This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2009-03-04 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| Although intent may be an ingredient of the crime of arson, it may be inferred from the acts of the accused. There is a presumption that one intends the natural consequences of his act; and when it is shown that one has deliberately set fire to a building, the prosecution is not bound to produce further evidence of his wrongful intent.[25] If there is an eyewitness to the crime of arson, he can give in detail the acts of the accused. When this is done the only substantial issue is the credibility of the witness.[26] | |||||
|
2008-03-28 |
REYES, R.T., J. |
||||
| [23] People v. Soriano, G.R. No. 142565, July 29, 2003, 407 SCRA 367. | |||||
|
2007-02-12 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| On the damages, we have consistently held that proof is required to determine the reasonable amount of damages that may be awarded to the victims of conflagration. As a rule, therefore, actual or compensatory damages must be proved and not merely alleged.[13] The records do not show concrete proof of the amount of actual damages suffered by each complaining witness. Thus, we cannot grant actual damages. However, we may award nominal and temperate damages. | |||||
|
2006-09-26 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| As previously discussed, there are two (2) categories of the crime of arson: 1) destructive arson, under Art. 320 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659; and 2) simple arson, under Presidential Decree No. 1613. Said classification is based on the kind, character and location of the property burned, regardless of the value of the damage caused,[48] to wit:Article 320 of The Revised Penal Code, as amended by RA 7659, contemplates the malicious burning of structures, both public and private, hotels, buildings, edifices, trains, vessels, aircraft, factories and other military, government or commercial establishments by any person or group of persons.[[49]] The classification of this type of crime is known as Destructive Arson, which is punishable by reclusion perpetua to death. The reason for the law is self- evident: to effectively discourage and deter the commission of this dastardly crime, to prevent the destruction of properties and protect the lives of innocent people. Exposure to a brewing conflagration leaves only destruction and despair in its wake; hence, the State mandates greater retribution to authors of this heinous crime. The exceptionally severe punishment imposed for this crime takes into consideration the extreme danger to human lives exposed by the malicious burning of these structures; the danger to property resulting from the conflagration; the fact that it is normally difficult to adopt precautions against its commission, and the difficulty in pinpointing the perpetrators; and, the greater impact on the social, economic, security and political fabric of the nation. [Emphasis supplied.] | |||||