Discharge of Accused as State Witness

The conditions for the discharge of an accused as a state witness are as follows:

1. There is absolute necessity for the testimony of the accused whose discharge is requested;
2. There is no other direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense committed, except the testimony of said accused;
3. The testimony of said accused can be substantially corroborated in its material points;
4. Said accused does not appear to be the most guilty; and
5. Said accused has not at any time been convicted of any offense involving moral turpitude. (People v. Estacio, G.R. No. 171655, July 22, 2009)

Litis Pendentia

The requisites of litis pendentia are: (a) the identity of parties, or at least such as representing the same interests in both actions; (b) the identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the relief being founded on the same facts; and (c) the identity of the two cases such that judgment in one, regardless of which party is successful, would amount to res judicata in the other. (Villarica v. Gernale, G.R. No. 163344, March 20, 2009)

Extra-Judicial Confession

Thus, we have held that an extra-judicial confession is admissible in evidence if the following requisites have been satisfied: (1) it must be voluntary; (2) it must be made with the assistance of competent and independent counsel; (3) it must be express; and (4) it must be in writing. (People v. Reyes, G.R. No. 178300, March 17, 2009)

Malversation

The essential elements common to all acts of malversation under Article 217 of the Revised Penal Code are the following:

1. That the offender be a public officer.
2. That he had the custody or control of funds or property by reason of the duties of his office.
3. That those funds or property were public funds or property for which he was accountable.
4. That he appropriated, took, misappropriated or consented or, through abandonment or negligence, permitted another person to take them. (People vs. Pantaleon, Jr., G.R. No. 158694-96. March 13, 2009)

Falsification under par. 1, Art. 172

The elements of falsification of documents under paragraph 1, Article 172 of the RPC are:

1. that the offender is a private individual or a public officer or employee who did not take advantage of his official position;
2. that he committed any of the acts of falsification enumerated in Article 171 of the RPC; and
3. that the falsification was committed in a public, official or commercial document. (Panuncio v. People, G.R. No. 165678, July 17, 2009)

Substituted Service

For substituted service to be justified, the following circumstances must be clearly established: (a) personal service of summons within a reasonable time was impossible; (b) efforts were exerted to locate the party; and (c) the summons was served upon a person of sufficient age and discretion residing at the party’s residence or upon a competent person in charge of the party’s office or place of business. (Sansio v. Mogol, G.R. No. 177007, July 14, 2009)

In Sandoval II v. HRET, the Court enumerated the requisites of a valid substituted service: (1) service of summons within a reasonable time is impossible; (2) the person serving the summons exerted efforts to locate the defendant; (3) the person to whom the summons is served is of sufficient age and discretion; (4) the person to whom the summons is served resides at the defendant’s place of residence; and (5) pertinent facts showing the enumerated circumstances are stated in the return of service. In Sandoval, the Court held that “statutory restrictions for substituted service must be strictly, faithfully and fully observed.” (Galura v. Math-Agro Corporation, G.R. No. 167230. August 14, 2009)

Qualified Theft

In précis, the elements of qualified theft punishable under Article 310 in relation to Articles 308 and 309 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) are as follows:

1. There was a taking of personal property.
2. The said property belongs to another.
3. The taking was done without the consent of the owner.
4. The taking was done with intent to gain.
5. The taking was accomplished without violence or intimidation against person, or force upon things.
6. The taking was done under any of the circumstances enumerated in Article 310 of the RPC, i.e., with grave abuse of confidence. (Matrido v. People, G.R. No. 179061. July 13, 2009)

Impossible Crime

Thus, the requisites of an impossible crime are: (1) that the act performed would be an offense against persons or property; (2) that the act was done with evil intent; and (3) that its accomplishment was inherently impossible, or the means employed was either inadequate or ineffectual. (Jacinto v. People, G.R. No. 162540, July 13, 2009)

Urban Land Reform

In Dimaculangan v. Casalla, the Court was emphatic in ruling that the protective mantle of P.D. No. 1517 and P.D. No. 2016 extends only to landless urban families who meet these qualifications: a) they are tenants as defined under Section 3(f) of P.D. No. 1517; b) they built a home on the land they are leasing or occupying; c) the land they are leasing or occupying is within an Area for Priority Development and Urban Land Reform Zone; and d) they have resided on the land continuously for the last 10 years or more. (Estreller v. Ysmael, G.R. No. 170264, March 13, 2009)

