused Alberto Buban and her daughter GGG were no longer living with them. They transferred to their house across the river in May of 1993. In October, 1995, AAA was in second year high school and was more or less 15 [should be 17] years old. She quits her studies when she became pregnant in February 1996. She didn't have any suitor neither did she see any boy of her age coming to their house. The witness likewise testified that it was the usual habit of the accused Alberto Buban to frequent their place where he usually eats his lunch at least twice (2) a week. In 1995 there were times when the accused passed by her house while she was not around and she came to learn about it because her young daughter who was in Grade II told her. The witness is a businesswoman by occupation. (TSN/EEE, dtd. August 25, 1999, pp. 8 to 16).14

The details of the four (4) rape incidents are summarized by the RTC in this wise:

That on October 12, 1995 at more or less 9:00 o'clock in the evening, the victim was in the house of EEE together with the three (3) year old child she was baby sitting when accused Alberto Buban arrived. He sat at the sala for a while then proceeded to the place where their comfort room was. After walking to and fro for a while, the accused entered the room where the offended party together with the child was, and began undressing her. She pulled down her shorts and panty while she was pleading and crying not to do it. It took the accused sometime to remove her shorts and panty because she was resisting and boxing him. After removing completely her panty he forced her to lie down in bed while she continued to resist and boxed him. The accused then succeeded in having her lie down held her two (2) hands on the side of her body then proceeded to rape her. In inserting his penis, the accused held her vagina and guided his penis into it. As he was able to release her hands she continued to box him but her resistance proved futile as the accused was able to succeed in having carnal knowledge of her. The accused lay on top of her for a long time and while in that position he warned her not to tell anybody, particularly EEE or else something might happen to her. After the incident she just kept on crying. When her companions in the house returned at more or less 11:30 p.m., she did not inform them about what happened because of fear. The victim further testified that the little boy whom she was baby sitting and already asleep at the time she was being sexually abused was transferred by the accused from the bed to the floor. Hence, the logical reason why the small child did not wake up from his slumber. The witness, likewise POSITIVELY IDENTIFIED the accused in open court (TSN/AAA, dtd 8 October 1997, pp. 2 to 7).

That on November 15, 1995 the accused again had carnal knowledge of her. The sexual abuse happened in the same house where she was staying. Oftentimes, she was left alone in the house because her companions were fond of viewing betamax. On the aforestated date at around 10:00 o'clock in the evening, she was alone in their house in San Julian studying when the accused Alberto Buban came. While she was studying in the sala, the accused asked her for an errand and she was asked to enter the room where the accused was. When she heard the voice of the accused calling her, she felt afraid but nevertheless she entered the room and asked him what she will buy. Upon entering the room, the accused came near infront of her and covered her mouth with his left hand while her left shoulder was being held by his right hand. He pulled her to and placed her in the bed and undressed her. While the accused was pulling and undressing her, she kept on boxing and kicking him but her resistance was not successful, and every time she attempted to run away, the accused would block the way. After the accused undressed himself he forced himself into her by separating her thighs and inserting his penis into her vagina. She felt pain on her back hip, vagina and other parts of her body, although according to the victim, the first rape incident on October 12th was more painful. (TSN, dtd. October 8, 1997, pp. 8 to 12).

The incidents on October 12th and November 15th 1995 were again repeated on January 29, 1996. At about 9:00 o'clock in the evening of January 29, 1996 while she was viewing TV alone in their house the accused came and seated himself in one of the chairs. She felt sleepy after a while so she told the accused to just turn off the TV once he is through and proceeded to her room to sleep. When she went to her room to retire, the accused was still in the sala viewing TV. She was awakened from her slumber when the accused put his hand on her mouth and warned her not to make noise. Despite her plea for the accused to leave and telling him even that she will tell somebody about him, the latter refused to yield and even warned her that something bad might happen to her if she tells somebody. Thereafter, the accused started to remove her shorts and panty and despite her resistance, he succeeded in penetrating her. She felt again the pain that she felt during the two (2) previous rapes that she suffered in the hands of the same accused. After the accused had satisfied his bestial desires he went home and left her alone in her room crying. She did not tell her companions in the house about what happened because of fear of the threat from the accused (TSN, dtd. 8 October 1997, pp. 12 to 14).

