Lawyerly

GR No. 189971

2010-08-23

NACHURA, J.

Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.[22] The agreement need not be proven by direct evidence;[23] it may be inferred from the conduct of the parties before, during, and after the commission of the offense,[24] pointing to a joint purpose and design, concerted action, and community of interest.[25] Complicity of the accused in the criminal design may be determined by their concerted action at the moment of consummating the crime and the form and manner in which assistance is rendered to the person inflicting the wound.[26]

GR No. 188601

2010-06-29

PEOPLE v. JO HNNY BAUTISTA Y BAUTISTA

VELASCO JR., J.

Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.[46] Where all the accused acted in concert at the time of the commission of the offense, and it is shown by such acts that they had the same purpose or common design and were united in its execution, conspiracy is sufficiently established.[47] It must be shown that all participants performed specific acts with such closeness and coordination as to indicate a common purpose or design to commit the felony.[48]

GR NO. 138553

2005-06-30

ENRIQUE “TOTOY” RIVERA Y DE GUZMAN v. PEOPLE

GARCIA, J.

Nor is Lt. Leygo's credibility any less diminished by the circumstance that he failed to categorically identify which of petitioner's hands was used in punching him, and the exact distance between them at that time. In all likelihood, this police officer was not expecting a physical attack by the petitioner as he was just confronting the latter about the prohibited unloading of chicken dung when petitioner laid hand on him. Under this scenario, any person, like Lt. Leygo, cannot be expected to remember every single detail of the incident with perfect recall.[12] For sure, far from adversely affecting Lt. Leygo's credibility, his failure to recall every minute detail of what transpired even fortifies it. We have thus held that the failure of a witness to recall each and every detail of an occurrence may even serve to strengthen rather than weaken his credibility because it erases any suspicion of a coached or rehearsed testimony.[13] What is vital in Lt. Leygo's testimony is the fact that petitioner punched him on his face, about which he was steadfast and unflinching.

GR No. 146810

2004-05-27

PEOPLE v. ANTONIO DELMINDO

QUISUMBING, J.

Well established is the rule that once the justifying circumstance of self- defense is invoked, the onus probandi of proving its elements shifts to him who invokes it.[39] Thus, even if the prosecution evidence is weak, the charge cannot be readily dismissed, considering that the accused had openly admitted authorship of the killing. Having admitted killing the victim, in this case, appellant must prove by clear and convincing evidence that he acted in self-defense by establishing: (a) unlawful aggression on the part of the victim; (b) reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it; and (c) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. [40]

GR No. 148518

2004-04-15

PEOPLE v. NARCISO SALDAÑA

PER CURIAM

Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.[116] Where all the accused acted in concert at the time of the commission of the offense, and it is shown by such acts that they had the same purpose or common design and were united in its execution, conspiracy is sufficiently established.[117] It must be shown that all participants performed specific acts with such closeness and coordination as to indicate a common purpose or design to commit the felony.[118]

GR No. 150030

2003-05-09

PEOPLE v. ERNESTO MUÑEZ

YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.

The question of whether appellant acted in self-defense is essentially a question of fact. In self-defense, unlawful aggression is a primordial element.[13]

GR Nos. 140727-28

2003-01-31

PEOPLE v. RAQUIM PINUELA

YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.

Salvador's recovery from the mortal wounds due to timely medical intervention does not diminish the treacherous character of the attack because the existence or non-existence of treachery is not dependent on the success of the assault.[24] Moreover, even granting arguendo that Salvador was forewarned of the danger to his person when he saw accused-appellant approaching, treachery may still be appreciated even when the victim was forewarned of danger to his person.[25] What is decisive is that at the time the blow was struck, the victim was helpless and unable to defend himself.[26]

GR Nos. 134823-25

2003-01-14

PEOPLE v. ANTONIO HAMTON

PER CURIAM

Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.[40] The agreement need not be proven by direct evidence;[41] it may be inferred from the conduct of the parties before, during and after the commission of the offense, [42] pointing to a joint purpose and design, concerted action, and community of interest.[43] Indeed, jurisprudence consistently tells us that conspiracy may be deduced from the mode and manner in which the offense was perpetrated.[44]

GR No. 138782

2002-09-27

PEOPLE v. JERRY VILLEGAS

YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.

primordial element of self-defense, there is no more need to pass upon the existence of the other requisites thereof.[17] Accused-appellant's invocation of self-defense must, therefore, fail. Accused-appellant posits that if the killing cannot be justified as self-defense, then it can only be categorized as homicide and not murder due to the absence of treachery.

GR No. 144308

2002-09-24

PEOPLE v. ANTONIO BARCELON

QUISUMBING, J.

witnesses and observed their deportment and manner of testifying during the trial.[16] Here, the trial court found the account of the incident proffered by the lone prosecution eyewitness Isabel Medino to be positive, sincere and candid.[17] Moreover, it is a settled doctrine that the positive identification of an eyewitness, who has been shown to have no ill motive to testify falsely against the appellant, prevails over the bare denials of the latter.[18]

GR No. 145719

2002-08-20

PEOPLE v. RAUL HAROVILLA

YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.

real chance to defend himself, thereby ensuring its commission without risk to the aggressor.[17] As vividly narrated by the prosecution eye-witness, the attack on the unarmed victim was sudden. Accused-appellant poked and fired the gun on the victim's chest while the latter's hands were being held behind his back by accused-appellant's brother. Evidently, accused-appellant and his companion executed the attack in a manner that posed no risk to themselves and absolutely afforded the victim no chance to defend himself. Under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by Republic Act No. 7659, murder is punishable by reclusion perpetua to death. Pursuant to Article 63 of the same Code, if the penalty prescribed by law is composed of two indivisible penalties, the lesser

