This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2014-12-08 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| Every person criminally liable for a felony is also civilly liable. The acquittal of an accused of the crime charged, however, does not necessarily extinguish his civil liability.[31] In Manantan v. CA,[32] the Court expounded on the two kinds of acquittal recognized by our law and their concomitant effects on the civil liability of the accused, as follows: Our law recognizes two kinds of acquittal, with different effects on the civil liability of the accused. First is an acquittal on the ground that the accused is not the author of the act or omission complained of. This instance closes the door to civil liability, for a person who has been found to be not the perpetrator of any act or omission cannot and can never be held liable for such act or omission. There being no delict, civil liability ex delicto is out of the question, and the civil action, if any, which may be instituted must be based on grounds other than the delict complained of. This is the situation contemplated in Rule 111 of the Rules of Court. The second instance is an acquittal based on reasonable doubt on the guilt of the accused. In this case, even if the guilt of the accused has not been satisfactorily established, he is not exempt from civil liability which may be proved by preponderance of evidence only.[33] | |||||