This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2014-09-22 |
BRION, J. |
||||
| Pursuant to Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, we review the decision[1] and the resolution[2] of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No. 29371 which denied the appeal of Nenita Carganillo (petitioner). The CA affirmed, with modification as to penalty, the judgment[3] of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 30, Cabanatuan City, convicting the petitioner of the crime of estafa, defined and penalized under Article 315, paragraph 1(b) of the Revised Penal Code, as amended. | |||||
|
2002-07-30 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| On this score this Court agrees. It bears stressing that conspiracy must be proved as convincingly and indubitably as the crime itself.[25] Like conspiracy, treachery and evident premeditation, as qualifying circumstances, must be proved as clearly and | |||||
|
2001-03-07 |
DE LEON, JR., J. |
||||
| Q What did you do when you arrived there? A I tried to pacify them but they even threatened to kill me, sir.[44] The existence of conspiracy cannot be presumed. Similar to the physical act constituting the crime itself, the elements of conspiracy must be proven beyond reasonable doubt. Mere presence at the scene of the incident, knowledge of the plan or acquiescence thereto are not sufficient grounds to hold a person liable as a conspirator.[45] The mere fact that the accused had prior knowledge of the criminal design of the principal perpetrator and aided the latter in consummating the crime likewise does not automatically make him a co-conspirator. Both knowledge of and participation in the criminal act are also inherent elements of an accomplice.[46] As such, conspiracy must be established as any element of the crime and evidence of conspiracy must be beyond reasonable doubt. | |||||
|
2001-01-16 |
GONZAGA-REYES, J. |
||||
| The essence of conspiracy is community of criminal intent. It exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and perform overt acts to commit it.[40] The overt act may consist of active participation in the actual commission of the criminal act, or it may be in the form of moral assistance such as the exertion of moral ascendancy over the other co-conspirators by moving them to implement the conspiracy.[41] Conspiracy may be proven by direct evidence, or deduced from the manner in which the offense was committed, as when the accused acted in concert to achieve the same objective.[42] A finding of conspiracy results in grave consequences to the accused, as each is held responsible for the acts of all the co-conspirators which proceeded from the same criminal intent. Thus, it is required that conspiracy be established as any element of the crime and proven beyond reasonable doubt.[43] | |||||