Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. RODRIGO GALVEZ Y JEREZ

This case has been cited 9 times or more.

	GR No. 174474 2007-05-25	PEOPLE v. LEODEGARIO G. GREGORIO GARCIA, J.
With regard to the civil indemnity, we rule that XXX is entitled to the amount of P50,000.00 for each count of rape in keeping with the current jurisprudence authorizing the mandatory award without need of proof other than the fact of the commission of the offense.[22] In addition, the victim should be awarded moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00 for each count.[23] Finally, exemplary damages in the sum of P25,000.00 in each case of rape are likewise imposed on appellant to deter other fathers with perverse tendencies and aberrant sexual behavior from preying upon and sexually abusing their daughters.[24]
	GR No. 124474 & 139972-78 2003-01-28	PEOPLE v. SILVERIO MONTEMAYOR AZCUNA, J.
Thus, we are not inclined to deviate from the established rule that testimonies of rape victims, especially child victims, are given full weight and credit.[39] It bears emphasis that the victim in this case was barely twelve (12) years old when she was raped. In a litany of cases, the Court has applied the well settled rule that when a woman, more so if she is a minor, says she has been raped, she says in effect, all that is necessary to prove that rape was committed.[40] We give greater weight to the testimony of a girl who is a victim of sexual assault, especially a minor, for it is most unnatural for a young and immature girl to fabricate a story as sordid as her own defilement, allow a medical examination of her genitalia, subject herself to a public trial and expose herself to public ridicule for no reason other than her thirst for justice.[41]
	GR No. 124474 & 139972-78 2003-01-28	PEOPLE v. SILVERIO MONTEMAYOR AZCUNA, J.
Civil indemnity must be awarded to complainant Aileen S. Alba. Civil indemnity, which is mandatory in a finding of rape, is distinct from and should not be denominated as moral damages which are based on different jural foundations and assessed by the court in the exercise of sound discretion. [57] In accordance with prevailing jurisprudence, we grant civil indemnity of Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) in each case.[58]
	GR No. 140676 2002-07-31	PEOPLE v. JAIME GONZALES Y PALLER PANGANIBAN, J.
serious as rape, if what she claims is not true.[18] Courts usually give greater weight to the testimony of the victim of a sexual assault, especially a minor.[19] No woman, especially one so young, would concoct a tale of defloration; allow the examination of her private parts; and undergo the expense,
	GR No. 143677 2002-05-09	PEOPLE v. BENITO LACHICA Y LLAMAS PANGANIBAN, J.
Appellant did not raise the sufficiency of the prosecution's evidence as an issue. This Court, however, looked into it motu proprio, consistent with the principle that an appeal in a criminal action opens the whole case. Any review of a rape case begins with the settled reality that accusing a person of this crime can be done with facility.[14] While it may not be easy for the complainant to prove its commission, it is even more difficult for the accused, although innocent, to disprove his guilt. In view of the intrinsic nature of this crime where only two persons are normally involved, the testimony of the complainant must always be scrutinized with great caution. Thus, in a prosecution for rape, credibility becomes the single most important issue.[15] Also, the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits; it cannot draw strength from the weakness of that for the defense.[16]
	GR No. 138987 2002-02-06	PEOPLE v. RODOLFO RODRIGUEZ PUNO, J.
Anent the damages, current case law fixes civil indemnity in case of simple rape at P50,000.00 and moral damages also at P50,000.00. Prevailing jurisprudence also sets exemplary damages at P25,000.00 to "deter other fathers with perverse tendencies and aberrant sexual behavior from preying upon and sexually abusing their daughters."[35]
	GR Nos. 134488-89 2002-01-25	PEOPLE v. PEPITO FLORES Y MARIANO PUNO, J.
The Court notes that while the trial court awarded moral damages, it did not award civil indemnity. In line with current jurisprudence, civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000.00 on each count should be awarded, or a total of P100,000.00, without need of proof other than the fact of the commission of the offense.[17] Exemplary damages in each case of rape, pegged at P25,000.00 in accord with controlling case law, must likewise be awarded "to deter other fathers with perverse tendencies and aberrant sexual behavior from preying upon and sexually abusing their daughters."[18]
	GR Nos. 142741-43 2001-10-25	PEOPLE v. ROMEO MANAYAN PANGANIBAN, J.
At the outset, we lay down the guiding principles used by this Court in reviewing a rape case. The Court has consistently ruled that in the disposition thereof,[17] it will be guided by the settled realities that an accusation of rape can be made with facility. While it may not be easy for the complainant to prove the commission of the crime, it is even more difficult for the one accused, although innocent, to disprove one's guilt. In view of the intrinsic nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are normally involved, the testimony of the complainant must always be scrutinized with great caution. Thus, in a prosecution for rape, credibility becomes the single most important issue. Also, the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits; it cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of that for the defense.[18]
	GR Nos. 142741-43 2001-10-25	PEOPLE v. ROMEO MANAYAN PANGANIBAN, J.
Courts usually give greater weight to the testimony of the victim of a sexual assault, especially a minor. No woman would be willing to undergo a public trial and put up with the shame, the humiliation and the dishonor of exposing her own degradation were it not to condemn an injustice and to have the offender apprehended and punished.[23] The embarrassment and stigma she suffered in allowing an examination of her private parts and testifying in open court on the painfully intimate details of her ravishment effectively rule out the possibility of a false accusation of rape.[24] In a litany of cases, this Court has applied the well-settled rule that when a woman -- more so if she is a minor -- says she has been raped, she says, in effect, all that is necessary to prove that rape was committed.[25] Her account of her horrible ordeal evinced sincerity and truthfulness.