This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2010-07-05 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| The essence of kidnapping is the actual deprivation of the victim's liberty, coupled with indubitable proof of the intent of the accused to effect such deprivation.[29] | |||||
|
2004-03-10 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| Under Article 267 of the Revised Penal Code,[44] the penalty of death is imposed upon proof that the kidnapping was committed to extort ransom from the victim or any other person. We find that the prosecution has established Castillo's guilt for this crime beyond reasonable doubt. However, Castillo's pecuniary liability must be modified to conform with jurisprudence. The award of exemplary damages must be deleted in the absence of any aggravating circumstance. Mr. Cebrero testified that their family suffered serious anxiety at the possibility of not seeing Rocky again.[45] The pain and anguish they experienced justifies the award of moral damages. However, we reduce the trial court's award of moral damages to P100,000 in line with current jurisprudence.[46] | |||||
|
2000-08-09 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| In cases of kidnapping, if the person detained is a child, the question is whether there was actual deprivation of the child's liberty, and whether it was the intention of the accused to deprive the parents of the custody of the child.[29] | |||||