This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2009-06-16 |
PUNO, C.J. |
||||
| In People v. Galapin,[73] People v. Continente,[74] United States v. Lasada,[75] People v. Mobe,[76] People v. Irinea,[77] People v. Rillorta,[78] People v. Cagalingan,[79] People v. Villanueva,[80] People v. Magno,[81] People v. del Rosario,[82] People v. Yrat,[83] People v. Saul,[84] and People v. Tamayo,[85] the principal and accomplice were ordered to pay jointly and severally the entire amount of the civil indemnity awarded to the victim. In People v. Sotto,[86] the accomplice was ordered to pay half of the amount of civil indemnity imposed by the trial court, while the principal was liable for the other half. In People v. Toring,[87] the principal, accomplice and the accessory were made jointly and severally liable for the entire amount of the civil indemnity. | |||||
|
2000-06-22 |
GONZAGA-REYES, J. |
||||
| As an accomplice, Rolando Flores should be imposed the penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony.[29] The penalty for murder is reclusion perpetua to death. The penalty one degree lower is reclusion temporal and there being no aggravating nor mitigating circumstances, the penalty should be reclusion temporal medium. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, accused-appellant Rolando Flores should therefore be meted out the penalty of six (6) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as minimum to fourteen (14) years and eight (8) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal as maximum.[30] | |||||