This case has been cited 5 times or more.
|
2002-01-25 |
BELLOSILLO, J. |
||||
| On the other hand, accused-appellant's defense is basically alibi.[25] Alibi is a weak defense and cannot overturn the positive identification by the prosecution witness of the assailant. For alibi to prosper, it must be shown that the accused was at another place for such a period of time that it was impossible for him to have been at the place where the crime was committed at the time of its commission.[26] In the case at bar, it has been determined from the testimonies of the defense witnesses Jaypee de Guzman and Martin Ibabao that the distance from accused-appellant's house to the scene of the crime is more or less one hundred (100) meters.[27] Accused-appellant's alibi does not satisfactorily show that it was physically impossible for him to have participated in the shooting. | |||||
|
2001-11-22 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Finally, a modification of the damages is in order. The trial court awarded P20,000 as actual damages, not supported by evidence on record. Actual damages can be given only to claims which are duly supported by receipts.[25] Nonetheless, under Article 2224 in lieu of actual damages, temperate damages may be recovered as it has been shown that the victim's family suffered some pecuniary loss although the amount cannot be proved with certainty.[26] For this reason, the P20,000 award shall be for temperate damages. Further, conformably with prevailing jurisprudence, moral damages is increased to P50,000.[27] | |||||
|
2000-08-04 |
KAPUNAN, J. |
||||
| Thus, aside from the ordinary indemnity for death which is currently set by case law at P50,000.00,[68] accused-appellant is obliged: (1) to compensate the heirs of Abelardo Velasquez for the latter's loss of earning capacity; and (2) to pay the heirs of | |||||
|
2000-07-31 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| under rigorous and intense cross-examination. Note that it is but natural for victims of criminal violence to strive to know the identity of their assailants and observe the manner the crime was committed.[33] Where conditions of visibility are favorable, (such as in this case where both victims were held up beneath a street lamp post)[34] and the victims had no ax to grind against appellant prior to the incidents, the assertion of the complaining witnesses as to the identity of the wrongdoer commands the greater weight[35] over the denials of suspected offender. On the second assigned error, appellant contends that the prosecution's evidence on his alleged offer to assist in apprehending the culprit is contrary to human nature and experience. For it is not natural for a suspect to volunteer such assistance to the police. He | |||||
|
2000-07-31 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| In lieu of actual damages, accused-appellant should pay the heirs of the deceased the amount of P15,000.00 as temperate damages. Art. 2224 of the Civil Code provides that temperate damages "may be recovered when the court finds that some pecuniary loss has been suffered but its amount cannot, from the nature of the case, be proved with certainty."[24] | |||||