This case has been cited 7 times or more.
|
2011-07-20 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| The Court has ruled that in case of acts of lasciviousness, the lone testimony of the offended party, if credible, is sufficient to establish the guilt of the accused.[10] In this case, both the trial court and the Court of Appeals found the testimony of AAA credible over Garingarao's defense of denial and alibi. It is a settled rule that denial is a weak defense as against the positive identification by the victim.[11] Both denial and alibi are inherently weak defenses and constitute self-serving negative evidence which cannot be accorded greater evidentiary weight than the positive declaration by a credible witness.[12] Garingarao's defense of denial and alibi must fail over the positive and straightforward testimony of AAA on the incident. Further, like the trial court and the Court of Appeals, we find incredible Garingarao's defense that the case was an offshoot of a heated argument he had with AAA's father over the manner Garingarao was giving AAA's medications. It is hard to believe that AAA's parents would expose her to a public trial if the charges were not true.[13] In addition, the prosecution was able to establish that, contrary to Garingarao's allegation, both BBB and CCC were not in AAA's room at the time of the incident. | |||||
|
2011-02-09 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| As regards the other criminal cases for acts of lasciviousness, where appellant's guilt was proved beyond reasonable doubt, we affirm appellant's conviction. In these cases, the alternative circumstance of relationship under Article 15 of the Revised Penal Code should be considered against appellant.[36] In People v. Fetalino,[37] the Court held that, "in crimes against chastity, like acts of lasciviousness, relationship is considered aggravating." In that case, the Court considered relationship as an aggravating circumstance since the informations mentioned, and the accused admitted, that the complainant is his daughter. | |||||
|
2009-02-23 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| The award of moral damages with respect to AAA and BBB as rape victims is increased to P75,000.00 in line with prevailing jurisprudence,[75] while the award of moral damages with respect to AAA as victim of acts of lasciviousness is reduced to P30,000.00, also in consonance with jurisprudence.[76] | |||||
|
2008-12-24 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| Finally, we also sustain the award of moral damages in the amount of PhP 30,000 in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.[35] | |||||
|
2008-11-24 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| Finally, we also sustain the award of moral damages in the amount of PhP 30,000 in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence.[35] | |||||
|
2008-04-09 |
REYES, R.T., J. |
||||
| 2) By any person who, under any of the circumstances mentioned in paragraph 1 hereof, shall commit an act of sexual assault by inserting his penis into another person's mouth or anal orifice, or any instrument or object, into the genital or anal orifice of another person.[62] (Underscoring supplied) Rape by sexual assault was introduced into our penal system via the amendatory Anti-Rape Law of 1997 (R.A. No. 8353), which took effect on October 22, 1997. With these amendments, rape was reclassified as a crime against person and not merely a crime against chastity.[63] | |||||
|
2008-01-31 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| In Criminal Case No. 02-725, the alternative circumstance of relationship under Article 15 of the Revised Penal Code[51] should be considered against Montinola. In People v. Fetalino,[52] the Court held that, "in crimes against chastity, like acts of lasciviousness, relationship is considered aggravating." In that case, the Court considered relationship as an aggravating circumstance since the informations mentioned, and the accused admitted, that the complainant was his daughter. In the instant case, the information[53] expressly states that AAA is Montinola's daughter, and Montinola openly admitted this fact: Q x x x [D]o you know [AAA]? | |||||