Reconstitution

From the foregoing, the following must be present for an order for reconstitution to issue: (a) that the certificate of title had been lost or destroyed; (b) that the documents presented by petitioner are sufficient and proper to warrant reconstitution of the lost or destroyed certificate of title; (c) that the petitioner is the registered owner of the property or had an interest therein; (d) that the certificate of title was in force at the time it was lost and destroyed; and (e) that the description, area and boundaries of the property are substantially the same as those contained in the lost or destroyed certificate of title. (Republic v. Tuastumban, G.R. No. 173210, April 24, 2009)

Law of the Case

The law of the case applies only when (1) a question is passed upon by an appellate court, and (2) the appellate court remands the case to the lower court for further proceedings; the lower court and even the appellate courts on subsequent appeal of the case are, thus, bound by how such question had been previously settled. It must be emphasized, therefore, that the law of the case finds application only in the same case between the same parties. (Lopez v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 168734, April 24, 2009)

Voluntary Surrender

For the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender to be appreciated, the defense must prove that:

1. the offender had not been actually arrested;
2. the offender surrendered himself to a person in authority;
3. the surrender was spontaneous and voluntary. (People v. Obligado, G.R. No. 171735, April 16, 2009)

Transfer of Stocks

For a valid transfer of stocks, the requirements are as follows: (a) there must be delivery of the stock certificate; (b) the certificate must be endorsed by the owner or his attorney-in-fact or other persons legally authorized to make the transfer; and (c) to be valid against third parties, the transfer must be recorded in the books of the corporation. (Raquel-Santos v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 174986, July 7, 2009)

Default

There are three requisites necessary for a finding of default. First, the obligation is demandable and liquidated; second, the debtor delays performance; and third, the creditor judicially or extrajudicially requires the debtor’s performance. (Raquel-Santos v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 174986, July 7, 2009)

Check Off

The Court further determines that the requisites for a valid levy and check-off of special assessments, laid down by Article 241(n) and (o), respectively, of the Labor Code, as amended, have not been complied with in the case at bar. To recall, these requisites are: (1) an authorization by a written resolution of the majority of all the union members at the general membership meeting duly called for the purpose; (2) secretary's record of the minutes of the meeting; and (3) individual written authorization for check-off duly signed by the employee concerned. (Marino v. Gamilla, G.R. No. 149763, July 7, 2009)

Plain View

The “plain view” doctrine applies when the following requisites concur: (a) the law enforcement officer in search of the evidence has a prior justification for an intrusion or is in a position from which he can view a particular area; (b) the discovery of the evidence in plain view is inadvertent; (c) it is immediately apparent to the officer that the item he observes may be evidence of a crime, contraband or otherwise subject to seizure. (Revaldo v. People, G.R. No. 170589, April 16, 2009)

Accretion

But it must be stressed that accretion as a mode of acquiring property under Article 457 of the Civil Code requires the concurrence of the following requisites: (1) that the deposition of soil or sediment be gradual and imperceptible; (2) that it be the result of the action of the waters of the river; and (3) that the land where accretion takes place is adjacent to the banks of rivers. (New Regent v. Tanjuatco, G.R. No. 168800, April 16, 2009)

Reconveyance

To warrant a reconveyance of the land, the following requisites must concur: (1) the action must be brought in the name of a person claiming ownership or dominical right over the land registered in the name of the defendant; (2) the registration of the land in the name of the defendant was procured through fraud or other illegal means; (3) the property has not yet passed to an innocent purchaser for value; and (4) the action is filed after the certificate of title had already become final and incontrovertible but within four years from the discovery of the fraud, or not later than 10 years in the case of an implied trust. (New Regent v. Tanjuatco, G.R. No. 168800, April 16, 2009)

Res Gestae

A declaration made spontaneously after a startling occurrence is deemed as part of the res gestae when (1) the principal act, the res gestae is a startling occurrence; (2) the statements were made before the declarant had time to contrive or devise; and (3) the statements concern the occurrence in question and its immediately attending circumstances. (Zarate v. RTC, G.R. No. 152263, July 3, 2009)

Conventional Compensation

However, we recognize the concept of conventional compensation, defined as occurring “when the parties agree to compensate their mutual obligations even if some requisite is lacking, such as that provided in Article 1282.” It is intended to eliminate or overcome obstacles which prevent ipso jure extinguishment of their obligations.

The only requisites of conventional compensation are (1) that each of the parties can dispose of the credit he seeks to compensate, and (2) that they agree to the mutual extinguishment of their credits. (UPSUMCO v. G.R. No. 126890, April 2, 2009)

Abandonment

To constitute abandonment, two elements must concur: (1) the failure to report for work or absence without valid or justifiable reason, and (2) a clear intent, manifested through overt acts, to sever the employer-employee relationship. (Pentagon v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 174141, June 26, 2009)