Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 2009 > October 2009 Decisions > G.R. No. 176070 - People of the Philippines v. Anton Madeo :




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

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. NO. 176070 : October 2, 2009]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, v. ANTON MADEO, Appellant.

D E C I S I O N

DEL CASTILLO, J.:

Rape is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which a man keeps a woman in a state of fear and humiliation. Thus, it is not even impossible for a victim of rape not to make an outcry against an unarmed assailant.1 Physical resistance is immaterial in a rape case when the victim is sufficiently intimidated by her assailant and she submits against her will because of fear for her personal safety.2

Assailed before us is the 16 October 2006 Decision3 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 01551 which affirmed the Decision4 of the Regional Trial Court of Urdaneta City, Branch 46 in Criminal Case No. U-10600 finding appellant Anton Madeo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay the victim the sum of P50,000.00 as moral damages and P20,000.00 as exemplary damages, with modification that appellant is further ordered to pay the sum of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity.

On 4 April 2000, an Amended Information was filed charging appellant Anton Madeo with the crime of Rape committed as follows:

That on or about December 7, 1999, in the afternoon, at Labit West, Urdaneta City and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, knowing fully well of the mental disability, emotional disorder and/or physical handicap of the offended party, "AAA"5 at the time of the commission of the rape, and by means of force and intimidation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously have sexual intercourse with said "AAA," against her will and without her consent, to her damage and prejudice.

Contrary to Art. 266-A, par. 1(a), Revised Penal Code, as amended by Rep. Acts 7659 and 8353.6

During arraignment, appellant entered a plea of "not guilty."7 Trial on the merits thereafter ensued.

The prosecution presented Dr. Noel U. Obedoza who testified that he examined AAA on 5 January 2000. According to Dr. Obedoza, the victim was conscious and coherent during the interview.8 However, the physical examination results indicated that she had a ruptured hymen and healed hymenal lacerations9 about three weeks old.10 On the other hand, Dr. Bernadette M. Quitoriano testified that she conducted psychological and mental examinations on the person of AAA whom she found to have a mental age of a 5 - year old.11

AAA's mother also testified that on 5 January 2000, she noticed that her daughter was pale and trembling; that when asked if she has any problem, AAA answered "none;"12 that when further asked if somebody touched her private parts, AAA cried and told her that appellant touched her private parts and warned her not to tell anyone or he would kill her family;13 that she and her husband immediately brought AAA to a hospital for examination and to the NBI to report the crime.14

Complaining witness, AAA, also took the witness stand. She testified that on 7 December 1999 at about 3 o'clock in the afternoon, she was on her way to her grandmother's house when her classmate, Jovelyn Fortuna (Jovelyn), invited her to the house of her uncle, herein appellant Madeo;15 that soon thereafter Jovelyn left AAA alone with appellant16 who summoned AAA to his room; that when she did not comply, appellant forcibly pulled her inside the room,17 undressed her and thereafter touched her private parts;18 that appellant likewise undressed, ordered AAA to lie down, went on top of her and proceeded to have carnal knowledge of her;19 that she felt pain in her private parts;20 that thereafter, appellant warned AAA not to reveal to anyone what happened or he would kill her and her family; that after the sexual assault, appellant put on his pants; that AAA also put on her shorts and was told to go home;21 that after some time she narrated the incident to her mother who brought her to the hospital for medical examination and to the NBI to report the incident.22

The defense presented Jovelyn as its first witness. She testified that she was staying at her grandmother's house at Labit West, Urdaneta City, Pangasinan;23 that her uncle, appellant herein, also stays in the said house;24 that on 7 December 1999 she was sick25 and did not see her uncle or AAA.26

Melanie Andrada also testified for the defense. She claimed that Jovelyn is her niece while appellant is her cousin;27 that on 7 December 1999, she visited Jovelyn who was sick;28 and that during her visit, she did not see AAA or appellant.29

The defense also presented Olimpia Yesa who testified that on 7 December 1999, from 3 to 7 p.m., she was at the house of Epifania Madeo, appellant's mother, as she was treating Jovelyn who was sick.30

To establish the whereabouts of appellant, the defense presented Virgilio Jacob who testified that on 7 December 1999, he and appellant were working in a mobile rice mill owned by Roger Madolid at Labit West, Urdaneta City.31

