Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. CHARLES JOY FLORES

This case has been cited 7 times or more.

	GR No. 171284 2015-06-29	PEOPLE v. ALFREDO DULIN Y NARAG BERSAMIN, J.
There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means and methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend to directly and specially ensure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.[29] Two conditions must concur in order for treachery to be appreciated, namely: one, the assailant employed means, methods or forms in the execution of the criminal act which give the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or to retaliate; and two, said means, methods or forms of execution were deliberately or consciously adopted by the assailant.[30] Treachery, whenever alleged in the information and competently and clearly proved, qualifies the killing and raises it to the category of murder.[31]
	GR NO. 166617 2007-07-03	PEOPLE v. AGUSTIN ABELLERA Y CAMANA CORONA, J.
Respondent's contention that he was allegedly in his neighbor's house during the October 7, 1996 rape incident was likewise untenable. For this defense of alibi to prosper, respondent should have proven that he was in some place where it was physically impossible for him to be at the locus criminis during the commission of the crimes.[23] In this case, even assuming that respondent was in his neighbor's place, he was nevertheless still near his house and his daughters.
	GR NO. 170471 2007-05-11	PEOPLE v. FRANCISCO BUBAN QUISUMBING, J.
As often stressed by this Court, the issue of credibility of witnesses is a function properly lodged with the trial court, whose findings are entitled to great weight and accorded the highest respect by the reviewing courts.[39] We shall accord the trial court's findings, when affirmed by the appellate court, the greatest respect and uphold its evaluation of the credibility and weight of the testimony of the witnesses, Ruel and Perla.
	GR Nos. 154348-50 2004-06-08	PEOPLE v. PABLO DELA CRUZ YNARES-SATIAGO, J.
We have consistently ruled that there is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means, methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make.[26] Two conditions must concur for treachery to exist, namely: (a) the employment of means of execution that gave the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or to retaliate; and (b) the means or method of execution was deliberately and consciously adopted.[27]
	GR No. 150083 2004-05-27	PEOPLE v. HENRY CARPIO Y NATIVIDAD CARPIO MORALES, J.
Finally, this Court orders appellant to pay the offended parties P25,000.00[37] as temperate damages representing expenses attendant to the redemption of the pledged jewelry and the subjection of Eldie Grace to medical examination, among other expenses.
	GR No. 132146 2004-03-10	PEOPLE v. DANTE GAUFO Y DILAO SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
Appellant's defense that other unknown persons raped Imee cannot be given credence. It is too unconvincing and obviously a concoction a product of a desperate attempt to exculpate himself from criminal liability. Certainly, it cannot overcome the categorical and positive testimony of the victim that it was appellant who dragged her to the grassy area, hit her with a piece of wood, and punched her abdomen until she fainted. She cannot be mistaken of his identity since she knows him well she even calls him "Kuya Dante." To be sure, there is no proof or any indication that Imee and the rest of the prosecution witnesses were animated by improper motive in testifying against appellant. We have held that where there is no evidence and nothing to indicate that the principal witnesses for the prosecution were impelled by any improper motive, the presumption is that they were not and that their testimonies are thus entitled to full faith and credit.[36]
	GR No. 133380 2004-02-18	PEOPLE v. FLAVIANO R. SEGNAR SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
With respect to appellant's civil liabilities, the trial court correctly awarded the amount of P50,000.00 as indemnity ex delicto.[23] However, moral damages may not be recovered for lack of proof that the victim's heirs suffered mental anguish, moral shock and wounded feelings because of her death.