This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2015-06-29 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| Pursuant to Article 69 of the Revised Penal Code, the privileged mitigating circumstance of incomplete self-defense reduces the penalty by one or two degrees than that prescribed by law. For this purpose, the accused must prove the existence of the majority of the elements for self-defense, but unlawful aggression, being an indispensable element, must be present. Either or both of the other requisites may be absent, namely: reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it, or the lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself.[27] | |||||
|
2011-03-09 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| In order that incomplete self-defense could prosper as a privileged mitigating circumstance, unlawful aggression must exist. In People v. Manulit,[27] People v. Mortera,[28] and Mendoza v. People,[29] We reiterated the well-settled rule that unlawful aggression is an indispensable requisite in appreciating an incomplete self-defense. It is any one of the two other elements of self-defense that could be wanting in an incomplete self-defense, i.e., reasonable necessity of the means to employed to prevent or repel it; or lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself; but it can never be unlawful aggression.[30] | |||||
|
2009-05-08 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| Third. Lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the person defending himself. In incomplete self-defense, the indispensable requisite is unlawful aggression.[25] What is missing is either reasonable necessity of the means employed to prevent or repel it or lack of sufficient provocation on the part of the persons defending themselves. In the instant case, accused-appellant's self-serving claim of self-defense coupled with the fact that he did not sustain any injuries from his supposed attacker, Adrian, fails to support any claim of unlawful aggression, the crucial requisite to his defense. As the appellate court noted, there was no clear, credible, and convincing evidence that Adrian was the one who instigated the fight and that accused-appellant was merely fending off an attack. Unlawful aggression by the victim must be clearly shown.[26] | |||||