This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2010-04-19 |
DEL CASTILLO, J. |
||||
| We are not impressed with petitioner's argument that he should be held liable only for reckless imprudence resulting in homicide due to the absence of intent to kill Lucrecio. When death resulted, even if there was no intent to kill, the crime is homicide, not just physical injuries, since with respect to crimes of personal violence, the penal law looks particularly to the material results following the unlawful act and holds the aggressor responsible for all the consequences thereof.[22] Accordingly, Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code provides: Art. 4. Criminal liability - Criminal liability shall be incurred: | |||||
|
2000-06-19 |
PUNO, J. |
||||
| In the absence of evidence to the contrary, the law presumes that every person is of sound mind[43] and that all acts are voluntary.[44] The moral and legal presumption under our law is that freedom and intelligence constitute the normal condition of a person.[45] This presumption, however, may be overthrown by other factors; and one of these is insanity which exempts the actor from criminal liability.[46] | |||||