Finally, the defense presented appellant who denied the charges against him. He claimed that on 7 December 1999, he was working at the rolling rice mill together with Berting Jacob, Etong, Rommel, Roger Madolid who owned the rice mill and another person whose name he forgot;32 that from 6 o'clock in the morning up to 6 o'clock in the afternoon, they traveled to several barangays in Urdaneta City to mill rice; and that he did not see the victim on said date.33 On cross-examination, appellant averred that he did not have any quarrel with the victim and that he could not understand why the latter would file the charges against him.34

On rebuttal, the prosecution presented Roger Madolid who denied hiring Virgilio Jacob and appellant as workers in his rolling rice mill. He testified that on 7 December 1999, his rolling rice mill was under repair at the Andrada Repair Shop in Nancamaliran, Urdaneta City.35

On 24 August 2000, the Regional Trial Court of Urdaneta City, Branch 46, rendered its Decision, the dispositive portion of which reads:

WHEREFORE, JUDGMENT is hereby rendered, CONVICTING ANTON MADEO beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of SIMPLE RAPE and the Court sentences him to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua; Anton Madeo is hereby ordered to indemnify "AAA" the sum of P50,000.00 as moral damages and P20,000.00 as exemplary damages.

The Branch Clerk of Court of this Court is hereby ordered to prepare the mitimus immediately.

The Jail Warden, Bureau of Jail Management and Penology (BJMP) Urdaneta District Jail, Urdaneta City, is hereby ordered to deliver the living person of Anton Madeo to the National Bilibid Prisons, Muntinlupa City, immediately upon receipt of this Decision.

SO ORDERED.36

The trial court held that although Dr. Quitoriano testified that AAA has a mental age of 5 - years old, the latter is only simple-minded as she was able to finish grade school and has a mental age of more than seven years old. The court below found the testimony of the victim credible and straightforward and corroborated by the medical findings. Likewise, the age of the healed hymenal lacerations coincided with the date of the commission of the crime. On the other hand, the court below disregarded appellant's alibi for being self-serving.

Appellant filed an appeal before the Court of Appeals. In his Brief,37 he alleged that the trial court erred in finding that he employed force and intimidation in consummating the rape.38 He also argued that the victim's actuations did not show the kind of resistance expected of a woman defending her virtue. In particular, appellant asserted that AAA voluntarily accepted the invitation to enter appellant's room; that she did not make any outcry or sought the help of the neighbors despite the lack of danger to her life; that she was not rendered unconscious during the intercourse; that she only used her hands but not her feet in warding off appellant's advances; and that the medical report did not indicate that AAA suffered any physical injury.39

Appellant likewise argued that the trial court erred in finding that the victim was mentally deficient.40 He alleged that when AAA was presented on the witness stand, she was 22 years old and was in 2nd year high school.41 Finally, appellant alleged that the victim may have been coerced by her mother to testify falsely against him in order to have the sole management of the land which she jointly tills with the appellant.42

In the Appellee's Brief,43 the Office of the Solicitor General countered that appellant's argument of consensual congress should be dismissed because it was clearly established that appellant employed force, threats and intimidation. It was also shown that AAA was deceived to join Jovelyn inside the house of appellant; that the victim's failure to shout could not yield the inference that no rape was committed; and that the mental retardation of AAA was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

On 16 October 2006, the Court of Appeals rendered its Decision affirming with modification the Decision of the Regional Trial Court, the dispositive portion of which reads:

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant appeal is hereby DISMISSED, and the Decision appealed from rendered by the Regional Trial Court of Urdaneta City, Branch 46, dated August 24, 2000, in Criminal Case No. U-10600 is hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that accused-appellant is hereby ORDERED to pay private complainant an additional Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) as and by way of civil indemnity.

SO ORDERED.44

The appellate court noted that the issues raised by appellant deal with the victim's credibility and appreciation of facts, both of which lie in the province of the trial court. At any rate, the Court of Appeals found that the trial court did not overlook or mis-appreciate any material fact that warrants a reversal of its findings.45

The appellate court likewise found that the victim testified in a spontaneous and straightforward manner; that there was nothing in her testimony that detracts from her claim that she was indeed raped; that her failure to make an outcry did not mean that she was not raped; that the fact that she did not shout could be attributed to the warning she received from the appellant; that it is not true that the victim did not resist the advances of the appellant; and that AAA's failure to offer tenacious resistance does not make her submission to the criminal acts of the appellant voluntary.46

Anent the award of damages, the Court of Appeals held that AAA is entitled to an additional amount of P50,000.00 by way of indemnity ex delicto.47

