Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. RODOLFO SUYU

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 181902 2011-08-31	PEOPLE v. EDGAR EVANGELIO Y GALLO PERALTA, J.
To be convicted of robbery with rape, the following elements must concur: (1) the taking of personal property is committed with violence or intimidation against persons; (2) the property taken belongs to another; (3) the taking is characterized by intent to gain or animus lucrandi; and (4) the robbery is accompanied by rape.[16]
	GR No. 178771 2011-06-08	PEOPLE v. ALBERTO ANTICAMARA Y CABILLO PERALTA, J.
However, the Court does not agree with the CA and trial court's judgment finding appellant Al liable for Rape in Criminal Case No. 4481-R. In People v. Suyu, [48] We ruled that once conspiracy is established between several accused in the commission of the crime of robbery, they would all be equally culpable for the rape committed by anyone of them on the occasion of the robbery, unless anyone of them proves that he endeavored to prevent the others from committing rape. [49] Also, in People v. Canturia, [50] the Court held that: x x x For while the evidence does convincingly show a conspiracy among the accused, it also as convincingly suggests that the agreement was to commit robbery only; and there is no evidence that the other members of the band of robbers were aware of Canturia's lustful intent and his consummation thereof so that they could have attempted to prevent the same. x x x
	GR No. 179944 2009-09-04	PEOPLE v. ANTONIO ORTIZ QUISUMBING, J.
Simply, robbery with rape is committed when the following elements concur: (1) the taking of personal property is committed with violence against or intimidation of persons; (2) the property taken belongs to another; (3) the taking is characterized by intent to gain or animus lucrandi; (4) the robbery is accompanied by rape.[15]
	GR NO. 175316 2007-03-28	PEOPLE v. ROGER DURANO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
A rape victim, who testifies in a categorical, straightforward, spontaneous and frank manner, and remains consistent, is a credible witness.[23] When the testimony of a rape victim is simple and straightforward, unshaken by rigorous cross-examination and unflawed by any serious inconsistency or contradiction, the same must be given full faith and credit.[24] The Court Appeals found her narration candid, straightforward, and credible.[25] It likewise found it incredible that an innocent girl like the private complainant, who practically grew up in a religious institution would concoct a tale of defloration, publicly admit having been ravished, allow the examination of her private parts, and endure the pain and trauma of public trial had she not in fact been truly violated. [26]