Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. GREGORIO LIMA Y SILPA

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 171164 2008-11-28	PEOPLE v. NASARIO CASTEL REYES, R.T., J.
Indeed, AAA testified in a categorical, straightforward, and consistent manner even in the face of a tedious and grueling cross-examination. Her testimony, bearing badges of truth, is sufficient to establish appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt for the crimes charged.[83] AAA's testimony gives no impression whatsoever that her testimony is a mere fabrication. If her story had only been contrived, she would not have been so composed and consistent throughout her testimony in the face of intense and lengthy interrogation.[84]
	GR Nos. 144972-73 2003-09-12	PEOPLE v. RODOLFO JUNAS PER CURIAM
On cross-examination, appellant's counsel asked Rhoda why she cried when she testified during her direct examination. Rhoda answered that "she does not want to see appellant because whenever she sees him, she can remember all that he had done to her."[29] Such actuation demonstrates her sincerity and spontaneity, and the truthfulness of what she was narrating. The crying of the victim during her testimony is evidence of the credibility of the rape charge with the verity born out of human nature and experience.[30]
	GR Nos. 140034-35 2003-08-14	PEOPLE v. RODOLFO ZABALA Y BACORRO QUISUMBING, J.
As to damages, the trial court awarded moral damages but failed to award civil indemnity. Moral damages are separate and distinct from civil indemnity awarded to rape victims. Civil indemnity, which is actually in the nature of actual or compensatory damages, is mandatory upon the finding of the fact of rape.[32] Thus, civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000.00 should be awarded here for each count of rape, in line with recent case law,[33] together with another sum of P50,000.00 as moral damages, without need for pleading or proof of the basis thereof.[34]
	GR No. 127756-58 2003-06-18	PEOPLE v. BENJAMIN MEDINA CALLEJO, SR., J.
There is nothing in the records that would impel this Court to deviate from the said findings and conclusion of the trial court. Indeed, the private complainant testified in a categorical, straightforward and consistent manner. Her testimony, bearing badges of truth, is sufficient to establish the appellant's guilt for the crimes charged.[36]
	GR Nos. 131589-90 2002-08-06	PEOPLE v. BALTAZAR CESISTA KAPUNAN, J.
credibility of witnesses, since he was in a better position to decide the question having heard and observed the demeanor attitude, conduct and deportment of witnesses.[29] Also, it is quite clear that the accused-appellant used intimidation, threat and force on Rea when he raped her twice in September, 1994.