This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2009-10-16 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| It is clear from the foregoing that cruelty attended the appellant's commission of the crime. The CA's ruling finds support in People v. Bonito,[35] where the Court held, thus: xxx The test in appreciating cruelty as an aggravating circumstance is whether the accused deliberately and sadistically augmented the wrong by causing another wrong not necessary for its commission and inhumanly increased the victim's suffering or outraged or scoffed at his/her person or corpse. The victim in this case was already weak and almost dying when appellant Bonito inserted the cassava trunk inside her private organ. What appellant Bonito did to her was totally unnecessary for the criminal act intended and it undoubtedly inhumanly increased her suffering. xxx | |||||
|
2001-09-27 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| The records reveal that at the time of his death, the victim was a 48-year old taxi driver, earning an average daily wage of P300.00 or P9,000.00 a month.[26] Hence, accused-appellant should indemnify the heirs of the deceased the amount of P1,151,820.00, for the deceased's loss of earning capacity, computed pursuant to the following formula,[27] to wit - | |||||