Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. LEOSON DELA CRUZ Y ECHECHE

This case has been cited 9 times or more.

	GR No. 187049 2010-05-04	PEOPLE v. LITO MACAPANAS Y ECIJA VILLARAMA, JR., J.
Positive identification made with moral certainty suffices to convict the accused.[30] AAA's claim that she was raped was amply supported by the testimony and finding of Dr. Elizabeth Co-Loyola that she suffered a hymenal laceration at the five (5) o'clock position which is consistent with penile intrusion.
	GR No. 186420 2009-08-25	PEOPLE v. SAMUEL ANOD NACHURA, J.
It is worth stressing that, at the outset, the appellant, together with Lumbayan, was sentenced by the RTC to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. Thus, the CA's reliance on our ruling in People v. dela Cruz[15] was misplaced. In dela Cruz, this Court cited our ruling in People v. Tubongbanua,[16] wherein we held that the civil indemnity imposed should be P75,000.00. However, the instant case does not share the same factual milieu as dela Cruz and Tubongbanua. In the said cases, at the outset, the accused were sentenced to suffer the penalty of death. However, in view of the enactment of Republic Act No. 9346 or the Act Prohibiting the Imposition of the Death Penalty on June 24, 2006, the penalty meted to the accused was reduced to reclusion perpetua. This jurisprudential trend was followed in the recent case of People of the Philippines v. Generoso Rolida y Moreno, etc.,[17] where this Court also increased the civil indemnity from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00. Based on the foregoing disquisitions and the current applicable jurisprudence, we hereby reduce the civil indemnity awarded herein to P50,000.00.[18] We affirm all the other awards made by the CA.
	GR No. 185841 2009-08-04	PEOPLE v. ISMAEL DIAZ CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Anent moral damages, the same is mandatory in cases of murder and homicide, without need of allegation and proof other than the death of the victim.[72] The trial court awarded P25,000.00 as moral damages in each case. The same must be increased to P50,000.00 to conform with current jurisprudence. [73]
	GR No. 184343 2009-03-02	PEOPLE v. JESUS DOMINGO CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
Appellant is guilty of Frustrated Murder in Criminal Case No. 1500-M-2000. The penalty for Frustrated Murder is reclusion temporal, which must be imposed in its medium period, considering that there were neither aggravating nor mitigating circumstances that were proven in this case. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, appellant should be sentenced to suffer the penalty of twelve years of prision mayor, as minimum, to seventeen years and four months of reclusion temporal medium, as the maximum penalty. This Court affirms the award by the Court of Appeals of (1) Civil Indemnity in the amount of P30,000.00;[43] (2) actual damages of P46,343.00 for medical expenses, which are supported by receipts marked as Exhibits "I" and "J"; and (3) moral damages of P25,000.00. Appellant is also ordered to pay exemplary damages of P25,000.00 based on the finding that the assault against Raquel Indon was attended by treachery.[44] The essence of treachery is that the attack is deliberate and without warning, done in a swift and unexpected manner of execution, affording the hapless and unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or escape.[45] At the time Raquel was attacked, she was in her home, unarmed and sleeping with her children. She was undoubtedly unprepared and defenseless to resist appellant's attack on her and her young children.
	GR No. 172696 2008-08-11	PEOPLE v. BENITO BALLESTEROS Y GRAGASIN BRION, J.
The "time" requirement is critical in evident premeditation as it indicates the "premeditation" aspect - the opportunity to coolly and serenely think and deliberate on the meaning and the consequences of what the accused planned to do.[46] In the stabbing of Reyes, the flow of events showed that this element was not present.
	GR No. 170136 2008-01-18	PEOPLE v. . ROBERT BRODETT y PAJARO CARPIO, J.
The trial court and the appellate court imposed upon appellant the death penalty. However, in view of the effectivity of Republic Act No. 9346,[9] the imposition of the death penalty has been prohibited and in lieu thereof, the penalty of reclusion perpetua should be imposed, without eligibility for parole. We also reduce the award of moral damages from P1,000,000 to P50,000 and increase the civil indemnity from P50,000 to P75,000 in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.[10] Furthermore, since the offense is attended by aggravating circumstances, exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000 should also be imposed.[11]
	GR No. 177299 2007-11-28	PEOPLE v. CHARLITO TUMULAK NACHURA, J.
As to the monetary awards imposable, a modification is in order. In addition to the CA's award of P50,000.00 civil indemnity and P50,000.00 moral damages, temperate damages of P10,000.00 must also be awarded to the heirs of Marcelino. Regalada testified that the family incurred expenses for funeral and burial expenses, but she was not able to present receipts. It is settled that where the amount of actual damages cannot be determined because no receipts were presented to prove the same, but it is shown that the heirs are entitled thereto, temperate damages may be awarded.[17] Considering that funeral expenses were obviously incurred by the victim's heirs, an award of temperate damages is proper.
	GR NO. 153133 2006-09-26	MELY NIERVA v. PEOPLE GARCIA, J.
On May 29, 1989, after settling her first loan, petitioner secured a new loan from the same lending company, this time in the amount of P350,000.00 for which she again executed a Real Estate Mortgage[5] over her same property, which mortgage was likewise annotated on her Tax Declaration No. 50047[6] and registered with the Register of Deeds as well as with the City Assessor's Office, Baguio City. The mortgage document contained a prohibition against the alienation or encumbrance of the mortgaged property without ANGENIZ' consent.[7]
	GR NO. 153133 2006-09-26	MELY NIERVA v. PEOPLE GARCIA, J.
Also, on August 22, 1989, one Aida Reyes had a document - a Release of Real Estate Mortgage[9] - notarized by Atty. Amado Orden. Said document was apparently signed by Ines Chan acknowledging her receipt of P350,000.00 from the petitioner and releasing the latter's mortgage obligation to ANGENIZ. The release document likewise bears the signatures of Reyes and the petitioner's maid Editha Solomon as witnesses. After the notarization of this release instrument, Reyes registered the same with the City Assessor's Office of Baguio City. Consequently, the earlier mortgage in favor of ANGENIZ as annotated on Tax Declaration No. 50047 was cancelled.[10]