On 7 March 2007, the Court resolved to notify the parties to file, if they so desire, their respective supplemental briefs.48 Both parties manifested that they were no longer submitting their supplemental briefs since they have already extensively discussed their arguments in their respective briefs.49

Article 266-A of the Revised Penal Code provides:

ART. 266-A. Rape, When and How Committed. - Rape is committed -

1. By a man who shall have carnal knowledge of a woman under any of the following circumstances:

A. Through force, threat or intimidation;

b. When the offended party is deprived of reason or is otherwise unconscious;

c. By means of fraudulent machination or grave abuse of authority;

d. When the offended party is under twelve (12) years of age or is demented, even though none of the circumstances mentioned above is present;

x x x x.

Thus, in the instant case, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that appellant had carnal knowledge of AAA through the use of force, threats or intimidation.

We have carefully examined the records of the case and we find that both the trial court and the Court of Appeals correctly held that appellant is guilty of the crime of simple rape. The testimony of the victim clearly established that appellant had sexual intercourse with her without her consent and against her will by employing force, threats and intimidation. Her narration of her harrowing experience is enlightening, thus:

Q On December 7, 1999 at 3:00 0 clock in the afternoon, do you remember where you were?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q Where were you?cralawred

A I was walking going to the house of my grandmother, sir.

Q Were you able to reach the house of your grandmother on that date and time?cralawred

A No, sir.

Q Why were you not able to reach the house of your grandmother?cralawred

A That was the time when Anton Madeo raped me, sir.

Q Will you kindly tell this Honorable Court how this incident happened and started?cralawred

A I was walking going to the house of my grandmother, Jovelyn called me, sir.

Q What is the family name of this Jovelyn?cralawred

A I only know her to be Jovelyn, sir.

COURT Is he a man or a woman?cralawred

A A woman, sir.

ATTY. BONGOLAN Do you know if this Jovelyn who called you has any relationship with Anton Madeo?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q How are they related?cralawred

A Jovelyn is the niece of Anton Madeo, sir.

Q Where was Jovelyn when she called you?cralawred

A She was in the yard of Madeo, sir.

COURT So, you were walking and called by Jovelyn in the yard of Madeo?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

ATTY. BONGOLAN What did she say when she called you?cralawred

A Jovelyn told me, "come AAA I have something to tell you".

COURT Is that your nickname AAA?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

ATTY BOLONGAN What did you do?cralawred

A I responded to the call of Jovelyn, sir.

Q What happened when you got near Jovelyn?cralawred

A We greeted each other, sir.

Q What else?cralawred

A She invited me to get inside the house, sir.

Q Do you know where Anton Madeo was at the time?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q Where was he?cralawred

A Inside their house, sir.

Q Did you go inside the house as invited by Jovelyn?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q When you got inside the house did you notice any other person aside from the three of you?cralawred

A No more, sir.

COURT

By the way, the place where you were walking is it a pathway, barrio road or municipal road?cralawred

A It is a road, sir.

Q The place where Jovelyn was at the time, was it divided by a wall or barb wire or nothing was placed in between the road?cralawred

A None, sir.

Q When you were already inside the house of Anton Madeo and Jovelyn, what did Jovelyn do?cralawred

A She went out laughing, sir.

Q After she left what happened?cralawred

A (No answer yet, a question was raised by the Court).

COURT Did you find out why she was laughing?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q What was the reason why she went out laughing?cralawred

A Because she told, "come AAA inside the house".

Q Do you know the reason why she went out x x x and why she went out laughing?cralawred

A Because Anton Madeo pulled me inside his room, sir.

Q Did you comply?cralawred

A No, sir, I did not?cralawred

Q What is your understanding when Jovelyn went out laughing?cralawred

A She was laughing, sir.

Q Is it because you were left alone with Anton Madeo and she went out laughing?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

ATTY BOLONGAN Before Anton Madeo pulled you to his room, what did he do then?cralawred

A He warned me and he said: "if you shout I will kill you".

COURT Where did he pull you?cralawred

A In his room, sir.

Q Otherwise what?cralawred

A He will kill me, sir.

ATTY BOLONGAN After he pulled you to his room and warned if you will scream or shout what did he do next if any?cralawred

A He suddenly undressed me, sir.

Q Will you tell us how he undressed you?cralawred

A He held my two hands and then he undressed me, sir.

Q What part of your dress was removed first?cralawred

A My shorts, sir.