	GR No. 189971 2010-08-23	FREDDIE CABILDO v. PEOPLE NACHURA, J.
Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.[22] The agreement need not be proven by direct evidence;[23] it may be inferred from the conduct of the parties before, during, and after the commission of the offense,[24] pointing to a joint purpose and design, concerted action, and community of interest.[25] Complicity of the accused in the criminal design may be determined by their concerted action at the moment of consummating the crime and the form and manner in which assistance is rendered to the person inflicting the wound.[26]
	GR No. 188601 2010-06-29	PEOPLE v. JO HNNY BAUTISTA Y BAUTISTA VELASCO JR., J.
Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.[46] Where all the accused acted in concert at the time of the commission of the offense, and it is shown by such acts that they had the same purpose or common design and were united in its execution, conspiracy is sufficiently established.[47] It must be shown that all participants performed specific acts with such closeness and coordination as to indicate a common purpose or design to commit the felony.[48]
	GR NO. 138553 2005-06-30	ENRIQUE “TOTOY” RIVERA Y DE GUZMAN v. PEOPLE GARCIA, J.
Nor is Lt. Leygo's credibility any less diminished by the circumstance that he failed to categorically identify which of petitioner's hands was used in punching him, and the exact distance between them at that time. In all likelihood, this police officer was not expecting a physical attack by the petitioner as he was just confronting the latter about the prohibited unloading of chicken dung when petitioner laid hand on him. Under this scenario, any person, like Lt. Leygo, cannot be expected to remember every single detail of the incident with perfect recall.[12] For sure, far from adversely affecting Lt. Leygo's credibility, his failure to recall every minute detail of what transpired even fortifies it. We have thus held that the failure of a witness to recall each and every detail of an occurrence may even serve to strengthen rather than weaken his credibility because it erases any suspicion of a coached or rehearsed testimony.[13] What is vital in Lt. Leygo's testimony is the fact that petitioner punched him on his face, about which he was steadfast and unflinching.
	GR No. 146810 2004-05-27	PEOPLE v. ANTONIO DELMINDO QUISUMBING, J.
Well established is the rule that once the justifying circumstance of self- defense is invoked, the onus probandi of proving its elements shifts to him who invokes it.[39] Thus, even if the prosecution evidence is weak, the charge cannot be readily dismissed, considering that the accused had openly admitted authorship of the killing. Having admitted killing the victim, in this case, appellant must prove by clear and convincing evidence that he acted in self-defense by establishing: (a) unlawful aggression on the part of the victim; (b) reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it; and (c) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. [40]
	GR No. 148518 2004-04-15	PEOPLE v. NARCISO SALDAÑA PER CURIAM
Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.[116] Where all the accused acted in concert at the time of the commission of the offense, and it is shown by such acts that they had the same purpose or common design and were united in its execution, conspiracy is sufficiently established.[117] It must be shown that all participants performed specific acts with such closeness and coordination as to indicate a common purpose or design to commit the felony.[118]
	GR No. 150030 2003-05-09	PEOPLE v. ERNESTO MUÑEZ YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
The question of whether appellant acted in self-defense is essentially a question of fact. In self-defense, unlawful aggression is a primordial element.[13]
	GR Nos. 140727-28 2003-01-31	PEOPLE v. RAQUIM PINUELA YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
Salvador's recovery from the mortal wounds due to timely medical intervention does not diminish the treacherous character of the attack because the existence or non-existence of treachery is not dependent on the success of the assault.[24] Moreover, even granting arguendo that Salvador was forewarned of the danger to his person when he saw accused-appellant approaching, treachery may still be appreciated even when the victim was forewarned of danger to his person.[25] What is decisive is that at the time the blow was struck, the victim was helpless and unable to defend himself.[26]
	GR Nos. 134823-25 2003-01-14	PEOPLE v. ANTONIO HAMTON PER CURIAM
Conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.[40] The agreement need not be proven by direct evidence;[41] it may be inferred from the conduct of the parties before, during and after the commission of the offense, [42] pointing to a joint purpose and design, concerted action, and community of interest.[43] Indeed, jurisprudence consistently tells us that conspiracy may be deduced from the mode and manner in which the offense was perpetrated.[44]
	GR No. 138782 2002-09-27	PEOPLE v. JERRY VILLEGAS YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
primordial element of self-defense, there is no more need to pass upon the existence of the other requisites thereof.[17] Accused-appellant's invocation of self-defense must, therefore, fail. Accused-appellant posits that if the killing cannot be justified as self-defense, then it can only be categorized as homicide and not murder due to the absence of treachery.
	GR No. 144308 2002-09-24	PEOPLE v. ANTONIO BARCELON QUISUMBING, J.
witnesses and observed their deportment and manner of testifying during the trial.[16] Here, the trial court found the account of the incident proffered by the lone prosecution eyewitness Isabel Medino to be positive, sincere and candid.[17] Moreover, it is a settled doctrine that the positive identification of an eyewitness, who has been shown to have no ill motive to testify falsely against the appellant, prevails over the bare denials of the latter.[18]
	GR No. 145719 2002-08-20	PEOPLE v. RAUL HAROVILLA YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
real chance to defend himself, thereby ensuring its commission without risk to the aggressor.[17] As vividly narrated by the prosecution eye-witness, the attack on the unarmed victim was sudden. Accused-appellant poked and fired the gun on the victim's chest while the latter's hands were being held behind his back by accused-appellant's brother. Evidently, accused-appellant and his companion executed the attack in a manner that posed no risk to themselves and absolutely afforded the victim no chance to defend himself. Under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by Republic Act No. 7659, murder is punishable by reclusion perpetua to death. Pursuant to Article 63 of the same Code, if the penalty prescribed by law is composed of two indivisible penalties, the lesser

PEOPLE v. EFREN TEJERO