This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2003-04-30 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Appellant's reliance on the police blotter deserves nothing more than the scantest consideration. In the first place, "[t]he entry in the police blotter is not necessarily entitled to full credit for it could be incomplete and inaccurate, sometimes from either partial suggestions or for want of suggestion or inquiries, without the aid of which the witness may be unable to recall the connected collateral circumstances necessary for the correction of the first suggestion of his memory and for his accurate recollection of all that pertain to the subject.[31] According to appellant, Shirley's failure to seek police assistance for the immediate arrest of the assailants, and the fact that two years had elapsed before she was able to execute a sworn statement impaired her credibility as a witness. This matter, however, was adequately explained by the prosecution. Reluctance to get involved in a criminal investigation is not an unnatural reaction of some individuals, especially when there is fear of reprisal. Such initial reluctance is insufficient to affect credibility.[32] Moreover, the eyewitness had given reasons why she did not return to the police station: she was in the last stages of her pregnancy, and she feared the Cabreras who are notorious troublemakers in their neighborhood.[33] | |||||
|
2002-03-11 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| We also find the award of P500,000 in moral damages excessive. Moral damages are not meant to enrich an injured party. In line with prevailing jurisprudence,[63] the award in each case should be reduced to P50,000. In addition, P50,000 as civil indemnity in each of these cases is mandatory and is granted to the heirs of the victims without need of further proof other than the commission of the crime.[64] | |||||
|
2001-07-11 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| We agree with the accused that the prosecution did not prove the aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation. "The prosecution failed to establish the following elements of this aggravating circumstance: (a) the time when the accused determined to commit the crime, (b) an act manifestly indicating that the accused clung to that determination, and (c) a lapse of time between the determination and the execution sufficient to allow the accused to reflect upon the consequences of the act."[7] | |||||
|
2001-06-19 |
GONZAGA-REYES, J. |
||||
| Similarly, the elements of evident premeditation must be established with equal certainty and clarity as the criminal act itself before it can be appreciated as a qualifying circumstance.[28] These elements are: (1) the time when the accused determined to commit the crime; (2) an overt act manifestly indicating that they clung to their determination to commit the crime; and (3) a sufficient lapse of time between the decision to commit the crime and the execution thereof to allow the accused to reflect upon the consequences of their act.[29] The essence, therefore, of evident premeditation is that the execution of the criminal act is preceded by cool thought and reflection upon the resolution to carry out the criminal intent within a space of time sufficient to arrive at a calm judgment.[30] | |||||