Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. IRENEO CORRAL

This case has been cited 6 times or more.

	GR Nos. 148939-40 2004-02-13	PEOPLE v. JOSEPH ORILLA CARPIO, J.
We cannot consider dwelling as a generic aggravating circumstance because the Amended Information did not allege dwelling. The 2000 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, which applies retroactively in this case, now explicitly mandates that the information must state in ordinary and concise language the qualifying and aggravating circumstances.[57] When the law or rules specify certain circumstances that can aggravate an offense or qualify an offense to warrant a greater penalty, the information must allege such circumstances and the prosecution must prove the same to justify the imposition of the increased penalty.[58]
	GR No. 148991 2004-01-21	PEOPLE v. LEONARDO NUGUID Y MAYAO CARPIO, J.
The 2000 Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure now require the complaint or information to state the qualifying and aggravating circumstances attending an offense.[52] When the law or rules specify certain circumstances that can aggravate an offense, or circumstances that would attach to the offense a greater penalty than that ordinarily prescribed, such circumstances must be both alleged and proved to justify the imposition of the increased penalty.[53]
	GR No. 149370 2003-09-23	PEOPLE v. MARTIN ALEJO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
Likewise, the relationship between appellant and Michelle was not established with the same degree of proof. While the information alleged that the victim was appellant's stepdaughter, the prosecution failed to prove the said relationship. For appellant to be considered the stepfather of the victim, he must be legally married to her mother.[26] The testimony of Lutgarda and the admission of the appellant regarding their marriage do not meet the required standard of proof.[27] The best evidence of their marriage is the marriage certificate itself, absent any showing that the same was lost or destroyed.[28]
	GR No. 149810 2003-08-28	PEOPLE v. CRISPIN T. RUALES YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
In deciding rape cases, we have been guided by the following well-established principles: (a) an accusation of rape can be made with facility; it is difficult to prove but more difficult for the person accused, though innocent, to disprove; (b) due to the nature of the crime of rape where only two persons are usually involved, the testimony of the complainant must be scrutinized with extreme caution; and (c) the evidence for the prosecution must stand or fall on its own merits and cannot be allowed to draw strength from the weakness of the evidence for the defense.[11]
	GR Nos. 146693-94 2003-07-31	PEOPLE v. ROLANDO MENDOZA CARPIO MORALES, J.
By the very nature of the crime of rape, conviction or acquittal depends almost entirely on the credibility of the complainant's testimony, given the fact that usually only the participants can testify as to its occurrence.[35]