Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 78 views

    FACTS: Accused-Appellants Dario Cabanas Cual and Dario Maranan Villoceno Were Charged W

    Uploaded by

    Kayee Kat
    Two men, Dario Cabanas Cual and Dario Maranan Villoceno, were charged with murdering Ramil Macasalhig Sabturani with a bolo. The trial court found them guilty, believing the prosecution's case over the defense's claim of self-defense. It noted the 21 stab wounds indicated conspiracy between the two. It sentenced Cual to life imprisonment and Villoceno to a lower term, viewing him as an accomplice for grappling the victim. On appeal, the court found Villoceno was not an accomplice, as there was no evidence he knew of or agreed to Cual's plan, and his struggling with the victim did not show unity with Cual's

    Copyright:

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

    FACTS: Accused-Appellants Dario Cabanas Cual and Dario Maranan Villoceno Were Charged W

    Uploaded by

    Kayee Kat
    78 views1 page
    Two men, Dario Cabanas Cual and Dario Maranan Villoceno, were charged with murdering Ramil Macasalhig Sabturani with a bolo. The trial court found them guilty, believing the prosecution's case over the defense's claim of self-defense. It noted the 21 stab wounds indicated conspiracy between the two. It sentenced Cual to life imprisonment and Villoceno to a lower term, viewing him as an accomplice for grappling the victim. On appeal, the court found Villoceno was not an accomplice, as there was no evidence he knew of or agreed to Cual's plan, and his struggling with the victim did not show unity with Cual's

    Original Description:

    People vs Cual

    Original Title

    People vs Cual

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    Two men, Dario Cabanas Cual and Dario Maranan Villoceno, were charged with murdering Ramil Macasalhig Sabturani with a bolo. The trial court found them guilty, believing the prosecution's case over the defense's claim of self-defense. It noted the 21 stab wounds indicated conspiracy between the two. It sentenced Cual to life imprisonment and Villoceno to a lower term, viewing him as an accomplice for grappling the victim. On appeal, the court found Villoceno was not an accomplice, as there was no evidence he knew of or agreed to Cual's plan, and his struggling with the victim did not show unity with Cual's

    Copyright:

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

    FACTS: Accused-Appellants Dario Cabanas Cual and Dario Maranan Villoceno Were Charged W

    Uploaded by

    Kayee Kat
    Two men, Dario Cabanas Cual and Dario Maranan Villoceno, were charged with murdering Ramil Macasalhig Sabturani with a bolo. The trial court found them guilty, believing the prosecution's case over the defense's claim of self-defense. It noted the 21 stab wounds indicated conspiracy between the two. It sentenced Cual to life imprisonment and Villoceno to a lower term, viewing him as an accomplice for grappling the victim. On appeal, the court found Villoceno was not an accomplice, as there was no evidence he knew of or agreed to Cual's plan, and his struggling with the victim did not show unity with Cual's

    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

    FACTS: Accused-appellants Dario Cabanas Cual and Dario Maranan Villoceno were charged w

    ith the crime of murder. The information filed states that the two accused, armed with a sharp
    bolo attacked and killed Ramil Macasalhig Sabturani.

    The trial court was of the impression that the prosecution's version of the events and witnesses
    was more credible than those of the defense. It struck down appellant's tale of self-defense
    particularly of the contention of the defense that the victim was the aggressor and that he was
    armed with a lead pipe.

    The court also stated that the presence of 21 stab wounds could not have been inflicted without
    the conspiracy and mutual participation of the two accused-appellants. Wit h respect to accused-
    appellant Dario Villoceno, the court was convinced that he was an accomplice to the murder as
    his act of grappling with the victim for the possession of a lead pipe gave accused-appellant
    Dario Cual the "necessary inspi ration and impetus in consummating the act of murder. 

    The court held the two accused guilty sentencing Dario Cual to suffer the penalty of
    imprisonment of Reclusion Perpetua for not being a heinous crime, and Dario Villoceno to suffer
    the penalty of Reclusion Temporal which is the next lower i n degree to that of reclusion
    perpetua. 

    Issue: Whether or not the deliberate grappling of the victim by Villocenco for the possession of a
    steel pipe was sufficient to hold him as an accomplice?

    Held: No. Under current jurisprudence, in order that a person may be considered an accomplice,
    the following requisites must concur: (1) community of design; that is, knowing the criminal
    design of the principal by direct participation, he concurs with the latter in his purpose; (2) that
    he cooperates in the execution of the offense by previous or simultaneous acts, with the intention
    of supplying material and moral aid in the execution of the crime in an efficacious way; and (3)
    that there be a relation between the acts and those attributed to the person charged as an
    accomplice. In the case at bench, there is nothing in the records which show that accused-
    appellant Villoceno knew that accused Cual was going to hack Ramil Sabturani. Neither was it
    shown that accused-appellant Villoceno concurred in the criminal design of his co-accused. The
    only involvement of accused-appellant Cual in the incident was when he was engaged in a
    struggle with the victim just before Villoceno made his initial attack on the victim. This
    circumstance does not by itself show his unity with the criminal design of Villoceno. On this
    point, we are inclined to believe his testimony that the struggle was not deliberate on his part and
    that, in fact, it was the victim who initiated the struggle. The victim, who had just been deprived
    of a job opportunity by accused-appellant Cual, surely had more reason to feel aggrieved and
    thus engage accused-appellant Cual to a fight. The fact that accused-appellant Cual immediately
    disengaged from his struggle with the victim after Villoceno's attack is yet another indication that
    he is innocent of the charge against him. Verily, if he had indeed conspired with Villoceno, he
    would have continued to hold the victim and prevent him from escaping until he expired from
    Villoceno's attack.

    You might also like