Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. VICENTE BALORA Y DELANTAR

This case has been cited 8 times or more.

	GR No. 132714 2001-09-06	PEOPLE v. RENATO LALINGJAMAN YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
. . . The Court has time and again held that "the evil in man has no conscience. The beast in him bears no respect for time and place, driving him to commit rape anywhere - even in places where people congregate such as parks, along the road side, within school premises, and inside a house where there are other occupants.[31] Rape does not necessarily have to be committed in an isolated place and can in fact be committed in places which to many would appear to be unlikely and high-risk venues for sexual advances.[32] Indeed, no one would think that rape would happen in a public place like the comfort room of a movie house in broad daylight.[33]
	GR No. 137282 2001-03-16	PEOPLE v. ALFREDO ALIPAR Y ALINSOD DE LEON, JR., J.
Q Do you know where that substance came from? A Yes, sir, it came from my father.[27] That no audible noise was heard from Twinkle to awaken her mother is explained by the fact that her mouth was gagged and her hands were tied.[28] It is neither improbable for rape to be committed with Twinkle's mother sleeping just an arm's length away for this Court has long settled that rape can be committed even in a room where the members of the family are also sleeping, lust being no respecter of time or place.[29] There is no rule that rape can only be committed in seclusion. The nearby presence of people in a certain place is no guarantee that rape will not and cannot be committed.[30]
	GR Nos. 134451-52 2001-03-14	PEOPLE v. REYNALDO FRETA Y CUEVAS MENDOZA, J.
The fact that the lacerations in the hymen of the victim were at least a month old only shows that Jenny was no longer a virgin, but not that she had not been raped on December 13 and 14, 1996. In any case, virginity is not an essential element of rape.[15]
	GR Nos. 133586-603 2001-02-19	PEOPLE v. HENRY QUEIGAN YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
. . . [t]he evil in man has no conscience. The beast in him bears no respect for time and place, driving him to commit rape anywhere - even in places where people congregate such as parks, along the road side, within school premises, and inside a house where there are other occupants.[32] Rape does not necessarily have to be committed in an isolated place and can in fact be committed in places which to many would appear to be unlikely and high-risk venues for sexual advances.[33] Indeed, no one would think that rape would happen in a public place like the comfort room of a movie house in broad daylight.[34] Accused-appellant likewise accuses one Oscar Mitra as the defiler of complainant's chastity adverting to a Sworn Statement[35] which narrated the details of the sexual assault by Mitra against the complainant. He further alleged that the testimony of the Medico Legal Officer who examined the victim is consistent with the commission of the rapes narrated in the Sworn Statement.
	GR No. 130406 2001-01-22	PEOPLE v. RUEL BAWAY Y ALIGAN YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
. . . The Court has time and again held that "the evil in man has no conscience. The beast in him bears no respect for time and place, driving him to commit rape anywhere - even in places where people congregate such as parks, along the road side, within school premises, and inside a house where there are other occupants.[25] Rape does not necessarily have to be committed in an isolated place and can in fact be committed in places which to many would appear to be unlikely and high-risk venues for sexual advances.[26] Indeed, no one would think that rape would happen in a public place like the comfort room of a movie house in broad daylight.[27] Verily, lust is no respecter of time and place.[28]
	GR No. 131806 2000-10-20	PEOPLE v. LIBERATO CABIGTING Y SARMIENTO PARDO, J.
occurrence of rape, proof of injury not being an essential element of that crime.[24] Lack of lacerated wounds does not negate sexual intercourse.[25] Even the slightest touching of the female genitalia, or mere introduction of the male organ into the labia of the pudendum constitutes carnal knowledge.[26] Moreover, when a woman, in this case a girl barely in her teens, says she has been raped, she in effect says all that is necessary to show that she has been raped, provided her testimony is credible.[27] It is highly inconceivable that a young girl of
	GR No. 131942 2000-10-05	PEOPLE v. CARLITO BAWANG YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
The presence of lacerations in the hymen is not necessary to prove rape.[45] The case of People v. Vicente Balora y Delantar[46] explicitly states that -
	GR No. 127650 2000-08-25	PEOPLE v. RICARDO TOQUERO Y JACOBO PARDO, J.
Assessing the credibility of witnesses is a function best discharged by the trial court.[7] In assessing Sonia's testimony, the trial court declared that "her naturalness and candor as a victim of sexual abuse in this case is credible."