The fourth and final sexual abuse suffered by the victim in the hands of the accused happened in the 24th day of February, 1996, she was raped while EEE was out and her other companions was manning the store. On the aforestated date at about 9:00 o'clock in the morning, she was able to sleep on the long bench situated in their sale while she was whiling away her time, because she was prevailed upon by EEE not to go to school as no one will attend to the house. She was awakened upon feeling that somebody was covering her mouth, and as she opened her eyes she was able to recognize the accused and found out that the door and the window of their house were already closed. When she tried to resist him by boxing him on the chest, he held her two (2) hands with the accused sitting beside her and while she was still in a lying position. Then the accused proceeded to undress her and after he was through removing her underwear, he also undressed himself. She could not run away because the door was locked and the accused was sitting beside her. The accused made her lie down face up, held her by one of his hands, inserted his penis and had carnal knowledge of her. She again felt the pain that she experienced during the three (3) previous rapes. The accused was able to consummate his carnal desires while they were both on top of the bench (which is similar in length and width to the benches inside the computer room). After the accused was through with her, he warned her again not to tell anybody or else something bad might happen to her. The first person to whom she confided the rapes that happened to her was FFF whose husband is the brother of her late father. This happened on March 24, 1996 while FFF was in their house viewing TV. The reaction of FFF was that of anger against the accused Alberto Buban, but she decided not to divulge what she knew, apprehensive that the accused might flee. When she executed her Sworn Statement with the police she was in the company of FFF and EEE. EEE was likewise with her when she was examined by the doctor. She first learned about her pregnancy when she was told by the doctor who examined her. On March 28, 1996 she was transferred to the custody of the DSWD who took care of her up to the time she gave birth to a baby girl on June 3, 1996 at the Sorsogon Provincial Hospital. The child was then brought to Legaspi City by the Social Worker. According to the victim she doesn't feel any love for her child and she doesn't like her child, because whenever she sees the child she remembers the accused Alberto Buban and she hates him. At present she has returned to the custody of EEE. (TSN, dated 8 October 1997, pp. 14-20)15

The defense presented a different version of the facts anchored on the claim that the accused-appellant and AAA were lovers so that their sexual encounters were consensual. As culled from the same Decision of the RTC, the gist of the defense evidence is as follows:16

The defense upon the other hand, admitted that the accused had carnal knowledge of the victim for several times, but claims likewise that the sexual intercourse had the mutual consent of both parties considering that they are "sweethearts." The accused alleged that it was the victim who proposed to him that she likes him. The first sexual intercourse allegedly happened on February 9, 1995 followed by several other sexual encounters which he could no longer count. He admitted to be the first one to have carnal knowledge of the victim AAA. The accused denied, however, having sexual intercourse with the victim on October 12, and November 15, 1995 and January 29 and February 24, 1996, because accordingly as early as August 1995 he already asked for a break-up as the victim was asking for a thing which he did not like. He failed however to specify what was that thing that he did not like. And he came to realize that he is not capable of giving what AAA was asking from him after having carnal knowledge of her for more or less one hundred times. In the course of the cross examination it was admitted however by the accused that his wife GGG never confronted him about his affair with AAA because she did not know anything about his relationship with her. And the first time that his wife came to know about his relationship with AAA was when the latter filed the criminal complaint against him, because he told his wife about it as he was already in jail. Finally, the accused admitted that he cannot show any picture, document or letter that would attest to the fact that he had a love affair with the victim in the instant case. (TSN/Alberto Buban, dtd. November 10, 1999, pp. 2 to 16).

On December 20, 2000, the RTC rendered its Decision finding the accused-appellant guilty of four (4) counts of rape and imposed the penalty mentioned above.

The records of these cases were forwarded to this Court in view of the Notice of Appeal17 filed by the accused-appellant, which this Court accepted in its Resolution18 dated June 7, 2004. The Court required the parties to submit their respective briefs, and the Director of the Bureau of Corrections to confirm the confinement of accused-appellant within ten days from notice thereof.

