Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered as follows: In Criminal Case No. 19676 , accused Pedro S. Giron[,] Jr., Gertrude S.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered as follows: In Criminal Case No. 19676 , accused Pedro S. Giron[,] Jr., Gertrude S. Sucias, Orlando B. Cedro, Robert G. Lala, and Felixberto B. Arreza are all ACQUITTED on the basis of reasonable doubt. In Criminal Case No. 19675 , the guilt of accused Pedro S. Giron[,] Jr., Leticia Gujilde-Crizaldo and Orlando B. Cedro having been proven beyond reasonable doubt, they are hereby found guilty as principals, and accordingly this Court sentences each one of them in default of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances to an indeterminate prison term of SIX (6) MONTHS and ONE DAY of Prision Correccional as minimum to SIX (6) YEARS[,] EIGHT (8) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY of Prision Mayor as maximum and to pay a fine of Five Thousand (P5,000.00) each without any subsidiary liability in case of insolvency. Accused Emiliano T. Salang is hereby ACQUITTED on the basis of reasonable doubt[.] [H]is participation [is] seemingly limited to the acts before the actual construction of the project[.] In Criminal Case No. 17352 [,] the prosecution having established the guilt of accused Felixberto B. Arreza beyond reasonable doubt for having conspired with accused Pedro Giron[,] Jr.[,] Leticia Gujilde-Crizaldo and Orlando B. Cedro[,] [this Court] hereby finds him guilty as principal for violation of Article 172 of the Revised Penal Code , and accordingly sentences him, in the absence of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances, to an indeterminate prison term of FOUR (4) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY of ARRESTO MAYOR as minimum to FOUR (4) YEARS[,] NINE (9) MONTHS and TEN (10) DAYS of Prision Correccional as maximum and to pay a fine of FIVE THOUSAND pesos (P5,000.00) with subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency. All those found guilty shall pay the costs proportionately. The facts from which civil liability could have arisen not having been adequately established[,] there is no pronouncement as to the same. SO ORDERED.
G.R. No. 220500 - CRISTINA AMPOSTA-MORTEL, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.
G.R. No. 220500 -
CaseG.R. Nos. 248086-93 - ROLANDO BOLASTIG MONTEJO, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.
G.R. Nos. 248086-93 -
CaseG.R. No. 190970 - VILMA M. SULIMAN, VS. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 190970 -