This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2003-10-01 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| We agree with appellant that the crime committed was not murder. The qualifying circumstance of treachery was not sufficiently established by the prosecution. The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack by an aggressor on an unsuspecting victim, depriving the latter of any real chance to defend himself, thereby ensuring its commission without risk to the aggressor, without the slightest provocation on the part of the victim.[14] | |||||
|
2003-09-24 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack by an aggressor on an unsuspecting victim, depriving the latter of any real chance to defend himself, thereby ensuring its commission without risk to the aggressor, without the slightest provocation on the part of the victim.[19] Abuse of superior strength is present whenever there is a notorious inequality of forces between the victim and the aggressor, assuming a situation of superiority of strength notoriously advantageous for the aggressor selected or taken advantage of by him in the commission of the crime. It must be shown by clear and convincing evidence that this qualifying circumstance was consciously sought by the assailants.[20] | |||||
|
2003-05-08 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Net earning capacity = 2/3 x (80-35) x [P108,000 ½ (P108,000)] = 2/3 x (45) x P54,000 = 35.33 x P54,000 = P1, 620,000 We delete the twenty five thousand peso-award for actual expenses in the absence of requisite proof,[37] but in lieu thereof, P10,000 is awarded as nominal damages.[38] As for moral damages, pursuant to current jurisprudence, the amount should be increased to P50,000.[39] The award of P50,000 as death indemnity to the heirs of the deceased is retained as well as the award of P20,000 as exemplary damages, which we find to be sufficient and justified by the presence of the qualifying circumstance of treachery. | |||||