In his letter dated July 22, 2004, the Assistant Director of the Bureau of Corrections confirmed that the accused-appellant was received for confinement at the New Bilibid Prison on February 15, 2001.19

Accused-appellant filed his Appellant's Brief20 on December 6, 2004. Meanwhile, before the People, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), filed its Appellee's Brief21 on April 12, 2005, the Court issued a Resolution22 on February 23, 2005, transferring the case to the CA for intermediate review conformably with the ruling in People v. Mateo.23

As above-stated, the CA, in its decision of August 31, 2005, in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00893, affirmed with modification the judgment of conviction pronounced by the trial court. The fallo of the CA decision is quoted as follows:

WHEREFORE, finding no reversible error in the appealed Decision dated December 20, 2000 of the RTC, Branch 55 of Irosin, Sorsogon, the same is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION that appellant ALBERTO BUBAN is ORDERED to pay complainant AAA an additional P200,000.00 as civil indemnity in addition to the award of P200,000.00 as moral damages.

SO ORDERED.

On May 29, 2006, the case was elevated to this Court for further review.24

In our Resolution25 of July 12, 2006, we required the parties to simultaneously submit their respective supplemental briefs. We also required the Director of the Bureau of Corrections to confirm whether the accused-appellant has been committed to said prison and to submit to this Court a report thereon, within ten days from notice.

In compliance with our Resolution, the Assistant Director of the Bureau of Corrections informed this Court that accused-appellant was received for confinement since February 15, 2001. Accused-appellant likewise filed his Supplemental Brief26 on September 20, 2006, while the OSG adopted in toto the arguments in the Brief for the Appellee dated April 5, 2005 and thereby dispensed with the filing of a supplemental brief.

The accused-appellant raised the following assignment of errors:

I

THE TRIAL COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN GIVING WEIGHT AND CREDENCE TO THE HIGHLY INCREDIBLE TESTIMONY OF THE PRIVATE COMPLAINANT.

II

THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT GUILTY OF THE CRIME CHARGED DESPITE FAILURE OF THE PROSECUTION TO PROVE HIS GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.

III

THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN FINDING THAT THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT USED FORCE AGAINST PRIVATE COMPLAINANT IN THE COMMISSION OF THE ALLEGED RAPES.

At the outset, accused-appellant puts at issue the credibility of AAA, specifically as regards the third rape which occurred on January 29, 1996. He avers that it is contrary to human nature and experience that after having been previously raped twice, AAA would still feel comfortable, in the presence of appellant, as she was able to speak to him casually as if nothing traumatic happened between them and she even managed to sleep in her room without locking its door while accused-appellant was in the sala watching television.

Accused-appellant also relies on the inconsistencies between AAA's testimony as to the date of the commission of the four (4) rape incidents and as stated in the four (4) Informations. He alleged that on direct examination, AAA declared that she was sexually abused on October 12, 1995, November 15, 1995, November 24, 1995 and January 29, 1996, while the four (4) Informations clearly stated that the rape incidents took place on October 12, 1995, November 15, 1995, January 29, 1996 and the last one on February 24, 1996.

Accused-appellant further asserts that there could be no rape where the sexual act was consensual. He maintains that if the sexual intercourse was truly against AAA's will, she could have easily cried for help when he was pulling her on the bed and she could have prevented the second rape by not going in the room knowing fully well that she was alone with the accused-appellant at that time. Further, she had every opportunity to run away but she chose to be left alone with him. Accused-appellant adds that AAA's failure to immediately report the alleged rape to her relatives or friends militates against the latter's credibility.

The Court ruled in People v. Nazareno27 as follows:

In reviewing rape cases, the Court is guided by the following jurisprudential guidelines: (a) an accusation of rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove; (b) due to the nature of the crime of rape in which only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (c) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.

Tersely put, the credibility of the offended party is crucial in determining the guilt of a person accused of rape. By the very nature of this crime, it is usually only the victim who can testify as to its occurrence. Thus, in rape cases, the accused may be convicted solely on the basis of the testimony of the victim, provided that such testimony is credible, natural, convincing and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things. Else wise stated, the lone testimony of the offended party, if credible, suffices to warrant a conviction for rape.

