This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2015-01-12 |
PERALTA, J. |
||||
| Abuse of superior strength is present whenever there is a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor, assuming a situation of superiority of strength notoriously advantageous for the aggressor selected or taken advantage of by him in the commission of the crime."[24] "The fact that there were two persons who attacked the victim does not per se establish that the crime was committed with abuse of superior strength, there being no proof of the relative strength of the aggressors and the victim."[25] The evidence must establish that the assailants purposely sought the advantage, or that they had the deliberate intent to use this advantage.[26] "To take advantage of superior strength means to purposely use excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense available to the person attacked."[27] The appreciation of this aggravating circumstance depends on the age, size, and strength of the parties.[28] | |||||
|
2010-08-09 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| "Abuse of superior strength is present whenever there is a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor, assuming a situation of superiority of strength notoriously advantageous for the aggressor selected or taken advantage of by him in the commission of the crime."[20] "The fact that there were two persons who attacked the victim does not per se establish that the crime was committed with abuse of superior strength, there being no proof of the relative strength of the aggressors and the victim."[21] The evidence must establish that the assailants purposely sought the advantage, or that they had the deliberate intent to use this advantage.[22] "To take advantage of superior strength means to purposely use excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense available to the person attacked."[23] The appreciation of this aggravating circumstance depends on the age, size, and strength of the parties.[24] | |||||
|
2002-08-06 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| previous agreement to commit a crime is not essential. It is sufficient that the form and manner in which the attack was accomplished clearly indicate unity of action and purpose. As the trial court found, accused Rodel Cristobal was in the company of three other persons, two of whom accompanied him upstairs to meet the victim while the third remained outside to act as look out. When Rodel shot the victim, all three escaped with him. The victim's dying declaration identified Rodel as the gunman. Also, Linda testified that she clearly saw the men enter the house and flee right after the shooting. When taken together, these facts prove the existence of conspiracy among the assailants. Abuse of superior strength also attended the commission of the crime. This aggravating circumstance is present when the aggressors purposely use excessive force out of proportion to the means of defense available to the person attacked.[19] In the | |||||