This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2004-01-20 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Like any aggravating or qualifying circumstance, evident premeditation must be established with equal certainty and clarity as the crime itself.[59] To prove evident premeditation, the prosecution is tasked to show: (1) the time when the offender determined to commit the crime; (2) an act indicating that the offender had clung to his determination; and (3) sufficient lapse of time between the determination to commit the crime and the execution thereof to allow the offender to reflect upon the consequences of his act.[60] Evident premeditation is not presumed from the mere lapse of time.[61] It may only be appreciated when the execution of the crime is preceded by cool thought and deliberate reflection upon the resolution to carry out the felonious intent during the space of time sufficient to arrive at a calm judgment.[62] | |||||
|
2003-09-29 |
PUNO, J. |
||||
| We find, however, that evident premeditation cannot be appreciated. The following are the elements of evident premeditation: (1) the time when the accused decided to commit the crime; (2) an overt act manifestly indicating that he has clung to his determination; (3) sufficient lapse of time between decision and execution to allow the accused to reflect upon the consequences of his act.[43] The essence of premeditation is that the execution of the criminal act was preceded by cool thought and reflection upon the resolution to carry out the criminal intent during a space of time sufficient to arrive at a calm judgment.[44] For this aggravating circumstance to be considered, it is indispensable to show how and when the plan to kill was hatched or how much time had elapsed before it was carried out. There is a dearth of evidence on such a plan. Neither can we appreciate use of a motor vehicle which the trial court appreciated as this was not alleged in the information.[45] | |||||