Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 44 views

    People of The Philippines V. Hallarte: G.R. No. 205382 - 02 April 2014 Credibility of Witnesses

    Uploaded by

    AJ Arugay
    This document summarizes a Supreme Court case from the Philippines. It discusses whether the elements of murder were met for convicting Casas. The Court ruled that Casas was not properly convicted of murder because the prosecution did not establish treachery as the qualifying circumstance. Specifically, the victim Joel was aware of the danger to his life when he intervened in Casas' fight with Eligio while Casas was armed with a knife. Additionally, Casas did not deliberately adopt means to ensure Joel had no means of defense, as he stabbed Joel after Joel slipped, without taking time for careful reflection.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People of The Philippines V. Hallarte: G.R. No. 205382 - 02 April 2014 Credibility of Witnesses

    Uploaded by

    AJ Arugay
    44 views1 page
    This document summarizes a Supreme Court case from the Philippines. It discusses whether the elements of murder were met for convicting Casas. The Court ruled that Casas was not properly convicted of murder because the prosecution did not establish treachery as the qualifying circumstance. Specifically, the victim Joel was aware of the danger to his life when he intervened in Casas' fight with Eligio while Casas was armed with a knife. Additionally, Casas did not deliberately adopt means to ensure Joel had no means of defense, as he stabbed Joel after Joel slipped, without taking time for careful reflection.

    Original Description:

    crim

    Original Title

    People v. Casas

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document summarizes a Supreme Court case from the Philippines. It discusses whether the elements of murder were met for convicting Casas. The Court ruled that Casas was not properly convicted of murder because the prosecution did not establish treachery as the qualifying circumstance. Specifically, the victim Joel was aware of the danger to his life when he intervened in Casas' fight with Eligio while Casas was armed with a knife. Additionally, Casas did not deliberately adopt means to ensure Joel had no means of defense, as he stabbed Joel after Joel slipped, without taking time for careful reflection.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    44 views1 page

    People of The Philippines V. Hallarte: G.R. No. 205382 - 02 April 2014 Credibility of Witnesses

    Uploaded by

    AJ Arugay
    This document summarizes a Supreme Court case from the Philippines. It discusses whether the elements of murder were met for convicting Casas. The Court ruled that Casas was not properly convicted of murder because the prosecution did not establish treachery as the qualifying circumstance. Specifically, the victim Joel was aware of the danger to his life when he intervened in Casas' fight with Eligio while Casas was armed with a knife. Additionally, Casas did not deliberately adopt means to ensure Joel had no means of defense, as he stabbed Joel after Joel slipped, without taking time for careful reflection.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES v.

    HALLARTE
    G.R. No. 205382| 02 April 2014
    Credibility of Witnesses

    DOCTRINE: Obvious awareness of the danger to one’s life discounts treachery as a qualifying circumstance.

    FACTS:
     Two (2) criminal Informations were filed before the RTC charging Casas of the Murder of Joel Tabile (Joel) and the Frustrated
    Murder of Eligio Ruiz (Eligio), because he stabbed the former for trying to help the latter who was engaged in a fist fight against
    Casas.
     He was convicted of murder and attempted homicide by the RTC which the CA affirmed; hence, his appeal to the SC.
    ISSUE: Whether or not Casas was properly convicted for the crime of Murder
    RULING: NO.
    • The elements of Murder that the prosecution must establish are: (a) that a person was killed; (b) that the accused killed him or her; (c) that
    the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 248 of the RPC; and (d) that the killing is not parricide or
    infanticide.
    • Among the qualifying circumstances thus enumerated in Article 248 is treachery. Under Article 14 of the RPC, "there is treachery when the
    offender commits any of the crimes against the person, employing means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and
    specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make." In other words, to
    appreciate treachery, it must be shown that: (a) the means of execution employed gives the victim no opportunity to defend himself or
    retaliate; and (b) the methods of execution were deliberately or consciously adopted; indeed, treachery cannot be presumed, it must be
    proven by clear and convincing evidence.
    • In this case, the records show that a fistfight ensued between Eligio and Casas. Joel, seeing that Casas had stabbed Eligio, wanted to help the
    latter by using a bamboo pole but slipped and fell. As he was lying prostrate on the floor, Casas delivered the blows that ended Joel's life.
    Under these circumstances, it is the Court's observation that Joel was fully aware of the danger posed in assisting Eligio. He knew that Casas
    was armed with a knife and had just used the same on Eligio. Joel elected to intervene, and even armed himself with a bamboo pole.
    Accordingly, it is rather obvious that Joel was aware of the danger to his life. Further, acting in the heat of the moment, and there being no
    showing that no appreciable interval of time had elapsed from Joel's mishap to his stabbing so as to allow for the assailant's careful reflection,
    it does not equally appear that Casas deliberately adopted means in order to ensure that Joel had no opportunity to defend himself or
    retaliate. Palpably, Casas just happened to stab Joel as the latter had just slipped on the floor when the former caught up with him (Joel).
    Evidently, this lack of deliberation on the part of Casas, as well as Joel's obvious awareness of the danger to his life, prompts this Court to
    discount treachery as a qualifying circumstance.

    You might also like