Guided by these judicial doctrines, the Court scrutinized all the pieces of evidence on record, especially the testimony of AAA and we find no reason to overturn the trial court's assessment of her credibility, which had the opportunity of observing AAA's manner and demeanor on the witness stand. AAA's testimony was indeed candid, spontaneous and consistent. As the trial court observed and we quote:

xxx. Even on re-cross examination the victim remained consistent and unwavering in her claim that she was sexually abused by the accused. Despite her young age and lack of experience in court proceedings she remained steadfast unfazed by the lengthy cross-examinations conducted by the defense, thus, attesting favorably to her credibility.

AAA narrated how appellant had overpowered her into submitting to his desires in this wise:

On the incident of October 12, 1995:

PROS. PURA

Q What was your position when he was removing your short and panty?cralawred

A I was standing.

Q What were you doing while he was removing your short and panty?cralawred

A I am boxing him.

Q Were you able to hit him?cralawred

A Yes.

Q And what did he do when you hit him?cralawred

A He held my hand.

x x x


Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






October-2009 Jurisprudence                 

  • A.C. No. 8242 - Rebecca J. Palm v. Atty. Felipe Iledan, Jr.

  • A.M. No. 07-2-93-RTC A.M. NO. P-07-2320 - Re: Order dated 21 December 2006 issued by Judge Bonifacio Sanz Maceda, Regional Trial Court, Branch 275, Las Pi as City, suspending Loida M. Genabe, Legal Researcher, same court

  • A.M. No. 09-3-50-MCTC - Re: Dropping from the rolls of Ms. Gina P. Fuentes, Court stenographer I, Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Mabini, Compostela Valley

  • A.M. No. 2007-08-SC - In Re: Fraudulent release of retirement benefits of Judge Jose C. Lantin, former Presiding Judge, Municipal Trial Court, San Felipe, Zambales

  • A.M. No. P-09-2620 Formerly OCA IPI No. 07-2517-P - Angelita I. Dontogan v. Mario Q. Pagkanlungan, Jr.

  • A.M. No. P-07-2385 Formerly OCA I.P.I No. 07-2556-P - Judge Jacinto C. Gonzales v. Clerk of Court and City Sheriff Alexander C. Rimando, et al.

  • A.M. No. P-07-2415 Formerly A.M. No. 07-10-279-MCTC - Office of the Court Administrator v. Alfredo Manasan, Clerk of Court II, MCTC, Orani-Samal, Bataan

  • A.M. No. P-08-2567 Formerly OCA I.P.I. No. 99-670-P and A.M. NO. P-08-2568 Formerly OCA I.P.I No. 99-753-P - Joana Gilda L. Leyrit, et al. v. Nicolasito S. Solas, Clerk of Court IV, Municipal Trial Court in Cities (MTCC), Iloilo City

  • A.M. No. P-08-2569 - Judge Rene B. Baculi v. Clemente U. Ugale

  • A.M. No. P-09-2625 - Elisa C. Ruste v. Cristina Q. Selma

  • A.M. No. P-09-2670 Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 09-3051-P] - Office of the Administrative Services (OAS) - Office of the Court Administrator (OCA) v. Rodrigo C. Calacal, Utility Worker 1, Municipal Circuit Trial Court, (MCTC), Alfonso Lista-Aguinaldo, Ifugao

  • A.M. No. RTJ-03-1781 and A.M. No. RTJ-03-1782 - State Prosecutor Emmanuel Y. Velasco v. Hon. Erasto D. Salcedo, (Ret.) Presiding Judge, Regional Trial Court of Tagum City, Davao Del Norte, Branch 31

  • A.M. No. RTJ-09-2204 Formerly A.M. OCA IPI No. 04-2137-RTJ - Juan Pablo P. Bondoc v. Judge Divina Luz P. Aquino-Simbulan, etc.

  • G.R. No. 114217 & G.R. No. 150797 - Heirs of Jose Sy Bang, Heirs of Julian Sy and Oscar Sy v. Rolando Sy, et al.

