Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. NOEL SANDOVAL

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 140406 2002-04-17	PEOPLE v. ANTONIO DESUYO BELLOSILLO, J.
Perforce, in the present case, the death penalty imposed by the trial court should be reduced to reclusion perpetua. Likewise, the award of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity should be modified and adjusted to P50,000.00 since the penalty is likewise lowered to reclusion perpetua. Consistent with prevailing jurisprudence, accused Antonio Desuyo should also be ordered to pay Maricel Desuyo P50,000.00 as moral damages even if there was no proof presented as basis therefor since the anguish and pain that complaining witness endured are plainly evident.[21]
	GR Nos. 123138-39 2001-11-08	PEOPLE v. HONESTO LLANDELAR Y MAGANTI QUISUMBING, J.
Finally, the trial court's award of moral damages in the amount of P50,000 in each case is proper without need of further proof. In addition, civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000 also must be awarded to the victim since it is mandatory upon a finding of the fact of rape.[22] Furthermore, pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000 in each case must also be awarded to her.
	GR Nos. 137969-71 2001-08-15	PEOPLE v. RAFAEL SALALIMA Y GARCIA QUISUMBING, J.
Finally, we affirm the trial court's award of moral damages of P50,000.00 in each of the three cases. The award of moral damages to a rape victim is proper even if there was no proof presented during the trial as basis therefor. In addition, civil indemnity must be awarded to the victim since it is mandatory upon finding of the fact of rape. The recent judicial prescription is that the amount shall be P50,000.00 for each count of rape if death penalty is not imposed.[20]
	GR No. 123542 2001-06-26	PEOPLE v. ROGELIO BULOS GONZAGA-REYES, J.
It is doctrinally settled that the lone testimony of the rape victim herself is competent to establish guilt, where the same is found to be credible, convincing, and consistent with human nature and the normal course of things.[22] This is because from the nature of the offense, the only evidence that can oftentimes be offered to establish the guilt of the accused is the complainant's testimony.[23] The Court also considers that ordinarily, no woman would be willing to undergo the humiliation of a public trial and testify to the details of her ordeal were it not but a response to the compelling need to seek and obtain justice.[24] There is nothing in this case to indicate that Nancy Cordero, an 18-year old cook and house helper, would have any motive to falsely implicate the accused, in the process admitting to the stain to her modesty and honor, and losing her humble means of employment; the logical conclusion is that her testimony is worthy of full faith and credence.
	GR No. 123542 2001-06-26	PEOPLE v. ROGELIO BULOS GONZAGA-REYES, J.
As for the resulting indemnities, the trial court awarded only P30,000.00 by way of moral damages and P10,000.00 as exemplary damages. Comfortably with recent case rulings,[30] we grant civil indemnity ex delicto in the amount of P50,000.00, and increase the award of moral damages, to which the offended party is entitled automatically and without need of proof, to P50,000.00. The award of exemplary damages is deleted, no aggravating circumstance having attended the commission of the offense.[31]