Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. ABUNDIO ROLUNA

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 182417 2013-04-03	PEOPLE v. ALBERTO GONZALES Y SANTOS BERSAMIN, J.
Given the high concern for the due recording of the authorized movements and custody of the seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant sources of dangerous drugs or laboratory equipment, the presentation as evidence in court of the dangerous drugs subject of and recovered during the illegal sale is material in every prosecution for the illegal sale of dangerous drugs.[17] Without such dangerous drugs being presented as evidence, the State does not establish the corpus delicti, which, literally translated from Latin, refers to the body of the crime, or the actual commission by someone of the particular offense charged.[18] Corpus delicti, as the Court puts it in People v. Roluna,[19] is: xxx the body or substance of the crime and, in its primary sense, refers to the fact that a crime has been actually committed. As applied to a particular offense, it means the actual commission by someone of the particular crime charged. The corpus delicti is a compound fact made up of two (2) things, viz: the existence of a certain act or result forming the basis of the criminal charge, and the existence of a criminal agency as the cause of this act or result. [20]
	GR No. 189330 2012-11-28	FIRST DIVISION PEOPLE v. LOUIE CATALAN Y DEDALA BERSAMIN, J.
Based on this statutory concern for the due recording of the authorized movement and custody of the seized drugs or controlled chemicals or plant sources of dangerous drugs or laboratory equipment, the presentation as evidence in court of the dangerous drugs subject of the illegal sale is material in every prosecution for the illegal sale of dangerous drugs.[23] To be sure, the dangerous drugs are themselves the corpus delicti, which, literally translated from Latin, refers to the body of the crime, or the actual commission by someone of the particular offense charged.[24] Corpus delicti, as the Court puts it in People v. Roluna,[25] is: xxx the body or substance of the crime and, in its primary sense, refers to the fact that a crime has been actually committed. As applied to a particular offense, it means the actual commission by someone of the particular crime charged. The corpus delicti is a compound fact made up of two (2) things, viz: the existence of a certain act or result forming the basis of the criminal charge, and the existence of a criminal agency as the cause of this act or result. [26]
	GR NO. 165884 2007-04-23	CIELITO R. GAN v. PEOPLE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Petitioner contends that he cannot be held liable for the charges on the ground that he was not caught in possession of the missing funds. This is clutching at straws. To be caught in possession of the stolen property is not an element of the corpus delicti in theft. Corpus delicti means the "body or substance of the crime, and, in its primary sense, refers to the fact that the crime has been actually committed."[69] In theft, corpus delicti has two elements, namely: (1) that the property was lost by the owner, and (2) that it was lost by felonious taking.[70] In the case before us, these two elements were established. The amounts involved were lost by WUP because petitioner took them without authority to do so.
	GR No. 147817 2004-08-12	FELICISIMO RIETA v. PEOPLE PANGANIBAN, J.
We do not agree. Corpus delicti refers to the specific injury or loss sustained.[13] It is the fact of the commission of the crime[14] that may be proved by the testimony of eyewitnesses.[15] In its legal sense, corpus delicti does not necessarily refer to the body of the person murdered,[16] to the firearms in the crime of homicide with the use of unlicensed firearms,[17] to the ransom money in the crime of kidnapping for ransom,[18] or -- in the present case -- to the seized contraband cigarettes.[19]
	GR No. 146481 2003-04-30	ARTURO G. RIMORIN SR. v. PEOPLE PANGANIBAN, J.
We disagree. The Court, on several occasions, has explained that corpus delicti refers to the fact of the commission of the crime charged[15] or to the body or substance of the crime.[16] In its legal sense, it does not refer to the ransom money in the crime of kidnapping for ransom[17] or to the body of the person murdered.[18] Hence, to prove the corpus delicti, it is sufficient for the prosecution to be able show that (1) a certain fact has been proven -- say, a person has died or a building has been burned; and (2) a particular person is criminally responsible for the act.[19]