People v. Mendoza, GR No.

L-2371, May 5, 1950

====================
Villanueva v. Ortiz, GR No. L-15344, May 30, 1960
JOSE

R.

VILLANUEVA,

City

Attorney

of

the

City

of

Butuan, petitioner, vs.

THE HON. MONTANO A. ORTIZ, Judge of the Court of First Instance of Agusan, ANTONIO MORDENO and MALAQUIAS
FORTUN, respondents.

Facts: In the barrio of Butuan City, while the board of election inspectors were in session
performing their duties as such inspectors and poll clerk in Precinct 36-A in the last general
election held on November 1953, the said accused cooperating and helping one another,
entered one of the rooms of Ba-an Elementary School where the precinct was then located
and where inspectors and poll clerk of said precinct was then holding their meeting to
canvass the result of the election in said precinct, and the accused Mondeno did then and
there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and use personal violence upon
the person of N. Medrano, a duly appointed and qualified inspectors of said precinct and
while performing his official duties as such inspectors and on the occasion of such
performance by then and there boxing him and the accused Fortun, did then and there
willfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and use personal violence upon the
person of A. Lupos, a duly appointed watcher in said precinct and while performing his
duties as such watcher thereby causing serious disturbance and interrupting or disturbing
public performance and functions of said precinct 36-A and 35-A.
Issue: Whether the accused should be charge with crime of assault with disturbance of
public order?
Ruling: Yes. The accused are charged to have committed not only the crime of assault upon
a person in authority defined in Article 148 of the RPC but also that of disturbance of public
order defined in Article 153. It is alleged that the accused by laying hands upon election
inspectors and watchers in public places, had caused serious disturbance and interrupted or
disturbed public performances and functions. The accused are thus charged with the
complex crime of assault upon a person in authority with disturbance of public order.The
resolution complained of is declared null and void, and the Court of First Instance of
Agusan is hereby ordered to render judgment in the criminal cases above-mentioned in
consonance with law and the evidence presented before it during the trial. No costs.

Note: The Revised Penal Code (Article 148) imposes the penalty of imprisonment of prision correccional in its medium and
maximum periods and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos upon anyone who commits the crime of direct assault when, as in these
cases, the offender lays hands upon a person in authority. And Article 153 of the same Code imposes the penalty of arresto
mayor in its medium period to prision correccional in its minimum period and a fine not exceeding 1,000 pesos for any serious
disturbance in a public place, office or establishment, or interruption of disturbance of public performances, functions or
gathering of peaceful meetings. Each separate crime charged in the information is, therefore, punishable with imprisonment of
more than six months and a fine of more than two hundred pesos

People v. Gayrama, GR Nos. 39270 and 39270 71, October 30, 1934 (long 2 cases)
Facts(2 in 1,long facts): Felix Gayrama was charged in the Court of First Instance of
Leyte in two cases with murder with assault upon agents of persons in authority, the victim
in the former case being policeman Placido Delloro , and in the latter chief of police
Fernando Corpin; with frustrated murder with assault upon an agent of persons in
authority in another case , and furthermore with serious physical injuries in another .The
two crimes with which the appellant was charged were the climax of some enc ounters on
April 1931, in the municipality of Biliran, Leyte, between F. Gayrama, a brother of said
appellant, and Aragon, on one side, and Corpin, Rosales, Nierras and others. On said date
the registration of voters in the electoral census took place in the different election precints
of said municipality. The electors therein were then divided into two factions: one in favor of
the candidacy for municipal president of the then incumbent E. Nierras who ran for
reelection and the other which, in turn, favored the candidacy of Francisco Tonelete who
aspired for the same office.
Regarding the deceased Placido Delloro, the evidence shows that he was on guard in the
municipal building when he was informed of the aggression committed by the appellant on
municipal president E. Nierras and chief of police Fernando Corpin. As soon as he had
received the municipal president's order to capture said appellant, he left his post in order
to comply with said order and, before discharging his revolver at the appellant, he made
himself known as a peace officer by shouting to said appellant, Justice! Justice! for the
purpose of suggesting to the latter to surrender. Inasmuch as the appellant would not stop
but instead continued to run toward him, bolo in hand, said policeman prepared to fire
another shot at the appellant and it was while he was in this position that the appellant
rushed at him to strike him on the wrist of his hand holding the revolver, forcing him to
drop said weapon. While the deceased Delloro was trying to pick up said revolver with his

left hand, the appellant shoved him, felling him to the ground, and forthwith repeatedly
struck him with his (appellant's) bolo until he died.
Issue: Does the appellant's act of depriving policeman Placido Delloro of his life also
constitute homicide with assault upon an agent of persons in authority?
Ruling: Yes. The court was already convinced that the appellant committed the two
complex crimes of homicide with assault with which he was charged, the next question to be
decided is that which concerns the penalty or penalties which should be imposed upon him.
Wherefore, with the modification that the appellant is sentenced in each of said cases Nos. 8922 and 8923 of the Court of First
Instance of Leyte (G.R. Nos. 39270 and 39271), to the indeterminate penalty of from twelve years and one day to fourteen
years, eight months and one day of reclusion temporal, and to indemnify the heirs of the deceased Fernando Corpin and
Placido Delloro in the sum of P1,000, the appealed judgment is affirmed in all other respects, with costs against the appellant.

People v. Acierto, GR No. 36595, November 28, 1932

Facts: On March 2, 1931, while the offended party, H. Velasco, duly appointed postmaster
for the municipality of Bacarra, Ilocos Norte, was in his office and counting two rolls of
twenty-peso bills amounting in all to P4,000, the accused, L. Acierto, entered the office
without the postmaster's noticing it. Without saying a word, the accused took one of the
rolls, but the postmaster caught hold of his hand and took away the money, saying: "Get out
of here, Lawyer, because we have plenty of work". For the third time the offended party said
to the defendant: "Go away now," and the latter answered: "I don't want to leave."
Displeased with this answer, the offended party approached the defendant quietly, and took
hold of his left hand to conduct him outside. Whereupon the lawyer hit him in the right eye
with his fist, and making him lose his balance. When he recovered, the accused again hit
him, first in the right frontal region, and then below the left eye. The offended party
shouted for help, and a member of the municipal police, as well as his office companions,
came up. As a result of the blows he had sustained, the offended party suffered an

ecchymosis(bruise) in the orbit of the left eye, and another in the frontal region, which took
seven days to heal completely.
Issue: Whether the accused is guilty of assault upon an agent of a person in authority
Ruling: Yes, (1) That a postmaster is an agent of a person in authority; and (2) that the
slight physical injuries sustained by such an agent as a result of the defendant's laying
hands upon him, are inherent in the offense of assault upon an agent of a person in
authority. Wherefore, the judgment appealed from is modified, and the accused-appellant is
held to be guilty of assault upon an agent of a person in authority, and sentenced to suffer
one year, one month, and eleven days of prision correccional, and to pay a fine of P100, with
subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, plus costs.
The same offense is punished in article 148 of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty fixed being that of prision correccional in
the minimum degree, and a fine not exceeding P500 which is less severe than the penalty prescribed by the old Penal Code for
the same crime, and in accordance with article 22 of the Revised Penal Code, and the accused not being an habitual criminal,
the penalty provided by article 148 above-mentioned must be imposed.