Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. EDUARDO GONZALES

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 217380 2015-11-23	PEOPLE v. EDUARDO CUESTA Y ASTORGA MENDOZA, J.
In People v. Gonzales,[20] the Court ruled that the following elements must be established before the existence of treachery may be appreciated: (a) the employment of means of execution which would ensure the safety of the offender from defensive and retaliatory acts of the victim, giving the victim no opportunity to defend himself; and (b) the means, method and manner of execution were deliberately and consciously adopted by the offender. In short, the method employed by the accused rendered the victim defenseless and the same was purposely carried out by the accused.
	GR No. 213383 2015-06-22	PEOPLE v. ERNIE INCIONG Y ORENSE PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
In order for self-defense to be appreciated, accused-appellant must be able to prove by clear and convincing evidence the following elements: (a) unlawful aggression on the part of the victim; (b) reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it; and (c) lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.[21] An accused who invokes self-defense has the burden to prove all the aforesaid elements, the most important of which is unlawful aggression. Being the basic requirement in a plea of self-defense,[22] unlawful aggression must be proved first in order for self-defense to be successfully pleaded, whether complete or incomplete.[23] No self-defense can exist without unlawful aggression since there is no attack that the accused will have to prevent or repel.[24]
	GR No. 213214 2015-04-20	PEOPLE v. EUGENE SAMUYA PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
The existence of unlawful aggression is the basic requirement in a plea of self-defense,[32] either to justify the commission of a crime or to mitigate the imposable penalty. It is settled that without unlawful aggression, there can be no self-defense, whether complete or incomplete.[33] For unlawful aggression to justify or mitigate a crime, the same must be an actual, sudden, unexpected attack or imminent danger thereof, and not merely threatening and intimidating attitude, towards the one claiming self-defense.[34]
	GR No. 192150 2014-10-01	FEDERICO SABAY v. PEOPLE BRION, J.
Self-defense as a justifying circumstance under Article 11 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, implies the admission by the accused that he committed the acts that would have been criminal in character had it not been for the presence of circumstances whose legal consequences negate the commission of a crime.[28] The plea of self-defense in order to exculpate the accused must be duly proven. The most basic rule is that no self-defense can be recognized until unlawful aggression is established.[29]
	GR No. 181444 2013-07-17	BOBBY “ABEL” AVELINO Y BULAWAN v. PEOPLE VILLARAMA, JR., J.
The two elements that must be proven to establish treachery are: (a) the employment of means of execution which would ensure the safety of the offender from defensive and retaliatory acts of the victim, giving the victim no opportunity to defend himself; and (b) the means, method and manner of execution were deliberately and consciously adopted by the offender.[30] The two elements are present in this case.