Q While he was removing your shorts what did you do if you did anything?cralawred

A I was pushing him but he was heavy I cannot push him away, sir.

Q After that what did he do if any?cralawred

A And then he removed my panty, sir.

Q What did he do to you when your panty was being removed?cralawred

A He touched my vagina, sir.

COURT The touching of your vagina, is it actual touching or inserting his penis or some other way?cralawred

A After touching my vagina he undressed himself, sir.

ATTY. BOLONGAN After undressing himself what did he do next if any?cralawred

A I was made to lie down and then he went on top of me, sir.

Q When he went on top of you what did you do?cralawred

A I was struggling but I cannot push him because he was heavy, sir.

Q When he was on top of you and you were trying to free yourself struggling what happened next?cralawred

A He forced his organ to insert in my vagina, sir.

COURT When you said, "he forced his organ in my vagina" what do you mean by his organ?cralawred

A His penis, sir.

COURT She is not a retarded.

ATTY BOLONGAN That is according to the findings of the Doctor, Your Honor.

Q When he forcibly inserted his penis into your private parts what did you feel?cralawred

A My vagina is painful, sir.

Q How long was he on top of you after inserting his penis in your vagina?cralawred

A A little bit long, sir.

Q Can you estimate how long he was on top of you?cralawred

COURT If I were you I will not ask that question that is dangerous.

ATTY BOLONGAN I will withdraw the question, Your Honor.

ATTY BOLONGAN After that what happened?cralawred

A He said, "if you will not give what I want, I will kill you together with your father and mother".

Q I am asking what he did if any after he was already on top of you and after he inserted his penis into your organ?cralawred

A The penis was inserted in my vagina, sir.

Q After that what did he do?cralawred

A After that he warned me and he said, "if you shout I will kill you and your parents".

Q Did he finally get off from you?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q What did he do after he got off from you?cralawred

A He put on his pants, sir.

Q How about you?cralawred

A I also put on my shorts and stood up, sir.

Q When you stood up, did you notice something in your person?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q What was that?cralawred

A My vagina was bleeding, sir.

Q Before that incident were you already touched by a man?cralawred

A None except him, sir.

Q Did he tell you anything as you put on your dress?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q What did he tell you?cralawred

A I was sent home, sir.

Q Did he not tell you anything more?cralawred

A If you report I will kill you and your father and mother.

Q But inspite of that threat did you report this matter to anyone?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q To whom did you report?cralawred

A My mother, sir.

Q What did your mother do when you reported to her?cralawred

A My mother reported the same to my father, sir.

Q What did your parents do if they did anything?cralawred

A I was examined at the Center, sir.

Q You are referring to the Rural Health Unit of Urdaneta City?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q Were you brought to any hospital for further examination?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q Where were you brought, what hospital?cralawred

A At the Center, sir.

Q Aside from the Center where were you brought?cralawred

A Emergency hospital, sir.

Q Are you referring to Don Amadeo Perez Memorial General Hospital?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q Who was with you when you were brought there?cralawred

A My mother, sir.

Q What happened first in the hospital?cralawred

A We were asked questions, sir.

Q When you said "we" who were your companions?cralawred

A My mother, sir.

Q Do you know who interviewed you at the hospital?cralawred

A I forgot the name, sir.

Q After you were interviewed what happened next?cralawred

A I was submitted for examination to determine pregnancy test, sir.

Q Do you remember having been examined by a Doctor?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q Do you know the Doctor who examined you in the hospital?cralawred

A I forgot the name, sir.

Q After you were examined in the hospital do you know if this matter was brought to the authorities?cralawred

A Yes, sir.

Q Where, what Police station or authorities?cralawred

A At the NBI, sir.

Q Where is that office of the NBI where you were brought?cralawred

A Urdaneta City, sir.

Q What happened at the NBI Office?cralawred

A We were asked questions, sir.50

We find no merit in appellant's contention that the victim's actuations did not show the kind of resistance expected of a woman defending her virtue. Time and again, we have held that "the behavior and reaction of every person cannot be predicted with accuracy. It is a time-honored precept that different people react differently to a given situation or type of situation and there is no standard form of behavioral response when one is confronted with a strange or startling or frightful experience. Not every rape victim can be expected to act conformably to the usual expectations of everyone. Some may shout; some may faint; and some may be shocked into insensibility; while other may openly welcome the intrusion."51 ???�r?bl?�


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