LEX SCEPTICUS

Plants vs Zombies 2 (Mediafire) The zombies are coming… back. It’s about time! The sequel to the hit action-strategy adventure brings the fun to tablets and touchscreens. Join Crazy Dave on a crazy adventure where you’ll meet, greet and defeat legions of zombies from the dawn of time to the end of days. Amass an army of powerful new plants, supercharge them with Plant Food and power up your defenses with amazing new ways to protect your brain. And that's just the beginning! The future holds many mysteries… also zombies. Lots and lots of zombies. “Not just good, not even just great, but an instant classic.” —NBCNews.com “An experience that’s every bit as challenging and rewarding as the original.” —Kotaku “Plants vs. Zombies 2 is a must-download.” —CNET Game Features • Meet powerful new plants that will defend your lawn through time • Go toe-to-missing-toe with dozens of new zombies • Supercharge your floral friends with healthy doses of Plant Food • Fire up amazing

Dexter the Game 2 (Mediafire) The official game based on the hit original TV series Dexter, play as Dexter Morgan in an open-world Miami. Investigate crime scenes as a blood spatter expert for the Miami police, stalk suspected killers, and unleash Dexter’s Dark Passenger on the lowlife criminals who have evaded the reach of the law. Features: - Dexter is voiced by Series star and executive producer Michael C. Hall - A new suspect and crime scene are generated each time you play - Listen to your iTunes music library while driving Dexter’s car - Earn blood slide trophies and unlock new kill weapons & vehicles Dexter the Game 2.apk - 8 MB Dexter the Game 2 (OBB File) - 163 MB

Leviste vs CA  GR No 189122                                                                 March 17, 2010 Facts: Jose Antonio Leviste  was charged with the crime of murder but was convicted by the RTC for the lesser crime of homicide. He appealed the RTC's decision to the CA then he field an application for admission to bail pending appeal, due to his advanced age and health condition, and claiming the absence of any risk or possibility of flight on his part. The CA denied his application on the ground that the discretion to extend bail during the course of appeal should be exercised with grave caution and only for strong reasons. That bail is not a sick pass for an ailing or aged detainee or a prisoner needing medical care outside the prison facility. On this matter, Levisete questioned the ruling of the CA and averred that the CA committed grave abuse of discretion in the denial of his application for bail considering that none of the conditions justifying denia

Canlas et. al., vs NAPICO Homeowners Association  GR No 182795                                                                                  June 5, 2008 Facts: Petitioners are settlers in a certain parcel of land. Their dwellings have been demolished or is about to be demolished pursuant to a court judgment. They filed a petition for writ of amparo to summon some unprincipled Land Officials as they allege to answer their participation in the issuance of fraudulent titles to NAPICO.  Issue: Whether or not  writ of amparo is proper in this case. Ruling: No, writ of amparo is a remedy available to any person whose right to life, liberty, and security is violated or threatened with violation by an unlawful act or omission of a public official or employee, or of a private individual or entity. The threatened demolition is not included among the enumeration of rights protected by the writ. Their claim to their dwelling does not constitute right to life, liberty,

Quelnan vs People  GR No 166061                                                                                      July 6, 2007 Facts: Sometime in 1996, the Police Assistance and Reaction Against Crime (PARAC) was tasked to implement a search warrant to a certain Bernard Lim for probably possessing MA HCI (Shabu). The team was escorted to the unit by the security officer (Punsaran), upon arrival at the place to be searched, a male person naked from the waist up opened the door, which was later identified as Quelnan. The team presented the search warrant and proceeded with the search. In the presence of Quelnan and Punsaran, they found on top of a bedroom table 3 pieces of transparent plastic sachet containing white crystalline substance which was later examined as Shabu. The next day, Quelnan was arrested for violation of Sec. 16 Art. III of RA 6425. Quelnan in his defense averred that he is not residing in the said unit, but he is the registered owner of the said unit

