Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

CLEMENT JOHN FERDINAND M. NAVARRETE v. PEOPLE

This case has been cited 8 times or more.

	GR No. 198389 2013-12-11	VIVENCIO ROALLOS Y TRILLANES v. PEOPLE REYES, J.
The child, whether male or female, is below 18 years of age.[17] (Emphasis supplied) The Information that was filed against Roallos alleged that he committed lascivious acts towards AAA, i.e., that he mashed the breasts and kissed the cheeks of the latter. It likewise alleged that AAA, at the time she was subjected to sexual abuse by Roallos, was only 15 years of age. Clearly, all the elements of sexual abuse under Section 5(b), Article III of R.A. No. 7610 are set out in the Information that was filed against Roallos.
	GR No. 188897 2011-06-06	PEOPLE v. IRENO BONAAGUA Y BERCE PERALTA, J.
However, pursuant to the foregoing provision, before an accused can be convicted of child abuse through lascivious conduct committed against a minor below 12 years of age, the requisites for acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC must be met in addition to the requisites for sexual abuse under Section 5 of R.A. No. 7610. [40]
	GR No. 186441 2010-03-03	SALVADOR FLORDELIZ Y ABENOJAR v. PEOPLE NACHURA, J.
However, pursuant to the foregoing provision, before an accused can be convicted of child abuse through lascivious conduct committed against a minor below 12 years of age, the requisites for acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of the RPC must be met in addition to the requisites for sexual abuse under Section 5 of R.A. No. 7610.[45]
	AM No. P-06-2282 2009-08-07	LOLITA S. REGIR v. JOEL T. REGIR LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Well-settled is the rule that bare denials cannot prevail over the positive testimonies of the witnesses.[11] Positive and forthright declarations of witnesses are often held to be worthier of credence than the self-serving denial of an accused.[12] Denial, if unsubstantiated by clear and convincing evidence, is a self-serving assertion that deserves no weight in law.[13]
	GR No. 175603 2009-02-13	PEOPLE v. RENATO ESPAÑOL CORONA, J.
Well-entrenched is the rule that the trial court's evaluation of the testimonies of witnesses is accorded great respect in the absence of proof that it was arrived at arbitrarily or that the trial court overlooked material facts. The rationale behind this rule is that the credibility of a witness can best be determined by the trial court since it has the direct opportunity to observe the candor and demeanor of the witnesses at the witness stand and detect if they are telling the truth or not.[30] We will not interfere with the trial court's assessment of the credibility of witnesses.
	GR No. 180501 2008-12-24	PEOPLE v. ROGER MENDOZA Y DELA CRUZ VELASCO JR., J.
As the CA observed, AAA's telling testimony deserves full faith and credit, given as it were in a categorical manner by a young and an immature girl who had no motive--and none was ascribed by the defense--to falsely impute the commission of a serious crime against the accused.[33] And if we may add, in cases of acts of lasciviousness, the lone testimony of the offended party, if credible, is sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused.[34] The Court, thus, need not dwell into the probative value of the corroborative testimony on the molestation incident of AAA's parents which accused-appellant assails as hearsay.
	GR No. 180501 2008-11-24	PEOPLE v. ROGER MENDOZA Y DELA CRUZ VELASCO JR., J.
As the CA observed, AAA's telling testimony deserves full faith and credit, given as it were in a categorical manner by a young and an immature girl who had no motive--and none was ascribed by the defense--to falsely impute the commission of a serious crime against the accused.[33] And if we may add, in cases of acts of lasciviousness, the lone testimony of the offended party, if credible, is sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused.[34] The Court, thus, need not dwell into the probative value of the corroborative testimony on the molestation incident of AAA's parents which accused-appellant assails as hearsay.
	GR No. 178061 2008-01-31	PEOPLE v. JOHN MONTINOLA CARPIO, J.
(b) Those who commit the act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse: Provided, That when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age, the perpetrators shall be prosecuted under Article 335, paragraph 3, for rape and Article 336 of Act No. 3815, as amended, the Revised Penal Code, for rape or lascivious conduct, as the case may be: Provided, That the penalty for lascivious conduct when the victim is under twelve (12) years of age shall be reclusion temporal in its medium period. (Emphasis ours) In Navarrete v. People,[45] the Court held that sexual abuse under Section 5(b) has three elements: (1) the accused commits an act of sexual intercourse or lascivious conduct; (2) the said act is performed with a child exploited in prostitution or subjected to other sexual abuse; and (3) the child is below 18 years old.