Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. EDMUNDO BRIONES AYTALIN

This case has been cited 7 times or more.

	GR No. 191722 2013-12-11	PEOPLE v. GERRY SABANGAN LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
In order to be appreciated, the circumstance must not merely be premeditation; it must be "evident premeditation."[45] To warrant a finding of evident premeditation, the prosecution must establish the confluence of the following requisites: (a) the time when the offender determined to commit the crime; (b) an act manifestly indicating that the offender clung to his determination; and (c) a sufficient interval of time between the determination and the execution of the crime to allow him to reflect upon the consequences of his act.[46] Evident premeditation, like other circumstances that would qualify a killing as murder, must be established by clear and positive evidence showing the planning and the preparation stages prior to the killing. Without such evidence, mere presumptions and inferences, no matter how logical and probable, will not suffice.[47]
	GR No. 146100 2002-11-13	PEOPLE v. JOHNNY LOTERONO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
speculations[51] and must be proved as clearly and as convincingly as the killing itself.[52] Any doubt as to the existence of treachery must be resolved in favor of the accused.[53] Contrary to the claims of the prosecution in this regard, there is evidence on record which tends to show that the victim was able to defend himself, namely a wound on the left wrist of accused-appellant which was bleeding at the time he met Dato-on and Anota.[54] We likewise take exception to the finding of the trial court that the killing of Roie Babagio was premeditated. Like treachery, the elements of evident premeditation must be established with equal certainty as the criminal act itself[55] before it can be
	GR No. 146687 2002-08-22	PEOPLE v. BONNIE R. RABANAL YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
"fn">[35] In the case at bar, there was neither a description of how the attack was commenced whether it was sudden, unexpected and whether the victim was caught totally unaware nor has there been a showing that the method of execution in the commission of the crime was consciously or deliberately adopted by the malefactor. To reiterate, the existence of alevosia must be based on positive or conclusive proof, not mere suppositions or speculations,[36] and must be proved as clearly and as convincingly as the killing itself.[37] Any doubt as to the
	GR No. L-146308 2002-07-18	PEOPLE v. SIXTO PARAGAS Y DELA CRUZ PANGANIBAN, J.
A Nakasanayan ko na pon iyon, sir. Kada pagsakay ko ng jeep, tumitingin po ako sa mga pumapasok, at least kung may vacant pa, puwede mong ituro sa kanila po."[21] The testimonies of the prosecution witnesses more than sufficiently established the fact of the killing and the identities of the persons responsible therefor.[22]
	GR Nos. 140901-02 2002-05-09	PEOPLE v. ANGELO ZETA Y DOLOROSO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
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. Treachery must be based on positive or conclusive proofs, not mere suppositions or speculations. Moreover, it must be proved as clearly and as convincingly as the killing itself.[11]
	GR No. 142044 2001-11-23	PEOPLE v. TOBECHUKWU NICHOLAS Y MABENA YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
There was no showing of how the attack was commenced or that the method of execution in the commission of the crime was consciously or deliberately adopted by the malefactor. To reiterate, alevosia must be based on positive or conclusive proof, not mere suppositions or speculations[56] and must be proved as clearly and as convincingly as the killing itself.[57]
	GR No. 137457 2001-11-21	PEOPLE v. ROSAURO SIA Y DICHOSO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
In this case, there was neither a description of how the attack was commenced - whether it was sudden, unexpected and whether the victim was caught totally unaware - nor has there been a showing that the method of execution in the commission of the crime was consciously or deliberately adopted by the malefactors. To reiterate, alevosia cannot be established where no particulars are known regarding the manner in which the aggression was carried out or how it developed.[38] It must be based on positive or conclusive proof, not mere suppositions or speculations,[39] and must be proved as clearly and as convincingly as the killing itself.[40]