People vs Meliton Jalbuena GR No 171163                                                                                          July 4, 2007 Facts: In the morning of August 1996, AAA a minor, was raped by her father Jalbuena. while her mother BBB was out of the house, Jalbuena approached AAA while she was in bed and pulled down her underwear, placed himself on top of her, and inserted his penis in her vagina. AAA was threatened not to report the incident to anyone, otherwise something bad will happen to her. The incident happened on two other occasions, the last was in the morning and witnessed by her uncle CCC while Jalbuena was on top of her. CCC reported what he saw to AAA’s grandfather who advised AAA to avoid her father, to an aunt as well as to BBB who refused to believe it. AAA thereafter, told her two classmates about the incident which reported the same to their teacher, who in turned reported and brought her to the school principal. Dr. Salumbides then examined

Rizal Alih et. al., vs Castro GR No L-69401                                                                                 June 23, 1987 Facts: A group of more than 200 Philippine marines and home defense forces raided the compound occupied by the petitioners (Rizal Alih et. al.) is search of loose firearms, ammunition and other explosives. The people inside the compound resisted the invasion and a crossfire between the Philippine marines and the petitioner occurred, resulting in number of casualties. The petitioners surrendered the next morning and 16 occupants were arrested, later to be finger-printed, paraffin-tested and photographed over their objection. The military also inventoried and confiscated several M16 rifles, M14 rifle, rifle grenades and rounds of ammunition. Petitioner filed a petition for prohibition and mandamus with preliminary injunction and restraining order. Their purpose was to recover the articles seized from them, to prevent these from being used as evi

Desierto vs Heirs of Margarita Ventura GR No 151800                                                    November 5, 2009 Facts: Heirs of Margarita Ventura ( the Heirs) filed with the Office of the Ombudsman a complaint for Falsification of Public Documents and violation of Sec. 3 (e) of RA 3019 against Zenaida Palacio and spouses Edilberto and Celerina Darang. Palacio being the OIC of DAR designated Celerina to investigate the claims of the Heirs agaist her former husband Edilberto. Celerina supported the report with public documents which she falsified and Palacio issed a recommendation based on that report to award the landholding in dispute to Edilberto. The DARAB recommended that the charged against the respondents be dismissed for insufficiency of evidence. The CA then took cognizance of the case and granted the provisional dismissal the complaint against respondent for violation of Sec 3 (e) of RA 3019 but denied the dismissal of the complaint for falsification of

MERALCO, Alexander Deyto and Ruben Sapitula vs Rosarion Gopez Lim GR No 184769                                                                   October 5, 2010 Facts: Lim is an administrative clerk at MERALCO, an anonymous letter was posted at the door of her assigned office denouncing respondent. By Memorandum of Alexander (head of MERALCO Human Resource Staffing), he directed the transfer of respondent to another sector due to the accusations and threats against her from unknown individuals and which could possible compromise her safety and security. Lim then requested deferment of his transfer, but due to futility, she filed a TRO for her transfer and a petition for issuance of a writ of habeas data against MERALCO commanding MERALCO, to wit: Full disclosure of a the data or information about respondent in relation to the report purportedly received by petitioners on the alleged threat to her safety and security;  The nature of such data and te purpose of its collection;

Ramiscal Jr vs SANDIGANBAYAN and People of the Philippines GR Nos 172476-99                                                                         September 15, 2010 Facts: Ramiscal Jr (Ramiscal) was a retired officer of AFP and the former president of AFP-Retirement and Separation Benefits System (AFP-RSBS). During his incumbency, the BOD of AFP-RSBS approved the acquisition of 15,020 sq. m. of land for development as housing projects. On August 1, 1997 AFP-RSBS as represented by Ramiscal Jr., and Flaviano the attorney-in-fact of 12 individual vendors executed and signed a bilateral Deed of Sale (1st Deed) over the subject property at the agreed price of P 10,500.00 per sq. m. After the payment @ P 10,500.00 per sq. m., Flaviano executed and signed a unilateral Deed of Sale (2nd Deed) over the same property with a purchase price of P 3,000.00 per sq. m. Thereafter the 2nd Deed was presented by Flaviano for registration which became the basis of the Certificate of Title of the s

