Title
Mallari y Samar vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 224679
Decision Date
Feb 12, 2020
Intoxicated Mallari resisted police intervention, slapping and kicking an officer. SC ruled her actions as resistance, not direct assault, imposing a lighter penalty.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-31890)

Factual Background of the Incident

In the early hours of January 12, 2007, uniformed PO2 Navarro and SPO3 Merza responded to a reported fight among two groups of women at GenX Billiard Hall. They introduced themselves and attempted to pacify the melee, then invited the participants to the station to file complaints. An intoxicated Mallari refused, grabbed Navarro’s collar, slapped his cheek, and kicked his legs repeatedly. The officers restrained and transported her to the station, where she was detained for Direct Assault.

Prosecution’s Evidence and Testimony

PO2 Navarro testified that Mallari knowingly assaulted him while he was in uniform and performing official duties, sustaining swelling of the right cheekbone. SPO3 Merza corroborated Navarro’s account in a joint affidavit, describing Mallari’s resistance, disrespectful utterances, and repeated kicks and slaps. Dr. Rolando Ortiz issued a medical certificate confirming Navarro’s minor facial injury.

Defense’s Evidence and Testimony

Mallari admitted involvement in the brawl but claimed the officers used excessive force in placing her inside the patrol car, causing her own injuries (contusions and abrasions on forearms and back). She denied initiating aggression, alleging Navarro pulled her by her blouse and legs, resulting in her head and buttocks striking the ground. She later sought medical attention and filed a complaint for maltreatment, which was dismissed.

Municipal and Regional Trial Court Decisions

The Municipal Trial Court (Sept. 5, 2013) found Mallari guilty of Direct Assault (RPC Art. 148) beyond reasonable doubt, emphasizing her admission to kicking and grabbing Navarro. The Regional Trial Court (July 30, 2014) affirmed, citing the credibility of prosecution witnesses and the insufficiency of Mallari’s denials.

Court of Appeals Ruling and Modification

The Court of Appeals (Oct. 27, 2015) dismissed Mallari’s petition, affirmed the RTC decision, but modified the penalty to an indeterminate term (two months arresto mayor to two years four months prision correccional) and reduced the fine to ₱500. The CA held Mallari was the aggressor and Navarro acted only to restrain her.

Issue on Certiorari

Mallari challenged the CA’s factual findings, contending Navarro’s minor cheek swelling contradicted the alleged repeated kicks and slaps, and asserting her resistance was justified by unlawful aggression on her dignity. The People argued the petition raised factual questions unreviewable under Rule 45 and maintained the assault was established.

Legal Distinction Between Direct Assault and Resistance

Under RPC Art. 148 (Direct Assault), serious force or intimidation against a person in authority is required. Jurisprudence distinguishes direct assault from resistance or disobedience (RPC Art. 151) based on the gravity of force empl

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.