  • G.R. No. 151903 - Manuel Go Cinco and Araceli S. Go Cinco v. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 152006 - Montano Pico and Rosita Pico v. Catalina Adalim-Salcedo and Urbano Salcedo

  • G.R. No. 152319 - Heirs of the late Joaquin Limense v. Rita vda. De Ramos, et al.

  • G.R. No. 153653 - San Miguel Bukid Homeowners Association, Inc., etc. v. City of Mandaluyong, etc., et al.

  • G.R. No. 153820 - Delfin Tan v. Erlinda C. Benolirao, Andrew C. Benolirao, Romano C. Benolirao, Dion C. Benolirao, Sps. Reynaldo Taningco and Norma D. Benolirao, Evelyn T. Monreal and Ann Karina Taningco

  • G.R. No. 153923 - Spouses Tomas F. Gomez, et al. v. Gregorio Correa, et al.

  • G.R. No. 155622 - Dotmatrix Trading as represented by its proprietos, namely Romy Yap Chua. Renato Rollan and Rolando D. Cadiz

  • G.R. No. 154117 - Ernesto Francisco, Jr. v. Ombudsman Aniano A. Desierto, et al.

  • G.R. No. 155716 - Rockville Excel International Exim Corporation v. Spouses Oligario Culla and Bernardita Miranda

  • G.R. No. 156981 - Arturo C. Cabaron and Brigida Cabaron v. People of the Philippines, et al.

  • G.R. No. 158467 - Spouses Joel and Marietta Marimla v. People of the Philippines, et al.

  • G.R. No. 158734 - Roberto Alba'a, et al. v. Pio Jude Belo, et al.

  • G.R. No. 158885 and G.R. NO. 170680 - Fort Bonifacio Development Corporation v. Commissioner of Internal Revenue, et al.

  • G.R. No. 160236 - ''G'' Holdings, Inc. v. National Mines and Allied Workers Union Locan 103 (NAMAWU), Sheriffs Richard H. Aprosta and Alberto Munoz, all acting sheriffs, Department of Labor and Employment, Region VI, Bacolod District Office, Bacolod City

  • G.R. No. 160409 - Land Center Construction and Development Corporation v. V.C. Ponce, Co., Inc. and Vicente C. Ponce

  • G.R. No. 160708 - Patronica Ravina and Wilfredo Ravina v. Mary Ann P. Villa Abrille, for behalf of Ingrid D'Lyn P. Villa Abrille, et al.

  • G.R. No. 161952 - Arnel Sagana v. Richard A. Francisco

  • G.R. No. 162095 - Ibex International, Inc. v. Government Service Insurance System, et al.

  • G.R. No. 162473 - Spouses Santiago E. Ibasco and Milagros D. Ibasco, et al. v. Private Development Corporation of the Philippines, et al.

  • G.R. No. 162474 - Hon. Vicente P. Eusebio, et al. v. Jovito M. Luis, et al.

  • G.R. No. 163033 - San Miguel Corporation v. Eduardo L. Teodosio

  • G.R. No. 163209 - Spouses Prudencio and Filomena Lim v. Ma. Cheryl S. Lim, for herself and on behalf of her minor children Lester Edward S. Lim, Candice Grace S. Lim, and Mariano S. Lim, III

  • G.R. NOS. 164669-70 - Liezl Co v. Harold Lim y Go and Avelino uy Go

  • G.R. No. 165332 - Republic of the Philippines v. Yang Chi Hao

  • G.R. No. 165544 - Romeo Samonte v. S.F. Naguiat, Inc.

  • G.R. No. 165679 - Engr. Apolinario Due as v. Alice Guce-Africa

  • G.R. No. 166383 - Associated Bank v. Spouses Justiniano S. Montano, Sr. and Ligaya Montano, et al.

  • G.R. No. 166508 - National Home Mortgage Finance Corporation v. Mario Abayari, et al.

  • G.R. No. 167764 - Vicente,Jr. and Danny G. Fajardo v. People of the Philippines

  • G.R. No. 168061 - Bank of the Philippine Islands v. Teofilo Icot, et al.