People vs Combate GR No 189301                                                 December 15, 2010 Facts: Jose Pepito Combate (Combate) was charged for killing Edmundo O. Prayco and Leopoldo P. Guiro, Jr. The prosecution’s version of the facts was that on March 16, 1995, Tomaro parked hiss passenger jeepney at the garage of Leopoldo’s mother, at the house of Leopoldo. Upon entering the gate of Leopoldo’s house he met Leopoldo and Edmundo who was on their way out and also invited him to join then in drinking liquor which he decline for he was already tired. As he was about to went up the stairs he heard a gunshot. He rushed back to the road and saw Combate pointing a gun at the fallen Leopoldo. Edmund was about to intervene, but Combate also shot him at a very close range. Thereafter he fired another shot against Leopoldo. Tomaro rushed to help them and pleaded for his life, but, Combate pointed his gun at Tomaro and pulled the trigger but the gun did not fire. TOmaro then

Bonifacio et al., vs RTC Makati and Jessie John Gimenez GR No 184800                                                                           May 5, 2010 Facts: Jessie John Gimenez (Gimenez) filed in behalf of Yuchenco Family of Yuchenco Group of Companies (YGC) and Malayan Insurance Co., (Malayan), a criminal complain for 13 counts of libel under Art. 355 in relation to Art. 353 of the RPC against the members of Paents Enabling Parents Coalition Inc (PEPCI), a group of discontented planholders of Pacific Plans, Inc (PPI) which is owned by the Yuchengco’s, for they previously purchased traditional pre-need educational plans but were unable to collect thereon or avail of the benefits of such after PPI, due to liquidity concerns, filed for corporate rehabilitation with prayer of suspension of payments. That PEPCI members owns and moderates a website and a blog with web domains: www.pacificnoplan.blogspot.com, www.pepcoalition.com, and no2pep2010@yahoogroups.com. Gimenez alleg

Case Digest: LBP vs Honeycomb Farms Corp GR No 166259                                                                         November 12, 2012 Facts: Honeycomb Farms Corp. (HFC) is a registered owner of a parcel of land covered by TCT No. T-2550 with an area of 29.0966 hectares. Through a letter HFC voluntarily offered its land to the DAR for acquisition pursuant to CARP for P 581,932.00 @ P 20,000.00 per hectare. The DAR and LBP determined an acquirable and compensable area of 27.5871 hectares while the remaining were excluded for being hilly and underdeveloped. LBP pursuant to DAR-AO No. 6 fixed the value of the land in the amount of P 165,739.44. HFC rejected the said valuation and filed with the DARAB a petition for determination of just compensation. HFC claimed that the just compensation should be in the amount of P 25,000.00 per hectare considering its location and productivity for a total of P 725,000.00. Pending this case, HFC filed a complaint for determinat

Case Digest: LBP vs Heirs of Maximo Puyat and Gloria Puyat  GR No 175055                                                              June 27, 2012 Facts: Gloria and Maximo Puyat (deceased) owns a parcel of riceland consisting of 46.8731 hectares. The said land was subjected to acquisition pursuant to PD 27 but the records does not show when the DAR acquired the same. Sometime in December 1989 DAR then, issued several emancipation patents in favor of various farm-beneficiaries. The Puyat's however, did not receive any compensation for the acquisition. Sometime in September 1992 LBP received DAR's instruction to pay the just compensation to the Puyats. The LBP made its evaluation, but the heirs of the Puyat rejected the valuation and filed a complain for determination of just compensation with the RTC. The following are the valuation of the property: LBP = P 92,752.10 @ P 2,012.50 per hectare (in compliance wit the formula under PD 27 and EO 228. LBP also cont

LBP vs Montinola-Escarilla and Co., Inc. GR No 178046                                                                        June 13, 2012 Facts: Montinola-Escarilla and Co., Inc., (MECO) is the owner of a parcel of agricultural land covered by OCT No. T-70 with an area of 159.0881 hectares was acquired by the government under RA 6657. LBP initially valued the subject land at P 823,204.08 but MECO rejected the valuation. Pending summary administrative proceedings for determination of just compensation before the RARAD, MECO filed a complaint for determination of just compensation before the RTC which appointed 4 Board of Commissioners (BOC) to evaluate and appraise the just compensation for the subject property covering 4.4825 hectares of rainfed rice land and 154.6056 hectares of idle land. Then the RARAD rendered a decision fixing the just compensation at P 823,204.08. The BOC was not able to come up iwth a unified valuation of the subject property. The RTC fixed the just

