Reodica v. CA
Reodica v. CA
Reodica v. CA
Reodica v. CA
8 July 1998
CASE PRINCIPLE: Art. 48 RPC: when a single act constitutes two or more
grave or less grave felonies, or when an offense is necessary a means for
committing the other, the penalty for the most serious crime shall be
imposed, the same to be applied in its maximum period.
FACTS:
• Isabelita Reodica was allegedly recklessly driving a van and hit
Norberto Bonsol causing him physical injuries and damage to property
amounting to P8,542.00. Three days after the accident, a complaint
was filed before the fiscal’s office against the petitioner. She was
charged of "Reckless Imprudence Resulting in Damage to Property
with Slight Physical Injury." After pleading not guilty, trial ensued.
ISSUE:
1. Whether or not there is a complex crime applying Article 48 of the
RPC?
RULING:
1. NO. Art. 48 on penalty for complex crime provides that when a single
act constitutes two or more grave or less grave felonies, or when an
offense is necessary a means for committing the other, the penalty for
the most serious crime shall be imposed, the same to be applied in its
maximum period. Both offenses cannot constitute a complex crime
because reckless imprudence resulting to slight physical injuries is not
either a grave or less grave felony.
2. NO. Rule 120, section 3 of the Rules of Court provides that when two
or more offenses are charged in a single complaint and the accused
fails to object against it before the trial, the court may convict the
accused to as many offenses as charged and impose a penalty for each
of them.