Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. CRISOGONO BOTONA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 186119 2009-10-27	PEOPLE v. PABLO LUSABIO CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The lower court was correct in appreciating treachery in the commission of the crime. There is treachery when the following essential elements are present, viz: (a) at the time of the attack, the victim was not in a position to defend himself; and (b) the accused consciously and deliberately adopted the particular means, methods or forms of attack employed by him.[46] The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack by the aggressor on an unsuspecting victim, depriving the latter of any real chance to defend himself, thereby ensuring its commission without risk to the aggressor, and without the slightest provocation on the part of the victim.[47] It was clearly established that Edwin Labini, while talking to Pablo Lusabio, Jr. face to face, was suddenly stabbed by the latter with a ten-inch bladed weapon for no reason at all. The suddenness of the stabbing and the fact that Edwin Labini was unarmed gave him no opportunity to defend himself. It is likewise apparent that accused-appellant consciously and deliberately adopted his mode of attack, making sure that the victim would have no chance to defend himself by reason of the surprise attack.
	GR No. 173282 2008-03-04	JOSE INGAL y SANTOS v. PEOPLE CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
We now go to the nature of the crime committed. The information alleged treachery in the commission of the crime. As correctly found by the trial court, treachery attended the killing. There is treachery in a sudden and unexpected attack which renders the victim unable to defend himself by reason of the suddenness and severity of the attack.[59] The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack by the aggressor on an unsuspecting victim, depriving the latter of any real chance to defend himself, thereby ensuring its commission without risk to the aggressor, and without the slightest provocation on the part of the victim.[60] In the case at bar, the victim was attacked from behind while he was eating. The victim was not able to defend himself or retaliate because the attack was so sudden and unexpected. Since treachery was properly alleged in the information, the same can be used to qualify the killing to murder.
	GR NO. 175881 2007-08-28	PEOPLE v. ARMANDO RODAS CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The qualifying circumstance of treachery attended the killing. The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack by the aggressor on an unsuspecting victim, depriving the latter of any real chance to defend himself, thereby ensuring its commission without risk to the aggressor, and without the slightest provocation on the part of the victim. [44] In People v. Villonez,[45] we ruled that treachery may still be appreciated even when the victim was forewarned of danger to his person. What is decisive is that the execution of the attack made it impossible for the victim to defend himself or to retaliate.
	GR No. 169082 2007-08-17	PEOPLE v. ERNESTO DE GUZMAN Y ELEMENCIO CARPIO MORALES, J.
Respecting the appreciation by the lower courts of the presence of treachery to qualify the offense to murder, the same is in order. The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack by the aggressor on an unsuspecting victim, depriving the latter of any real chance to defend himself, thereby ensuring its commission without risk to the aggressor, and without the slightest provocation on the part of the victim.[12]