This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2010-04-23 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| In his second assigned error, the accused invokes self-defense. By asserting it, however, it became incumbent upon him to prove by clear and convincing evidence that he indeed had acted in defense of himself. The requisites of self-defense are: (1) unlawful aggression; (2) reasonable necessity of the means employed to repel or prevent it; and (3) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.[17] | |||||
|
2008-12-18 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| Even assuming, arguendo, that Paradero sustained only one gunshot wound, such does not negate intent to kill on the part of petitioner. The number of wounds inflicted is not the sole consideration in proving intent to kill.[42] As earlier mentioned, the means used by the malefactors and the nature and location of the wounds also manifest intent to kill. Petitioner's use of a gun in shooting Paradero on the chest and the fact that the bullet hit some of her vital organs of Paradero clearly indicate intent to kill. | |||||