  • G.R. No. 168324 - Metro Costruction, Inc. and Dr. John Lai v. Rogelio Aman

  • G.R. No. 169541 - German Cayton, et al. v. Zeonnix Trading Corporation, et al.

  • G.R. No. 169554 - Nieva M. Manebo v. SPO1 Roel D. Acosta, et al.

  • G.R. NOS. 170122 and G.R. NO. 171381 - Clarita Depakakibo Garcia v. Sandiganbayan and Republic of the Philippines

  • G.R. No. 170525 - Baron Republic Theatrical Major Cinema, et al. v. Normita P. Peralta and Edilberto H. Aguilar

  • G.R. No. 170540 - Eufemia vda. De Agatep v. Roberta L. Rodriguez, et al.

  • G.R. No. 170738 - Rizal commercial Banking Corporation v. Marcopper Mining Corporation

  • G.R. No. 170790 - Angelito Colmenares v. Hand Tractor Parts and Agro-Industrial Corp.

  • G.R. No. 170925 - Rodolfo A. Aspillaga v. Aurora A. Aspillaga

  • G.R. No. 171088 - People of the Philippines v. Leonard L. Bernardino alias Onat

  • G.R. No. 171175 - People of the Philippines v. Arturo F. Duca

  • G.R. No. 171587 - Eastern Shipping Lines, Inc. v. Ferrer D. Antonio

  • G.R. No. 171832 - Antipolo Properties, Inc. (now Prime East Properties, Inc.) v. Cesar Nuyda

  • G.R. No. 172013 - Patricia Halague a, et al. v. Philippine Airlines, Inc.

  • G.R. No. 172077 - Bicol Agro-Industrial Producers Cooperative, inc. (BAPCI) v. Edmundo O. Obias, et al.

  • G.R. No. 172359 - China Banking Corporation v. The Commsissioner of Internal Revenue

  • G.R. No. 172710 - People of the Philippines v. Alberto Buban

  • G.R. No. 172885 - Manuel Luis S. Sanchez v. Republic of the Philippines, Represented by the Department of Education, Culture and Sports

  • G.R. No. 172925 - Government Service Insurance System v. Jaime Ibarra

  • G.R. No. 172986 - Arnulfo A. Aguilar v. Court of Appeals, Civil Service Commission and Commission on Elections

  • G.R. No. 173615 - Philippine National Bank v. Cayetano A. Tejano, Jr.

  • G.R. No. 173923 - Pedro Mago (deceased), represented by his spouse Soledad Mago, et al. v. Juana Z. Barbin

  • G.R. No. 173990 - Edgardo V. Estarija v. People of the Philippines, represented by Solicitor General and Edwin Ranada

  • G.R. No. 174451 - Veronica Cabacungan Alcazar v. Rey C. Alcazar

  • G.R. No. 174477 - People of the Philippines v. Renato Bracia

  • G.R. No. 174497 - Heirs of Generoso Sebe, et al. v. Heirs of Veronico Sevilla, et al.

  • G.R. No. 174642 - Dominador C. Villa v. Government Service Insurance System, (GSIS), represented by Angelina A. Patino, Fielf Office Manager, GSIS, Dinalupihan, Bataan Branch, and/or Winston F. Garcia, President and General Manager, GSIS

  • G.R. No. 174859 - People of the Philippines v. Jofer Tablang

  • G.R. No. 175317 - People of the Philippines v. Cristino Ca'ada

  • G.R. No. 175399 - Ophelia L. Tuatis v. Spouses Eliseo Escol and Visminda Escol, et al.

  • G.R. No. 175644 and G.R. No. 175702 - Department of Agrarian Reform, rep. OIC-Secretary Nasser C. Pangandaman v. Jose Marie Rufino, et al.

  • G.R. No. 175855 - Celebes Japan Foods Corp. (etc.) v. Susan Yermo, et al.

