Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. DIOSCORO ALCONGA

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 214883 2015-09-02	PEOPLE v. CRISTINA SAMSON MENDOZA, J.
The last requisite to be considered is lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. The Court cannot sustain the trial court's observation that it was Cristina who provoked her husband when she suddenly pushed him. Her shoving him cannot be considered a sufficient provocation proportionate to the act of aggression.[28] She merely capitalized on a window of opportunity, when her husband removed the knife away from her throat, to save herself from what she had perceived to be a danger to her life. Anybody, in her situation would have acted in the same reasonable way.
	GR No. 172606 2011-11-23	PEOPLE v. MELANIO NUGAS Y MAPAIT BERSAMIN, J.
Unlawful aggression on the part of the victim is the primordial element of the justifying circumstance of self-defense. Without unlawful aggression, there can be no justified killing in defense of oneself. [20] The test for the presence of unlawful aggression under the circumstances is whether the aggression from the victim put in real peril the life or personal safety of the person defending himself; the peril must not be an imagined or imaginary threat.[21] Accordingly, the accused must establish the concurrence of three elements of unlawful aggression, namely: (a) there must be a physical or material attack or assault; (b) the attack or assault must be actual, or, at least, imminent; and (c) the attack or assault must be unlawful.[22]
	GR NO. 165483 2006-09-12	RUJJERIC Z. PALAGANAS v. PEOPLE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
As an element of self-defense, unlawful aggression refers to an assault or attack, or a threat thereof in an imminent and immediate manner, which places the defendant's life in actual peril.[31] It is an act positively strong showing the wrongful intent of the aggressor and not merely a threatening or intimidating attitude. [32] It is also described as a sudden and unprovoked attack of immediate and imminent kind to the life, safety or rights of the person attacked.[33]
	GR No. 156567 2003-11-27	JOSE RIMANO v. PEOPLE YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
As to the third requisite that the provocation must be sufficient, it should be proportionate to the aggression and adequate to stir the aggressor to its commission.[34] To be entitled to self-defense, however, the one defending himself must not have given cause for the aggression by his unjust conduct or by inciting or provoking the aggressor.[35]
	GR No. 140386 2001-11-29	PEOPLE v. BENNY ACOSTA MENDOZA, J.
Q And you stabbed him again? A Yes.[34] Granting that the victim gave the initial unlawful aggression, it had certainly ceased from the moment he fell to the ground. At that point, accused Renny Boy became the aggressor.[35] When the unlawful aggression has ceased to exist, the one making the defense has no right to kill or injure the former aggressor.[36]