This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2001-01-16 |
DE LEON, JR., J. |
||||
| The contention has merit. The rule is that under normal conditions, when the conspiracy is directly established with proof of the attendant deliberation and selection of the method, time and means of executing the crimes, the existence of evident premeditation may be taken for granted.[77] In case of implied conspiracy, however, there must be proof as to how and when the plan was hatched and the time that elapsed before it was carried out, so it can be determined if the accused had sufficient time between its inception and its fulfillment to dispassionately consider the commission of the crime and its consequences.[78] In the case at bar, the prosecution failed to prove the aforementioned requisites. | |||||