Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. JOEMARIE JALBONIAN alias “Budo”

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR Nos. 204481-82 2015-10-14	ALBERT G. AMBAGAN v. PEOPLE VELASCO JR., J.
The finding of guilt based on the testimony of a lone witness is not uncommon in our jurisprudence.[63] Time and again, We have held that the testimony of a sole eyewitness is sufficient to support a conviction so long as it is clear, straightforward and worthy of credence by the trial court.[64] Such rulings were, therefore, premised on the fact that the credibility of the sole witness was duly established and observed in court.
	GR No. 189850 2014-09-22	PEOPLE v. REYNALDO TORRES DEL CASTILLO, J.
The existence of one aggravating circumstance also merits the grant of exemplary damages under Article 2230 of the New Civil Code. Pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, we likewise award P100,000.00 as exemplary damages to the victim's heirs.[47] An interest at the legal rate of 6% per annum on all awards of damages from the finality of this judgment until fully paid should likewise be granted to the heirs of Espino.[48]
	GR No. 196753 2014-04-21	PEOPLE v. ERWIN LALOG DEL CASTILLO, J.
As regards damages, the award of civil indemnity must be increased to P75,000.00 in line with prevailing jurisprudence.[11] The awards of moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00 and actual damages in the amount of P29,510.00 are proper. In addition, the heirs of the victim are entitled to an award of exemplary damages in the amount of P30,000.00.[12] Finally, interest at the rate of 6% per annum from date of finality of this judgment until the awards of damages are fully paid is imposed.[13]
	GR No. 195525 2014-02-05	PEOPLE v. WILFREDO GUNDA DEL CASTILLO, J.
Based on the above narrations, we find no cogent reason to depart from the findings of the trial court as affirmed by the CA, that appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder. Two prosecution witnesses positively identified him as the person who waylaid the victim, and with the help of his conspirators, stabbed the victim several times. According to the postmortem findings, the victim suffered 12 stab wounds which caused his death. There is also no doubt in our mind that the attack on the victim was attended by treachery. The victim was unarmed and had no inkling of the impending attack on his person. In fact, he was just on his way home together with his son Eladio Jr. The victim was attacked by appellant from behind with a blow to his head with a wooden pole. His cohorts then held the victim's arms rendering him helpless and immobile. In such position, there is no opportunity for the victim to escape or even offer a feeble resistance. Appellant then delivered the coup de grâce by stabbing the victim multiple times. Undoubtedly, treachery qualified the killing to murder. "There is treachery when the offender commits [a crime] against the person, employing means, methods or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution, without risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might make."[14] As regards conspiracy, the CA correctly ruled that it is not a circumstance which would aggravate or qualify the crime.
	GR No. 201092 2014-01-15	PEOPLE v. JOEL AQUINO Y CENDANA LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Jurisprudence also tells us that when a testimony is given in a candid and straightforward manner, there is no room for doubt that the witness is telling the truth.[14] A perusal of the testimony of Jefferson indicates that he testified in a manner that satisfies the aforementioned test of credibility. More importantly, during his time at the witness stand, Jefferson positively and categorically identified appellant as one of the individuals who stabbed his father.