Natalia Realty, Inc. and Estate Developer and Investors Corp vs DAR GR No 103302                                                                                     August 12, 1993 Facts: Natalia is the owner of 3 contiguous parcels of land with an area of 120.9793 hectares, 1.3205 hectares and 2.7080 hectares or a total of 125.0078 hectares, which are covered by TCT No. 31527. Presidential Proclamation No. 1637 set aside 20,312 hectares of land as townsite areas to absorb the population overspill in the metropolis which were designated as the Lungsod Silangan Townsite. The Natalia properties are situated within the areas proclaimed as townsite reservation. Since private landowners were allowed to develop their properties into low-cost housing subdivisions with the reservation, petitioner EDIC as developer of Natalia applied for and was granted preliminary approval and location clearances by the Human Settlements Regulatory Commission, which Natalia thereafter became Antipolo

Case Digest: Atlas Fertilizer Corp vs DAR  GR No 97855                                                                   June 19, 1997 Facts: This is a consolidated case questioning the constitutionality Sections 3 (b), 11, 13, 16 (d), 17 and 32 of RA 6657. That the said provision extends agrarian reform to aquaculture lands even as Sec. 4 of Art. XIII of the Constitution limits agrarian reform only to agricultural lands. The said provisions being violative of the equal protection clause of the Constitution by similarly treating of aquaculture and agriculture lands when they are differently situated. That the said provisions distort employment benefits and burdens in favor of aquaculture employees and against other industrial workers  even as Section 1 and 3 of Art. XIII of the Constitution mandates the State to promote equality in economic and employment opportunities and that the questioned provisions deprived petitioner of its government-induced investments in aquaculture e

Case Digest: LBP vs Enrique Livioco  GR No 170685                                                         September 22, 2010 Facts: Livioco was the owner of a 30.6329 hectares sugarland. Sometime in 1987 to 1988 he offered his sugarland to the DAR for acquisition under the CARP at P 30.00 per square meter, for a total of P 9,189,870.00. The voluntary offer-to-sell form he submitted to the DAR indicated that his property is adjacent to residential subdivision and to an international paper mill. LBP valuated the 26 hectares of such land for P 827,943.48 at P 3.21 per square meter. Livioco was promptly informed of the valuation and that the cash portion of the claim proceeds have been kept in trust pending his submission of the requirements. LBP did not act upon the notice given to him by both government agencies. Thereafter the LBP issued a certification to the ROD that it has earmarked the just compensation for Livioco's 26 hectares. After 2 years, Livioco then  req

Case Digest: Lebrudo, et al. vs Loyola  GR No 181370                                                                   March 9, 2011 Facts: Loyola owns a 240-square meter parcel of alnd known as Lot No. 723-6, Block 1, Psd-73149 covered by TCT/CLOA No. 998. Lebrudo filed an action for the cancellation of the said TCT/CLOA and the issuance for the 1/2 portion of the lot in his name. In his complaint, he alleged that sometime in 1989, he was approached by Loyola to redeem the lot, which was mortgaged by Loyola's mother to Trinidad Barreto, and that he helped Lebrudo in obtaining title to the lot in her name by shouldering all the expenses for the transfer of the title of the lot from her mother. In exchange for this, Lebrudo promised to give Loyola the 1/2 portion of the lot and that Loyolla allegedly executed a Sinumpaang Salaysay in support for this matter. However, Loyola in her answer has denied that she approached and sought help in titling from Lebrudo. She also deni

LBP vs Spouses Rosa and Pedro Costo  GR No 174647                                                                December 5, 2012 Facts: Rosa and Pedro Costo (Spouses Costo) are registered owner of a parcel of land covered by OCT No. P-6487 with an area of 9.1936 hectares. Spouses Costo voluntarily offered the said property to the DAR under CARP and its implementing rules. 7.3471 hectares was deemed qualified for acquisition, consequently LBP comuted and valued the said land in the amount of P 104,077.01. Spouses Costo then rejected the valuation and filed a determination of just compensation with the PARAD. PARAD then recomputed the land valuation and fixed the value of the property at P 468,575.92. LBP then sought relief from SAC and filed a petition for just compensation. SAC sustained the valuation of PARAD. On appeal, the LBP contended that LBP is charged with the responsibility of determining the value of lands placed under land reform and the compensation to be pa