  • G.R. No. 176070 - People of the Philippines v. Anton Madeo

  • G.R. No. 176527 - People of the Philippines v. Samson Villasan y Banati

  • G.R. No. 176566 - Eliseo Eduarte Coscolla v. People of the Philippines

  • G.R. No. 176863 - Gregorio Destreza v. Atty. Ma. Garcia Ri oza-Plazo, et al.

  • G.R. No. 176933 - The People of the Philippines v. Luis Plaza y Bucalon

  • G.R. No. 177024 - The Heritage Hotel Manila (Owned and operated by Grand Plaza Hotel Corp.) v. Pinag-isang galing and lakas ng mga manggagawa sa Heritage Manila (Piglas-Heritage)

  • G.R. No. 177113 - Sta. Lucia Realty & Development, Inc. v. Spouses Francisco & Emelia Buenaventura, as represented by Ricardo Segismundo

  • G.R. No. 177710 - Sps. Ramon Lequin and Virgina Lequin v. Sps. Raymundo Vizconde, et al.

  • G.R. No. 177809 - Spouses Omar and Moshiera Latip v. Rosalie Pala'a Chua

  • G.R. No. 178083 - Flight Attendants and Stewards Association of the Philippines (FASAP) v. Philippine Airlines, Inc.

  • G.R. No. 178229 - Miguel A. Pilapil, et al. v. C. Alcantara & Sons, Inc., et al.

  • G.R. No. 178199 - People of the Philippines v. Yoon Chang Wook

  • G.R. No. 178429 - Jose C. Go v. Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas

  • G.R. No. 179063 - Commissioner of Internal Revenue v. United Coconut Planters Bank

  • G.R. No. 178479 - Metropolitan Bank & Trust Co. v. Nikko Sources International Corp. and Supermax Philippines, Inc.

  • G.R. No. 179507 - Eats-Cetera Food Services Outlet and/or Serafin Remirez v. Myrna B. Letran, et al.

  • G.R. No. 179537 - Philippine Economic Zone Authority v. Edison (Bataan) CoGeneration Corporation

  • G.R. No. 179714 - People of the Philippines v. Rodolfo Lopez

  • G.R. No. 179748 - People of the Philippines v. Feblonelybirth T. Rubio and Joan T. Amaro

  • G.R. No. 179756 - Rizal Commercial Banking Corporation v. Royal Cargo Corporation

  • G.R. No. 179931 - People of the Philippines v. Nida Adeser y Rico

  • G.R. No. 180421 - People of the Philippines v. Domingo Alpapara, Pedro Alpapara, Alden Paya, Mario Bicuna

  • G.R. No. 180718 - Henlin Panay Company and/or Edwin Francisco/Angel Lazaro III v. National Labor Relations Commission and Nory A. Bolanos

  • G.R. No. 180778 - Rural Bank of Dasmari as v. Nestor Jarin, Apolinar Obispo, and Vicente Garcia in his capacity as Register of Deeds of the Province of Cavite

  • G.R. No. 180803 - Land Bank of the Philippines v. J. L. Jocson and Sons

  • G.R. No. 181085 - People of the Philippines v. Nemesio Aburque

  • G.R. No. 181206 - Megaworld Globus Asia, Inc. v. Mila S. Tanseco

  • G.R. No. 181232 - Joseph Typingco v. Lina Lim, Jerry Sychingco, et al.

  • G.R. No. 181528 - Hector T. Hipe v. Commssion on Elections and Ma. Cristina L. Vicencio

  • G.R. No. 181559 - Leah M. Nazareno, et al. v. City of Dumaguete, et al.

  • G.R. NOS. 181562-63 and G.R. NO. 181583-84 - City of Cebu v. Spouses Ciriaco and Arminda Ortega

  • G.R. No. 181744 - The People of the Philippines v. Roy Bacus

  • G.R. No. 181869 - Ismunlatip H. Suhuri v. The Honorable Commssion on Elections (En Banc), The Municipal Board of Canvassers of Patikul, Sulu and Kabir E. Hayundini

  • G.R. No. 181969 - Romago, Inc. v. Siemens Building Technologies, Inc.

  • G.R. No. 182065 - Evelyn Ongsuco and Antonia Salaya v. hon. Mariano M. Malones, etc.

