Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. ROLITO CABICAL

This case has been cited 7 times or more.

	GR No. 140267 2004-06-29	PEOPLE v. BEN AMBROCIO QUISUMBING, J.
Moreover, appellant Ben Ambrocio's claim of self-defense is bereft of merit. For self-defense to prosper, the following elements must be duly proved: (a) unlawful aggression; (b) reasonable means employed to repel the victim's unlawful aggression; and (c) lack of sufficient provocation on the appellants' part.[60] When self-defense is invoked, the accused admits the killing of the victim, and the accused has the burden to justify such killing.[61] Here, we find that appellant Ben Ambrocio failed to discharge his burden adequately.
	GR No. 141087 2004-03-31	PEOPLE v. ABRAHAM AGSALOG CARPIO MORALES, J.
Absent thus any corroboration by independent and competent evidence of appellant Agsalog's claim of unlawful aggression on the part of the victim, it is extremely doubtful, hence, it cannot prosper.[22]
	GR No. 153248 2004-03-25	PEOPLE v. JESUS MORILES QUISUMBING, J.
The recommendations of the OSG are well taken. As a rule, claims for actual damages must be supported by evidence.[39] In this case, no receipts were offered to support the funeral expenses claimed by the victim's family. Hence, the award of P19,000.00 in actual damages must be stricken for lack of proof. However, considering that the victim's heirs did incur funeral and other expenses because of his death, the award of temperate damages in the amount of P25,000.00 would be justified.[40] Lastly, concerning the award of civil indemnity, the amount thereof should be reduced to P50,000.00, in line with prevailing case law.[41]
	GR Nos. 137949-52 2003-12-11	PEOPLE v. GEORGE 'JORGE' BOLINGET Y BAGTAN PUNO, J.
Life Expectancy 2/3 x (80 age of the victim at the time of death) 2/3 x (80 36) 2/3 x 44 29 years Gross Annual Income gross monthly income x 12 months P6,850.00 x 12 P82,200.00 Loss of Earning Capacity Life Expectancy x [Gross Annual Income Living Expenses[57]] 29 x [P82,200.00 P41,100.00] 29 x P41,100.00 P1,191,900.00.[58] The award of actual expenses sought by Domingo Santiago cannot be granted for lack of proof.[59]
	GR No. 141217 2003-09-26	PEOPLE v. EUSEBIO DUBAN Y DOMINGO CARPIO MORALES, J.
This Court notes that while Rolly Barboza, the victim's brother, testified that the victim's family incurred medical and funeral expenses in the amount of P65,000.00, he, in support thereof, presented a list[23] of expenses. Only substantiated and proven expenses, however, or those that appear to have been genuinely incurred in connection with the death, wake or burial of the victim will be recognized in court.[24] A list of expenses is not considered a competent proof and cannot replace the official receipts necessary to justify the award of actual damages. [25] Neither can the funeral contract[26] submitted in evidence by the prosecution be sufficient, it not being proof that what was stipulated therein was eventually paid.[27]
	GR No. 141120 2003-09-17	PEOPLE v. FERNANDO BUENAVIDEZ CARPIO MORALES, J.
It is noted that the trial court did not award civil indemnity, which, following jurisprudence,[31] is separate and distinct from moral, exemplary and actual damages which may be awarded to the heirs of the victim. Neither did it award exemplary damages, an aggravating circumstance having qualified the offense.[32]
	GR No. 150590 2003-08-21	PEOPLE v. WILLIE ALMEDILLA Y ARCILLA PUNO, J.
We now come to the civil liabilities of Almedilla. The civil indemnity due the heirs of the victim should be P50,000.00 in accord with recent jurisprudence.[17] There should also be an award of moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00 for the anguish Gemma suffered due to the death of Ruel.[18] It is the rule that claims of actual damages must be supported by evidence.[19] In this case, although Gemma claimed P100,000.00 as actual damages, she was able to present receipts showing actual expenses the total of which is only P80,600.00.[20] Similarly, the award of loss of earning capacity should be deleted for lack of proof. When asked to present evidence of her claim that Ruel earned P22,000.00 a month and P10,000.00 for every plan that he used to make as a sideline, Gemma replied that she did not bring the proofs with her to court.[21] In People vs. Castillano,[22] we held that "compensation for lost income is in the nature of damages and as such requires due proof of the damage suffered; there must be unbiased proof of the deceased's average income." Nonetheless, we award P25,000.00 as temperate damages in view of the lack of proof of the average income of the victim.[23]