This case has been cited 5 times or more.
|
2003-09-29 |
PUNO, J. |
||||
| For voluntary surrender to be appreciated, the following requisites should be present: (1) the offender has not been actually arrested; (2) the offender surrendered himself to a person in authority or the latter's agent; and (3) the surrender was voluntary.[102] Further, the surrender must be spontaneous in such a manner that it shows the interest of the accused to surrender unconditionally to the authorities, either because he acknowledged his guilt or because he wishes to save them the trouble and expenses necessarily incurred in search and capture.[103] All these requisites have been complied with in the case at bar. | |||||
|
2003-06-10 |
AZCUNA, J. |
||||
| In the absence of the qualifying circumstance of treachery, the crime committed is Homicide, not Murder.[70] The penalty therefor, under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code, is reclusion temporal. Considering the attendant mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, the penalty should be imposed in its minimum period, pursuant to Article 64 (2) of the aforesaid Code.[71] Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, appellant's sentence will consist of a minimum that is anywhere within the full range of prision mayor, and a maximum which is anywhere within reclusion temporal in its minimum period. We hereby fix it to be from eight (8) years of prision mayor as minimum, to thirteen (13) years of reclusion temporal, as maximum. | |||||
|
2002-12-09 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| accused had openly admitted his responsibility for the killing.[8] To prove self-defense, the accused must show with clear and convincing evidence that: (1) he is not the unlawful aggressor; (2) there was lack of sufficient provocation on his part; and (3) he employed reasonable means to prevent or repel the aggression. Self-defense, like | |||||
|
2002-08-22 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| party might make. For treachery to exist, two essential elements must concur: (a) the employment of means of execution that gives the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or to retaliate, and (b) the said means of execution was deliberately or consciously adopted.[12] The essence of treachery is that the attack comes without warning and in a swift, deliberate and unexpected manner, affording the hapless, unarmed and unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or to escape.[13] Treachery cannot be established where no particulars are known regarding the manner in which the aggression was carried out, or how it began or developed.[14] Treachery cannot be presumed; it must be proved by clear and convincing evidence or as conclusively as the killing itself.[15] The prosecution failed to prove the presence of treachery as convincingly and conclusively as the killing. Although Richard was unarmed, the trial court only presumed that he was also caught by surprise or that the shooting was sudden and unexpected thereby affording Richard | |||||
|
2002-08-22 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| range, all of them concentrated on the chest area and each of them fatal.[27] It bears repeating in this regard that the nature and number of wounds inflicted by the accused are constantly and unremittingly considered as important indicia which disprove the plea for self-defense because they demonstrate a determined effort to kill the victim and not just defend oneself.[28] All told, the Court finds no reason to reverse the ruling of the court a quo insofar as accused-appellant's culpability is concerned. | |||||