Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 197539 2014-06-02	PEOPLE v. ANGELITA I. DAUD LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
It was not necessary for the prosecution to still prove that appellant himself received the placement fees from private complainants and issued receipts for the same, given the finding of both the RTC and the Court of Appeals of the existence of conspiracy among appellant and his co-accused Hanelita and Daud, appellant's wife and mother-in-law, respectively. When there is conspiracy, the act of one is the act of all.[23] It is not essential that there be actual proof that all the conspirators took a direct part in every act. It is sufficient that they acted in concert pursuant to the same objective.[24]
	GR No. 195419 2011-10-12	PEOPLE v. HADJA JARMA LALLI Y PURIH CARPIO, J.
In People v. Gallo,[42] the Court enumerated the elements of syndicated illegal recruitment, to wit: (1) the offender undertakes either any activity within the meaning of "recruitment and placement" defined under Article 13(b), or any of the prohibited practices enumerated under Art. 34 of the Labor Code;