This case has been cited 5 times or more.
|
2014-07-09 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| Indeed, no prosecution witness has actually seen the commission of the crime. But jurisprudence tells us that direct evidence of the crime is not the only matrix from which a trial court may draw its conclusion and finding of guilt. The rules on evidence allow a trial court to rely on circumstantial evidence to support its conclusion of guilt.[19] The lack of direct evidence does not ipso facto bar the finding of guilt against the appellant. As long as the prosecution establishes the appellant's participation in the crime through credible and sufficient circumstantial evidence that leads to the inescapable conclusion that the appellant committed the imputed crime, the latter should be convicted.[20] In the case at bar, those circumstances were enumerated by the CA in its decision, as follows: First. Appellant had an axe to grind against Elizabeth for filing a robbery case against him. Elizabeth got murdered the night before the initial hearing of the case; | |||||
|
2014-07-09 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| "[C]ircumstantial evidence is sufficient to sustain a conviction if (i) there is more than one circumstance; (ii) the facts from which the inference is derived are proven; and (iii) the combination of all circumstances is such as to produce conviction beyond reasonable doubt. All the foregoing elements were sufficiently established in this case."[21] | |||||
|
2014-07-09 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| In conformity with current jurisprudence, however, we increase the amount of civil indemnity from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00.[23] Civil indeminity is given without need of proof other than the fact of death as a result of the crime and proof of appellant's responsibility for it.[24] We also increase the award of exemplary damages granted by the CA from P25,000.00 to P30,000.00 consisted with prevailing jurisprudence.[25] | |||||
|
2014-01-22 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| However, we must modify the amounts of moral and exemplary damages already awarded in order to conform to existing jurisprudence. Therefore, the exemplary damages awarded should be increased from P20,000.00 to P30,000.00.[27] Moreover, there being no aggravating circumstance present in this case, the award of moral damages in the amount of P75,000.00 should be decreased to P50,000.00.[28] Lastly, the interest rate of 6% per annum is imposed on all damages awarded from the date of finality of this ruling until fully paid.[29] | |||||
|
2014-01-15 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Pursuant to current jurisprudence, the award of civil indemnity in the amount of P75,000.00[29] and exemplary damages in the amount of P30,000.00[30] is correct. The amount of actual damages duly proven in court in the sum of P60,100.00 is likewise upheld. Finally, we impose interest at the rate of 6% per annum on all damages from the date of finality of this ruling until fully paid.[31] | |||||