Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. JOSELITO A. LOPIT

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 181829 2010-09-01	PEOPLE v. SATURNINO VILLANUEVA DEL CASTILLO, J.
In view of the foregoing, we find that the prosecution did not present any satisfactory evidence to prove "AAA's" minority. "In the prosecution of criminal cases, x x x, nothing but proof beyond reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which an accused is charged must be established. Qualifying circumstances or special qualifying circumstances must be proved with equal certainty and clearness as the crime itself; otherwise, there can be no conviction of the crime in its qualified form. As a qualifying circumstance of the crime of rape, the concurrence of the victim's minority and her relationship to the accused-appellant must be both alleged and proven beyond reasonable doubt."[65]
	GR No. 174480 2009-12-18	PEOPLE v. REYNALDO ALBALATE DEL CASTILLO, J.
People v. Lopit[21] that: In the prosecution of criminal cases, especially those involving the extreme penalty of death, nothing but proof beyond reasonable doubt of every fact necessary to constitute the crime with which an accused is charged must be established. Qualifying circumstances or special qualifying circumstances must be proved with equal certainty and clearness as the crime itself; otherwise, there can be no conviction of the crime in its qualified form. As a qualifying circumstance of the crime of rape, the concurrence of the victim's minority and her relationship to the accused-appellant must be both alleged and proven beyond reasonable doubt.[22]
	GR No. 185723 2009-08-04	PEOPLE v. EDWIN MEJIA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
As amended, and effective 1 December 2000, Secs. 8 and 9, Rule 110 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure now provide that aggravating as well as qualifying circumstances must be alleged in the information and proven during trial; otherwise they cannot be considered against the accused. Proof of the age of the victim cannot consist merely of testimony. Neither can a stipulation of the parties with respect to the victim's age be considered sufficient proof of minority.[20] Thus, the same cannot be used to impose the higher penalty of capital punishment on the accused-appellant.