Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. ERNESTO MERCADO

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 205413 2013-12-02	PEOPLE v. ROGELIO MANICAT Y DE GUZMAN BRION, J.
In the present case, the prosecution established the elements of rape required under Article 266-A of the RPC. First, the appellant had carnal knowledge of the victim. AAA was straightforward when she testified that the appellant inserted his penis into her vagina. Her testimony was supported by Medico Legal Report No. M-257-01 dated April 29, 2001, reflecting the victim's non-virgin physical state. We have held that when the testimony of a rape victim is consistent with the medical findings, there is sufficient basis to conclude that there has been carnal knowledge.[5]
	GR No. 201105 2013-11-25	PEOPLE v. NATALIO HILARION Y LALIAG BRION, J.
First, the appellant had carnal knowledge of the victim. AAA was steadfast in her assertion that the appellant inserted his penis into her vagina, and her testimony was corroborated by the medical findings of Dr. Winston Tan. "We have held that when the testimony of a rape victim is consistent with the medical findings, there is sufficient basis to conclude that carnal knowledge has taken place."[6]
	GR No. 177137 2012-08-23	PEOPLE v. PEDRO BANIG DEL CASTILLO, J.
With respect to the propriety of the award of moral damages, the CA is correct in awarding "AAA" moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00, in addition to the award of civil indemnity. "The award of civil indemnity to the rape victim is mandatory upon a finding that rape took place. Moral damages, on the other hand, are awarded to rape victims without need of proof other than the fact of rape under the assumption that the victim suffered moral injuries from the experience she underwent." [45]
	GR No. 151258 2012-02-01	ARTEMIO VILLAREAL v. PEOPLE SERENO, J.
Civil indemnity ex delicto is automatically awarded for the sole fact of death of the victim.[274] In accordance with prevailing jurisprudence,[275] we sustain the CA's award of indemnity in the amount of P50,000.
	GR No. 183563 2011-12-14	PEOPLE v. HENRY ARPON Y JUNTILLA LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Contrary to the posturing of the accused-appellant, "the date of the commission of the rape is not an essential element of the crime of rape, for the gravamen of the offense is carnal knowledge of a woman."[44] "Inconsistencies and discrepancies in details which are irrelevant to the elements of the crime are not grounds for acquittal."[45]