This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2011-11-23 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Moreover, it is settled jurisprudence that for the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only that he was at some other place at the time of the commission of the crime, but also that it was physically impossible for him to be at the locus delicti or within its immediate vicinity.[49] Appellant's own categorical admission that he regularly went to the alleged boarding house of the victim and his two other children to give them their provisions for food and other expenses cast major doubt on his defense of alibi because, even if it were true, this only demonstrates that it was not physically impossible for appellant to be at the locus delicti when the victim was repeatedly raped. | |||||
|
2011-02-09 |
NACHURA, J. |
||||
| In murder, the grant of civil indemnity, which has been fixed by jurisprudence at P50,000.00, requires no proof other than the fact of death as a result of the crime, and proof of an accused's responsibility therefor. Similarly, moral damages are awarded in view of the violent death of the victim, and these do not require any allegation or proof of the emotional sufferings of the heirs.[26] We, therefore, sustain the awards of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages to the heirs of Edwin. | |||||