The evidence will be presented here to suggest that Jesus Christ is the mythical Sun God. Evidence: The Origin Of The Name Jesus. The Bible Was Written In Greek The Name Jesus Is An English Translation Of The Greek Word Jesus-the Greek Sun God Can Jesus Be Identified As The Greek Sun God? In Greek Each Letter Had A Numerical Value The Greek Sun God Is Identified In Greek Mythology By The Number 888 Each Letter In Greek Has A Numerical Value So It Is Easy To See If The Name Jesus Fulfills This Value As The Sun God. The Name Jesus In Greek Here Is The Name Jesus Written In Greek And Its Numerical Equivalent Obviously in creating the name Jesus in Greek, the intention was to portray Jesus as the Sun God. Evidence: The Direct Connection With The Egyptian Sun God Amen Ra The Name Of The Egyptian Sun God Is Amun/amen Ra. This Is How Jesus Is Identified In The Bible: He Is Identified As The Egyptian Sun God Amen Above: Revel

Bill Donahue irrefutably lays out the origins of Christianity, which includes the surprising story behind why all churches have steeples. Because Christianity is one of the newest religions, they took something from every previous religion. The birth of Jesus Christ was copied word for word from the birth of Hari Krishna, where the virgin mother gave birth to him on December 25th (the winter solstice). This religion predates Christianity by thousands of years before Jesus was allegedly born. The origins of Christianity can be found in ancient Egypt where there was a great contrast between the people who had money (the priests and politicians) and those who didn’t. They had a longing for blessed immortality beyond the grave so they invented an afterlife where the entrance into the afterlife was based on how well a person practiced their religion, not how good they were. Jesus taught the single eye meditation, which is the one thing that Christians say is evil. Lon

Saludaga and Genio vs Sandiganbayan GR No. 184537                                                             April 23, 2010 Facts: Saludaga and Genio entered into a Pakyaw Contract for the construction of Barangay Day Care Centers without conducting a competitive public bidding as required by law, which caused damage and prejudice to the government. An information was filed for violation of Sec. 3 (e) of RA 3019 by causing undue injury to the Government . The information was quashed for failure to prove the actual damage, hence a new information was filed, now for violation of Sec. 3 (e) of RA 3019 by giving unwarranted benefit to a private person.  The accused moved for a new preliminary investigation to be conducted on the ground that there is substitution and/or substantial amendment of the first information. Issue: Whether or not there is substitution and/or substantial amendment of the information that would warrant an new preliminary investigation. Ruling:

Judge Felimon Abelita III vs P/Supt German Doria & SPO3 Cesar Ramirez GR No. 170627                                                                                     August 14, 2009 Facts: Petitioner (Judge Abelita) filed a complaint for damages under Art. 32(4) and (9) of the Civil Code against Respondents (Doria and Ramirez). Petitioner alleged that he and his wife was on their home when the respondents accompanied by 10 unidentified police officers,requested them to proceed to the PNP headquarters. Petitioner alleged that he would proceed to to the PNP HQ after he had brought his wife home. Petitoner alleged  that when she parked his car in front of their house, SPO3 Ramirez grabbed him and took his car keys, bared into the vehicle and conducted as search without a warrant. The search resulted to the seizure of a licensed shotgun and a unlicensed .45 caliber pistol allegedly found inside the vehicle. However, the respondent has a different version of the case. D

People vs Cabiguez GR No. 185708                                                               September 29, 2010 Facts: Cabiguez and Grondiano was charged for robbery for allegedly ransacking AAA’s sari-sari’s store and taking cash and grocery items. Cabiguez was also charged for raping AAA in the presence of her children BBB, CCC and DDD. AAA did not file a complaint for fear that the accused will kill her and her children. Thereafter, Cabiguez and Grondiano were separately arrested for illegal possession of drugs. Then, AAA had the courage to file the case for both accused is now incarcerated. During the trial a DNA testing was conducted from the vaginal swabs for AAA, but it failed to match Cabiguez’s DNA profile since the sample merely contained vaginal discharge. Issue: Whether or not a negative result of a DNA test would exculpate an accused for the crime of rape. Ruling: In this case the court ruled “No”, since the sample tested merely contained vaginal dis

