Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. HENRY ALMAZAN

This case has been cited 6 times or more.

	GR No. 191721 2011-01-12	PEOPLE v. ROGELIO DOLORIDO Y ESTRADA VELASCO JR., J.
A person who invokes self-defense has the burden of proof of proving all the elements.[12] However, the most important among all the elements is the element of unlawful aggression. Unlawful aggression must be proved first in order for self-defense to be successfully pleaded, whether complete or incomplete. As this Court said in People v. Catbagan,[13] "There can be no self-defense, whether complete or incomplete, unless the victim had committed unlawful aggression against the person who resorted to self-defense."
	GR No. 192581 2010-11-17	PEOPLE v. DENNIS D. MANULIT VELASCO JR., J.
The essential elements of self-defense are: (1) unlawful aggression on the part of the victim; (2) reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel such aggression; and (3) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person resorting to self-defense.[33] The person who invokes self-defense has the burden of proof of proving all the elements.[34] More importantly, "to invoke self-defense successfully, there must have been an unlawful and unprovoked attack that endangered the life of the accused, who was then forced to inflict severe wounds upon the assailant by employing reasonable means to resist the attack."[35]
	GR No. 135619 2004-01-15	ADONIS ARADILLOS v. CA AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
Testimonial evidence to be credible should not only come from the mouth of a credible witness but should also be credible, reasonable and in accord with human experience, failing in which, it should be rejected.[36]
	GR No. 148912 2003-09-10	PEOPLE v. TIMOTEO ESCARLOS PANGANIBAN, J.
"In pleading self-defense, petitioner in effect admitted that he stabbed the victim. It was then incumbent upon him to prove that justifying circumstance to the satisfaction of the court, relying on the strength of his evidence and not on the weakness of the prosecution. The reason is that even if the prosecution evidence were weak, such could not be disbelieved after petitioner admitted the fact of stabbing the victim."[18] The accused who avers that the killing arose from an impulse of self-defense has the onus probandi of proving the elements thereof.[19] The essential requisites of self-defense are the following: (1) unlawful aggression on the part of the victim; (2) reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel such aggression; and (3) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person resorting to self-defense.[20] Verily, to invoke self-defense successfully, there must have been an unlawful and unprovoked attack that endangered the life of the accused, who was then forced to inflict severe wounds upon the assailant by employing reasonable means to resist the attack.[21]
	GR Nos. 132130-31 2002-05-29	PEOPLE v. JESUS SUMIBCAY Y REPOLLO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN NOT ACQUITTING ACCUSED-APPELLANT ON GROUNDS OF REASONABLE DOUBT.[16] Accused-appellant's self-defense theory is unavailing. In alleging that the killing arose from an impulse to defend oneself, the onus probandi rests upon accused-appellant to prove by clear and convincing evidence the following elements: (a) that there was unlawful aggression on the part of the victim; (b) that there was reasonable necessity for the means employed to prevent or repel it; and, (c) that there was lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the defendant.[17]
	GR No. 137610-11 2002-02-06	PEOPLE v. MANUEL GUTIERREZ PUNO, J.
IN VIEW WHEREOF, the impugned decision is MODIFIED. The accused-appellant is found guilty of three (3) counts of Murder and sentenced to suffer the penalty of three (3) sentences of reclusion perpetua and to pay for each count P50,000.00 civil indemnity and P50,000.00 moral damages.[32] He is also found guilty of one (1) count of frustrated murder and sentenced to suffer the penalty of eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor medium as minimum to fourteen (14) years and ten (10) months of reclusion temporal medium as maximum, and to pay the civil indemnity of P30,000.00.[33] He is also found guilty of three (3) counts of attempted murder and sentenced to suffer the indeterminate prison term of two (2) years, four (4) months and ten (10) days of prision correccional medium as minimum, to eight (8) years, two (2) months and twenty (20) days of prision mayor medium as maximum, and to pay the civil indemnity of P20,000.00 for each count.[34] Costs against accused-appellant.