This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2003-01-28 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| We have long recognized that different people react differently to a given situation and there is no standard form of behavioral response when one is confronted with a strange, startling or frightful experience.[50] Witnessing a crime is one novel experience that elicits different reactions from witnesses for which no clear-cut standard of behavior can be drawn.[51] This is especially true if the assailant is physically near.[52] Moreover, it is not proper to judge the actions of children who have undergone traumatic experiences by the norms of behavior expected under the circumstances from mature persons.[53] | |||||
|
2002-04-19 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Under our penal law, whenever the crime of rape is committed with the use of a deadly weapon, such as the knife used by appellant,[26] the penalty shall be reclusion perpetua to death, a penalty composed of two indivisible penalties. In the case at bar, there is neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstance shown in the commission of the sexual assault. Thus, the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua has been properly imposed. | |||||