Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. JOVITO SITAO

This case has been cited 6 times or more.

	GR Nos. 148063-64 2004-06-17	PEOPLE v. MAXIMO IBARRIENTOS Y PERICO QUISUMBING, J.
Circumstances that qualify a crime and increase its penalty to death cannot be the subject of speculation. The appellant cannot be condemned to suffer the extreme penalty of death on the basis of stipulations or admissions. This strict rule is warranted by the gravity and irreversibility of capital punishment. Proof of the age of the victim cannot consist merely of testimony. Neither can a stipulation of the parties with respect to the victim's age be considered sufficient proof of minority.[86]
	GR Nos. 138195-96 2003-07-10	PEOPLE v. NICANOR ROA CARPIO MORALES, J.
indemnity.[33]And following People v. Sitao,[34] the victim should also be awarded moral damages of P50,000.00 for each count. More. In People v. Catubig,[35] this Court held that if an aggravating circumstance is not alleged in the information but is established during trial, the complainant may still be entitled to exemplary damages. In the case at bar, although the
	GR No. 148134 2003-07-08	PEOPLE v. GEORGE BUENAFLOR Y LABNOTIN PUNO, J.
IN VIEW THEREOF, the Resolution of the Regional Trial Court of Irosin, Sorsogon in Crim. Case No. 1193, dated February 16, 2000, finding appellant George Buenaflor y Labnotin guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of rape, and imposing upon him the penalty of imprisonment of reclusion perpetua is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that the appellant is ordered to pay the offended party Merly Marcaida the amounts of P50,000.00 as moral damages,[15] and P50,000.00 as civil indemnity ex delicto.[16]
	GR Nos. 148368-70 2003-07-08	PEOPLE v. EDUARDO FABIAN Y MARI PUNO, J.
IN VIEW THEREOF, the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City in Crim. Cases Nos. Q-99-85973 to 75, dated March 21, 2001, finding appellant Eduardo Fabian y Mari guilty beyond reasonable doubt of three (3) counts of rape, and imposing upon him the penalty of imprisonment of reclusión perpetua for each count, and payment of indemnity in favor of complainant Marietta Tingson y Suiza in the amount of FIFTY THOUSAND PESOS (P50,000.00) as actual or compensatory damages for each count is hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that the accused-appellant is ordered to pay the complainant Marietta Tingson y Suiza the additional amount of P50,000.00 as moral damages,[19] for each count of rape.
	GR Nos. 136870-72 2003-01-28	PEOPLE v. WILSON SALVADOR Y GAGARIN PUNO, J.
Q: With whom did you inquire (about) that information among the persons who came to you? A: Nelson Salvador, sir."[28] With regard the monetary award, law and justice dictate that upon the finding of the fact of rape, the award of civil indemnity ex delicto becomes mandatory. However, we find the trial court's award of P200,000.00 as excessive. Consonant with decided cases, we reduce the civil indemnity to P50,000.00.[29] We also grant P50,000.00 as moral damages, without need of proof,[30] and P25,000.00 as exemplary damages, to discourage abuse of young girls, especially by their relatives.[31]
	GR No. 142577 2002-12-27	PEOPLE v. RUPERTO RAMOS Y DELA CRUZ CALLEJO, SR., J.
qualifying circumstances must be proved with equal certainty and clearness as the crime itself, otherwise, there can be no conviction of the crime in its qualified form.[20] As a special qualifying circumstance of the crime of rape, the concurrence of the victim's minority and her relationship to the accused must be both alleged and proven beyond reasonable doubt. To prove the minority of Jocelyn, the prosecution was burdened to adduce in