People vs Nita Eugenio y Pejer G.R. No. 186459                                               September 1, 2010 Facts: Nita Eugenio (Nita) was charged for violation of Sec. 5 Art II of RA. 9165 (Comprehensive Dangerous Drug Act of 2002) before the RTC for selling, delivering and giving away prohibited drugs to a police poseur buyer. Nita contended that the Chain of Custody required under RA 9165 was not complied for failure to take photographs of the seized items. Issue: Whether or not Chain of Custody (under Sec. 21 (1) of RA 9165) was complied with. Ruling: No, however, failure to comply with the provision will not necessary doom the case for the prosecution. Non-compliance by the apprehending/buy-bust team with section 21 is not fatal as long as there is justifiable ground, as long as the integrity and the evidentiary value of the confiscated/seized items are properly preserved by the apprehending officer/team, the non-compliance would not render the arrest illeg

NAPOCOR vs Teresita Diato-Bernal GR No. 180979                                               December 15, 2010 Facts: NAPOCOR is a government owned and control corporation, for the purpose of undertaking development of hydroelectric power throughout the Philippines and NAPOCOR is authorized to exercise the power of eminent domain. Bernal is a registered owner oof a parcel of land along the highway. NAPOCOR filed an expropriation suit against respondent for NAPCOR needs to acquire an easement over Bernal's property. The parties filed a partial compromise agreement to the RTC, and the RTC proceeded to determine the amount of just compensation. The RTC appointed tree commissioners to assess the fair market value of the subject property.Thereafter, the commissioners submitted their report to the RTC recommending that the just compensation be at P 10,000.00 per square meters. NAPOCOR filed an opposition asserting that it was not substantiated by any official documents or regi

Lejano vs People People vs Webb GR Nos. 176389 and 176864                                        January 18, 2011 Facts: The Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the CA and acquitted accused, namely: Hubert Webb, Antonio Lejano, Michael Atchalian, Hospicio Fernandez, Miguel Rodriguez, Peter Estrada, and Gerardo Biong on the ground of lack of proof of their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Thereafter, complaint Lauro Vizconde, asked the Court to reconsider its decision, claiming that it "denied the prosecution due process of law; seriously misappreciated the facts; unreasonably regarded Alfaro as lacking credibility; issued a tainted and erroneous decision; decided the case in a manner that resulted in the miscarriage of justice; or committed grave abuse in its treatment of the evidence and prosecution witnesses." Issue: Whether or not a judgment of acquittal may be reconsidered. Ruling: No, as a rule a judgment of acquittal cannot be reconsidered

Romer Sy Tan vs Sy Tiong Gue, et al. G.R. No. 174570                                                                December 15, 2010 Facts: Petitioner (Romer Sy Tan) filed a criminal case against respondents (Tiong Gue, et al.). The Respondents moved for the withdrawal of the information which was subsequently granted by the RTC on the ground that the information for robbery did not contain the essential elements of robbery as decided upon by the Court of Appeals on an prior complaint. Hence the case was dismissed. Now the petitioner, seeking shelter from the Supreme Court contended that he filed information for qualified theft based on the same subject matter of the dismissed robbery and would like to use the item seized in the previously conducted search for the new information of qualified theft. Issue: Whether or not the items seized in the previously conducted search warrant issued by the court for robbery be included and used for the filing of for an information

Judith Yu vs Samson-Tatad GR No. 170979                                                                     February 9, 2011 Facts: An information for estafa against the petitioner (Judith Yu) was filed with the RTC which convicted the petitioner as charged. Fourteen days later, the petitioner filed a motion for new trial with the RTC, alleging that she discovered new and material evidence that would exculpate her of the crime for which she was convicted. The respondent judge denied the petitioner's motion for new trial for lack of merit. The petitioner filed a notice of appeal with the RTC, alleging she had a fresh period of 15 days from the receipt of the denial of her motion for new trial, within which to file a notice of appeal. The prosecution filed a motion to dismiss the appeal fore being belatedly filed and a Motion for execution of the decision. Issue: Does the fresh period rule apply to appeals in criminal cases? Ruling: Yes, to standardize the