Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. JESUS PAYCANA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 207818 2014-07-23	PEOPLE v. ALEX DE LOS SANTOS REYES, J.
Unlawful aggression on the part of the victim is the primordial element of the justifying circumstance of self-defense. Without it, there can be no self-defense, whether complete or incomplete, that can validly be invoked.[17] "There is an unlawful aggression on the part of the victim when he puts in actual or imminent danger the life, limb, or right of the person invoking self-defense. There must be actual physical force or actual use of a weapon."[18] "It is present only when the one attacked faces real and immediate threat to one's life."[19]
	GR No. 202847 2013-10-23	PEOPLE v. ANTERO GAMEZ Y BALTAZAR REYES, J.
Unlawful aggression is a condition sine qua non for the justifying circumstance of self-defense. Without it, there can be no self-defense, whether complete or incomplete, that can validly be invoked.[17] "There is an unlawful aggression on the part of the victim when he puts in actual or imminent danger the life, limb, or right of the person invoking self-defense. There must be actual physical force or actual use of a weapon."[18] It is present only when the one attacked faces real and immediate threat to one's life. It must be continuous; otherwise, it does not constitute aggression warranting self-defense.[19]
	GR No. 188320 2010-06-29	PEOPLE v. RIO TIBON Y DEISO VELASCO JR., J.
The Solicitor General recommended the reduction of civil indemnity from PhP75,000 to PhP50,000. However, recent jurisprudence pegs civil indemnity in the amount of PhP75,000,[27] which is automatically granted to the offended party, or his/her heirs in case of the former's death, without need of further evidence other than the fact of the commission of murder, homicide, parricide and rape.[28] People v. Regalario[29] has explained that the said award is not dependent on the actual imposition of the death penalty but on the fact that qualifying circumstances warranting the imposition of the death penalty attended the commission of the offense.
	GR No. 188320 2010-06-29	PEOPLE v. RIO TIBON Y DEISO VELASCO JR., J.
Pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, the trial court should have made accused-appellant account for PhP30,000 as exemplary damages on account of relationship, a qualifying circumstance, which was alleged and proved, in the crime of parricide.[33]