  • G.R. No. 182259 - Dionisio Ignacio, et al. v. People of the Philippines

  • G.R. No. 182499 - Concepcion Faeldonia v. Tong Yak Groceries, et al.

  • G.R. No. 182673 - Aqualab Philippines, Inc. v. Heirs of Marcelino Pagobo, et al.

  • G.R. No. 182836 - Continental Steel Manufacturing Corporation v. Hon. Accredited Voluntary Arbitrator Allan S. Montano, et al.

  • G.R. No. 183322 - Gov. Antonio P. Calingin v. Civil Service Commission and Grace L. Anayron

  • G.R. No. 183606 - Charlie T. Lee v. Rosita Dela Paz

  • G.R. No. 183619 - People of the Philippines v. Salvino Sumingwa

  • G.R. No. 184645 - Jose T. Barbieto v. Hon. Court of Appeals, et al.

  • G.R. No. 184702 - People of the Philippines v. Christopher Talita

  • G.R. No. 184778 - Bangko Sentral ng Pilipinas Monetary Board and Chuci Fonancier v. Hon. Nina G. Antonio-Valenzuela, etc., et al.

  • G.R. No. 184792 - People of the Philippines v. Alfredo Dela Cruz y Miranda, alias "DINDONG"

  • G.R. No. 184874 - Robert Remiendo y Siblawan v. The People of the Philippines

  • G.R. No. 184957 - People of the Philippines v. grace Ventura y Natividad

  • G.R. No. 185066 - Philippine Charter Insurance Corporation v. Philippine National Construction Corporation

  • G.R. No. 185159 - Subic Telecommunications Company, Inc. v. Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority and Innove Communications, Inc.

  • G.R. No. 185251 - Raul G. Locsin and Eddie B. Tomaquin v. Philippine Long Distance Telephone Company

  • G.R. No. 185261 - Wallem Maritime Services, Inc. and Scandic Shipmanagement Limited v. Eriberto S. Bultron

  • G.R. No. 185285 - People of the Philippines v. Paul Alipio

  • G.R. No. 185726 - People of the Philippines v. Darwin Bernabe y Garcia

  • G.R. No. 186001 - Antonio Cabador v. People of the Philippines

  • G.R. No. 186006 - Norlainie Mitmug Limbona v. Commssion on Elections and Malik "Bobby" T. Alingan

  • G.R. No. 186101 - Gina A. Domingo v. People of the Philippines

  • G.R. No. 186119 - People of the Philippines v. Pablo Lusabio, Jr. y vergara, Tomasito De Los Santos and John Doe (Accused)

  • G.R. No. 186139 - People of the Philippines v. Leonardo Rusiana y Broquel

  • G.R. No. 186201 - Carmelinda C. Barror v. The Commission on Elections, et al.

  • G.R. No. 186233 - Peopel of the Philippines v. Romeo Satonero @ Ruben

  • G.R. No. 186380 - People of the Philippines v. Manuel Resurreccion

  • G.R. No. 186390 - People of the Philippines v. Rosemarie R. Salonga

  • G.R. No. 186418 - People of the Philippines v. Alfredo, Jr. a.k.a. Jun Lazaro y Aquino

  • G.R. No. 186566 - Rep. Luis R. Villafuerte, et al. v. Gov. Oscar S. Moreno, et al.

  • G.R. No. 187074 - People of the Philippines v. Allan Del Prado y Cahusay

  • G.R. No. 187084 - People of the Philippines v. Carlito Pabol

  • G.R. No. 187428 - Eugenio T. Revilla, Sr. v. The Commission on Elections and Gerardo L. Lanoy

  • G.R. No. 187531 - People of the Philippines v. Elmer Peralta y Hidalgo

  • G.R. No. 188308 - Joselito R. Mendoza v. Commission on Elections and Roberto M. Pagdanganan

  • G.R. No. 188742 - Superlines Transportation Company, Inc. v. Eduardo Pinera

  • G.R. No. 188961 - Air France Philippines/KLM Air France v. John Anthony De Camilis

  • G.R. No. 189303 - People of the Philippines v. Felix Casas Perez