Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 109 views

    Marifosque vs. People

    Uploaded by

    FV
    1. The petitioner, a police sergeant, was accused of directly receiving money from a victim in exchange for recovering stolen gas cylinder tanks. 2. The key issue is whether the petitioner is liable for the crime of direct bribery. 3. The Supreme Court found the petitioner guilty of direct bribery, as all elements of the crime were met: the petitioner was a public officer who directly received money in consideration of performing an act in his official duties.

    Copyright:

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

    Marifosque vs. People

    Uploaded by

    FV
    109 views1 page
    1. The petitioner, a police sergeant, was accused of directly receiving money from a victim in exchange for recovering stolen gas cylinder tanks. 2. The key issue is whether the petitioner is liable for the crime of direct bribery. 3. The Supreme Court found the petitioner guilty of direct bribery, as all elements of the crime were met: the petitioner was a public officer who directly received money in consideration of performing an act in his official duties.

    Original Title

    35. Marifosque vs. People.docx

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    1. The petitioner, a police sergeant, was accused of directly receiving money from a victim in exchange for recovering stolen gas cylinder tanks. 2. The key issue is whether the petitioner is liable for the crime of direct bribery. 3. The Supreme Court found the petitioner guilty of direct bribery, as all elements of the crime were met: the petitioner was a public officer who directly received money in consideration of performing an act in his official duties.

    Copyright:

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

    Marifosque vs. People

    Uploaded by

    FV
    1. The petitioner, a police sergeant, was accused of directly receiving money from a victim in exchange for recovering stolen gas cylinder tanks. 2. The key issue is whether the petitioner is liable for the crime of direct bribery. 3. The Supreme Court found the petitioner guilty of direct bribery, as all elements of the crime were met: the petitioner was a public officer who directly received money in consideration of performing an act in his official duties.

    Copyright:

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

    Valenton, Francis Angelo T.

    Criminal Law 2

    1S

    Marifosque vs. People (G.R. No. 156685)

    Facts: The petitioner is Nazario N. Marifosque. The respondent is the People of the Philippines.
    In the case at bar. A certain Hian Hian Yu Sy wento to the Chief of the Intelligence and
    Operating Division in Region 5 to report the robbery of Shellane tanks at a gasoline station of
    her father and was allegedly to have been attempted to be extorted by the herein petitioner in
    exchange of the recovery of the lost times. Hence, Captain Salvo made an entrapment operation.
    The police asset approached the petitioner and ask if he could get P350 per cylinder tank as his
    reward money. The petitioner said that such collection of money for cylinder tank was only on
    behalf of a police asset and that he already have an advance P1,000 to said asset and collecting
    merely the balance of P4,800.

    Issue: Is the petitioner liable for direct bribery

    Held: The Supreme Court said that the crime of direct briber needs four elements to concur for
    conviction. These are: “(1) that the accused is a public officer; (2) that he received directly or
    through another some gift or present, offer or promise; (3) that such gift, present or promise has
    been given in consideration of his commission of some crime, or any act not constituting a crime,
    or to refrain from doing something which it is his official duty to do; and (4) that the crime or act
    relates to the exercise of his functions as a public officer.” They said that there was no question
    that the petitioner was a public officer since he was a police sergeant. He also directly received
    money from Yu So Pong in exchange for the recovery of the stolen cylinder tanks. Hence. He is
    guilty for said crime.

    You might also like