Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. EDGARDD LUPAC Y FLORES

This case has been cited 8 times or more.

	GR No. 212336 2015-07-15	PEOPLE v. ARSENIO D. MISA III VILLARAMA, JR., J.
On appeal,[23] the CA in its September 30, 2013 Decision affirmed the RTC's findings. The CA noticed that while the prosecution presented AAA's birth certificate as Exhibit 'H' in its formal offer of exhibits, no such document was surrendered by the prosecution to the trial court. In its May 13, 2013 Resolution, the CA required the Clerk of Court of the RTC to submit Exhibit 'H'. In her June 7, 2013 affidavit, the Court Interpreter alluded that the said exhibit was never attached to the prosecution's formal offer.[24] It however stated that while it agreed with the RTC that appellant had carnal knowledge of AAA, he could only be found guilty of simple rape because AAA's minority was not proven in evidence in accord with this Court's ruling in People v. Lupac[25] reiterating People v. Pruna.[26] The CA thus held:IN LIGHT OF ALL THE FOREGOING, the Court hereby AFFIRMS and [MODIFIES] the assailed Judgment dated September 18, 2007, of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 14, Cebu City in Criminal Case [No.] CBU-72202. Accused-Appellant ARSENIO D. MISA, III is found GUILTY of the crime of simple rape and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua. Accused-Appellant is ordered to pay AAA the amount of Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php 50,000.00) as civil indemnity; Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php 50,000.00) as moral damages; and Thirty Thousand Pesos (Php 30,000.00) as exemplary damages, plus legal interest on all damages awarded at the rate of six percent (6%) from the date of the finality of this decision until fully paid.
	GR No. 208749 2014-11-26	PEOPLE v. ANECITO ESTIBAL Y CALUNGSAG REYES, J.
In People v. Lupac,[46] the Court accepted as part of res gestae the 10-year-old victim's denunciation of her uncle to a neighbor whom she met soon after she managed to get away from her uncle after the rape, uttering the words "hindot" and "inano ako ni Kuya Ega."[47]
	GR No. 202838 2014-09-17	PEOPLE v. JULITO GERANDOY PEREZ, J.
Direct evidence is not the only means of proving rape beyond reasonable doubt.[26] Even without direct evidence, the accused may be convicted on the basis of circumstantial evidence, provided the proven circumstances constitute an unbroken chain leading to one fair reasonable conclusion pointing to the accused, to the exclusion of all others, as the guilty person.[27]
	GR No. 182794 2014-09-08	PEOPLE v. BOBBY BELGAR BERSAMIN, J.
The elements of the crime charged are that the offender had carnal knowledge of a female, and that the same was committed by using force, threat or intimidation.[16] The elements were proved beyond reasonable doubt. According to AAA, Belgar poked a knife at her neck, forced her to get up from her sleep, and dragged her outside of the house. She resisted and would have shouted but he warned her against shouting, and threatened to stab her and her sleeping sisters. Once they were outside, he injected a substance into her belly, thereby causing her to lose consciousness. Upon regaining her consciousness, she was already naked and had blood in her vagina.
	GR No. 205382 2014-04-02	PEOPLE v. MAURICIO HALLARTE Y MENDOZA PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
In this case, the Court gives full weight to the RTC's finding, as affirmed by the CA, that appellant indeed committed the crimes charged and is therefore guilty beyond reasonable doubt therefor. As observed by the RTC, which had the opportunity to personally scrutinize both AAA's and BBB's conduct and demeanor during trial, they were credible witnesses whose testimonies must be accorded great probative weight. The trial judge's evaluation, which the CA sustained, now binds the Court, leaving to the appellant the burden to bring to the fore facts or circumstances of weight that were otherwise overlooked, misapprehended or misinterpreted but would materially affect the disposition of the case differently if duly considered.[42] Unfortunately for appellant, he failed to discharge this burden.
	GR No. 201728 2013-07-17	PEOPLE v. MARVIN CRUZ REYES, J.
Both the RTC and the CA, however, failed to award exemplary damages. Exemplary damages are imposed in a criminal case as part of the civil liability "when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances."[29] Given the attendance of an aggravating circumstance in this case, that is, AAA's minority, exemplary damages in the amount of P30,000.00 should then be awarded to AAA.[30]
	GR No. 187740 2013-04-10	PEOPLE OF PHILIPPINES v. MANUEL CATACUTAN PEREZ, J.
Hence, the trial court correctly imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua for the rape of AAA, who was then under 12 years old, as evidenced by her birth certificate.[33] We increase the amount of moral damages and civil indemnity from P50,000.00 each to P75,000.00,[34] considering that the crime committed is statutory rape. We additionally award exemplary damages in the amount of P30,000.00. Exemplary damages are imposed in a criminal case as part of the civil liability when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances, minority in this case.[35] Also, in line with current jurisprudence,[36] all the monetary awards for damages shall earn interest at the legal rate of 6% per annum from date of finality of this Decision until fully paid.
	GR No. 170634 2013-01-08	PEOPLE v. PEDRO BUADO BERSAMIN, J.
The arguments of the accused are unwarranted. The essence of rape is the carnal knowledge of a female either against her will (through force or intimidation) or without her consent (where the female is deprived of reason or otherwise unconscious, or is under 12 years of age, or is demented).[51]