Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. ALEJANDRO GO-OD NESTOR GO-OD

This case has been cited 9 times or more.

	GR No. 140267 2004-06-29	PEOPLE v. BEN AMBROCIO QUISUMBING, J.
The appellee, through the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), counters that the evidence presented by the prosecution established all the elements of murder. The prosecution witnesses clearly identified all the accused. This fact belies the claim that it was Ben Ambrocio alone who killed the victim. The OSG invokes the doctrine in People v. Go-od[57] that mere averment of non-participation of the other accused does not suffice to overcome the positive identification of the malefactors by prosecution witnesses.[58]
	GR No. 146100 2002-11-13	PEOPLE v. JOHNNY LOTERONO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
[28] People v. Tomas Coca, et al., G.R. No. 133739, 29 May 2002, citing People v. Clariño, 31 July 2002, citing People v. Hilot, 342 SCRA 128 [2000] .
	GR No. 136790 2001-03-26	PEOPLE v. MANUEL GALVEZ Y ESTANISLAO MENDOZA, J.
As regards accused-appellant's civil liability, the trial court's award of P50,000.00 as indemnity to the heirs of the victim Romen Castro is in accord with our current rulings.[53] The award of actual damages in the amount of P30,000.00 should likewise be upheld. Although receipts should ordinarily support claims of actual damages, the defense in this case stipulated that Romen Castro's funeral and burial expenses amounted to P30,000.00. Hence, in view of the defense's admission as to the claim for actual damages, the award should be sustained.[54]
	GR Nos. 107529-30 2001-01-29	PEOPLE v. PATRICIO Y. BAGCAL QUISUMBING, J.
Treachery is the deliberate and unexpected attack on the victim without any warning and without giving him an opportunity to defend himself or repel the assault.[26] The fact that the victims were shot in the back does not per se indicate treachery. Nonetheless, undisputed is the fact that appellant fatally shot the unarmed victims while seated inside a car, unaware of any impending tragedy, and without opportunity to defend themselves. As the victims were totally unprepared for an unexpected and deliberate attack from behind, with no weapon to resist it, the shooting could only be described as treacherous.[27] The location of the gunshot wounds of the victims bolster the trial court's conclusion that treachery qualified the fatal shooting into murder. Abuse of superior strength need not be further shown. Treachery alone qualified the killing into murder and that absorbs the circumstance of abuse of superior strength.[28]
	GR No. 130281 2000-12-15	PEOPLE v. FELIX CELESTE QUISUMBING, J.
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and decide to commit it.[8] To establish conspiracy, all that is required is that the conspirators had the same purpose and were united in its execution.[9] Although it appears that it was appellant's co-accused who dealt Roy the death blow, we agree that appellant performed real and effective acts to carry out the killing. When appellant blocked and held the victim's pedicab, it deprived the latter of any means of escape, it also rendered the victim vulnerable to the sudden attack from behind by appellant's unknown confederate. In conspiracy, it is not necessary to show that all the conspirators actually killed the victim.[10] All the conspirators are liable as co-principals regardless of the extent and character of their participation, because the act of one is the act of all.[11]
	GR No. 123111 2000-09-13	PEOPLE v. JIMMY DAGAMI Y MORBOS PARDO, J.
In addition, the award of moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00 is justified considering the evidence that the widow suffered unbearable pain and anguish as a result of the killing of her husband.[17] Moral damages, which include mental anguish, serious anxiety and wounded feelings, may be recovered in criminal offenses resulting in the victim's death.[18] As stated, this is in addition to the indemnity of P50,000.00 that the trial court awarded.