Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. JONATHAN 'UTO' VELOSO Y RAMA

This case has been cited 9 times or more.

	GR No. 207774 2014-06-30	PEOPLE v. CARLOS ALHAMBRA Y MASING REYES, J.
In addition, and in conformity with current policy, the Court imposes interest on all monetary awards for damages at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this Resolution until fully paid.[30]
	GR No. 200920 2014-06-09	PEOPLE v. JERUSALEM ESTEBAN Y BALLESTEROS REYES, J.
In addition, and in conformity with current policy, the Court imposes interest on all monetary awards for damages at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this Resolution until fully paid.[17]
	GR No. 208761 2014-06-04	PEOPLE v. ROLANDO BARAGA Y ARCILLA REYES, J.
In addition, and in conformity with current policy, the Court imposes interest on all monetary awards for damages at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this Resolution until fully paid.[16]
	GR No. 208007 2014-04-02	PEOPLE v. RODRIGO GUTIEREZ Y ROBLES LEONEN, J.
As shown by her testimony, AAA was able to narrate in a clear and categorical manner the ordeal that was done to her. As a child-victim who has taken significant risks in coming to court, her testimony deserves full weight and credence. People v. Veloso[23] stated that: In a litany of cases, this Court has ruled that the testimonies of child-victims of rape are to be given full weight and credence. Reason and experience dictate that a girl of tender years, who barely understands sex and sexuality, is unlikely to impute to any man a crime so serious as rape, if what she claims is not true. Her candid narration of how she was raped bears the earmarks of credibility, especially if no ill will as in this case motivates her to testify falsely against the accused. It is well-settled that when a woman, more so when she is a minor, says she has been raped, she says in effect all that is required to prove the ravishment. The accused may thus be convicted solely on her testimony provided it is credible, natural, convincing and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[24]
	GR No. 198452 2014-02-19	PEOPLE v. VICENTE ROM PEREZ, J.
It is a fundamental rule that findings of the trial court which are factual in nature and which involve the credibility of witnesses are accorded with respect, more so, when no glaring errors, gross misapprehension of facts, and speculative, arbitrary, and unsupported conclusions can be gathered from such findings. The reason behind this rule is that the trial court is in a better position to decide the credibility of witnesses having heard their testimonies and observed their deportment and manner of testifying during the trial.[36] The rule finds an even more stringent application where the trial court's findings are sustained by the Court of Appeals.[37]
	GR No. 198389 2013-12-11	VIVENCIO ROALLOS Y TRILLANES v. PEOPLE REYES, J.
In addition, and in conformity with current policy, the Court imposes interest on all monetary awards for damages at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this Resolution until fully paid.[29]
	GR No. 199494 2013-11-27	PEOPLE v. WELMO LINSIE Y BINEVIDEZ LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
We have repeatedly held that what is decisive in a rape charge is that the commission of the rape by the accused against the complainant has been sufficiently proven; and that inconsistencies and discrepancies as to minor matters which are irrelevant to the elements of the crime cannot be considered grounds for acquittal.[15] Furthermore, we have recently reiterated that rape victims are not expected to make an errorless recollection of the incident, so humiliating and painful that they might be trying to obliterate it from their memory, thus, a few inconsistent remarks in rape cases will not necessarily impair the testimony of the offended party.[16]
	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. 202020 2013-03-13	MIKE ALVIN PIELAGO Y ROS v. PEOPLE REYES, J.
As can be gleaned from the records, the RTC and CA correctly imposed the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment ranging from seven (7) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to twelve (12) years and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum, with the accessory penalties provided for by law considering that Pielago voluntarily surrendered to the police authorities before a warrant of arrest could be issued against him. However, in line with the existing jurisprudence on the matter, the award of exemplary damages should be increased from P25,000.00 to P30,000.00.[31] In addition, and in conformity with the current policy, we also impose on all the monetary awards for damages interest at the legal rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this decision until fully paid.[32]