This case has been cited 5 times or more.
|
2010-08-03 |
VILLARAMA, JR., J. |
||||
| The elements of the crime of parricide are: (1) a person is killed; (2) the deceased is killed by the accused; and (3) the deceased is the father, mother or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, of the accused or any of his ascendants or descendants, or his spouse.[35] | |||||
|
2009-10-16 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Affidavits of retraction can easily be secured from poor and ignorant witnesses usually for a monetary consideration.[40] Like any other testimony, recantations are subject to the test of credibility based on the relevant circumstances and, especially, on the demeanor of the witness on the stand.[41] Rape, defined and penalized under paragraph l(a) of Article 266-A, in relation to Article 266-B, of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 8353, is punishable by reclusion perpetua, viz: | |||||
|
2009-05-08 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| The elements of the crime of parricide are: (1) a person is killed; (2) the deceased is killed by the accused; and (3) the deceased is the father, mother or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, of the accused or any of his ascendants or descendants, or his spouse.[14] | |||||
|
2009-02-13 |
CORONA, J. |
||||
| Likewise, moral damages in the amount of P50,000 should be awarded even in the absence of allegation and proof of the emotional suffering by the victim's heirs. Although appellant's two children sided with him in his defense, this did not negate the fact that the family suffered emotional pain brought about by the death of their mother.[36] We also award them exemplary damages in the sum of P25,000 considering that the qualifying circumstance of relationship is present, this being a case of parricide.[37] | |||||
|
2006-12-06 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| While none of the prosecution witnesses saw the commission of the crime, the guilt of the appellant may still be proved by circumstantial evidence. Direct evidence of the commission of the crime charged is not the only matrix wherefrom a court may draw its conclusions and findings of guilt.[18] There may be instances where, although a witness may not have actually witnessed the commission of a crime, he may still be able to positively identify a suspect or accused as the perpetrator of a crime as when, for instance, the latter is the person last seen with the victim immediately before and right after the commission of the crime. This is the type of positive identification, which forms part of circumstantial evidence. In the absence of direct evidence, the prosecution may resort to adducing circumstantial evidence to discharge its burden. Crimes are usually committed in secret and under condition where concealment is highly probable. If direct evidence is insisted under all circumstances, the prosecution of vicious felons who committed heinous crimes in secret or secluded places will be hard, if not well-nigh impossible, to prove.[19] | |||||