Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. MARK JOSEPH ZAPUIZ Y RAMOS

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 214506 2015-10-19	PEOPLE v. OSCAR PARBA Y SOLON PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
In order to convict a person charged with the crime of Murder, the prosecution must establish the following elements beyond reasonable doubt: (a) that a person was killed; (b) the accused killed him or her; (c) the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 248 of the RPC; and (d) the killing does not constitute Parricide or Infanticide.[26]
	GR No. 213214 2015-04-20	PEOPLE v. EUGENE SAMUYA PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
In order to convict a person charged with the crime of Murder, the prosecution must establish beyond reasonable doubt that: (a) a person was killed; (b) the accused killed him or her; (c) the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 248 of the RPC; and (d) the killing does not constitute Parricide or Infanticide.[25]
	GR No. 206381 2015-03-25	PEOPLE v. DANIEL MATIBAG Y DE VILLA PERLAS-BERNABE, J.
Matibag is charged with the crime of Murder, which is defined and penalized under Article 248 of the RPC, as amended. In order to warrant a conviction, the prosecution must establish by proof beyond reasonable doubt that: (a) a person was killed; (b) the accused killed him or her; (c) the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 248 of the RPC; and (d) the killing is not Parricide or Infanticide.[21]
	GR No. 201092 2014-01-15	PEOPLE v. JOEL AQUINO Y CENDANA LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Nevertheless, it is jurisprudentially settled that positive identification prevails over alibi since the latter can easily be fabricated and is inherently unreliable.[19] It is likewise settled that where there is nothing to indicate that a witness for the prosecution was actuated by improper motive, the presumption is that he was not so actuated and his testimony is entitled to full faith and credit.[20] In the case at bar, no allegation was made nor proven to show that Jefferson had any ill motive to falsely testify against appellant.
	GR No. 197039 2013-06-05	PEOPLE PHILIPPINES v. ARIEL CALARA Y ABALOS PEREZ, J.
Other than exemplary damages, the award of other damages is in order. In conformity with the prevailing jurisprudence[28], the amount of exemplary damages is increased to P30,000.00. In addition, an interest of 6% is imposed on the damages awarded in this case as a natural and probable consequence of the acts of the accused complained of.[29]