This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2007-09-11 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| There is no merit in appellants' assertion. This Court has held time and again that there is no standard behavior for a person who is confronted with a shocking incident.[16] One may immediately report the incident to the proper authorities while others, in fear and/or avoiding involvement in a criminal investigation, may keep to themselves what they witnessed.[17] In this case, fear of reprisal or avoiding participation in the investigation could be a credible excuse for the one-day silence of a prosecution witness before divulging to authorities what he had just witnessed. | |||||
|
2003-07-30 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| Felix Olanda likewise did not testify on the moral damages he suffered. However, considering that it is duly proven by the medical certificate issued by Dr. Francisco de Guzman[59] that Felix sustained serious hacking injuries inflicted by appellant, it is sufficient basis to award moral damages as ordinary human experience and common sense dictate that such wounds inflicted on Felix would naturally cause physical suffering, fright, serious anxiety, moral shock, and similar injury.[60] We deem it just and reasonable to award P40,000.00 as moral damages for frustrated murder. | |||||
|
2003-06-10 |
CORONA, J. |
||||
| Finally, since the penalty was downgraded to reclusion perpetua, the award of civil indemnity by the trial court in the amount of P75,000 should also be reduced to P50,000 in line with recent jurisprudence.[91] Civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000 is mandatory and is granted to the heirs of the victim without need of proof other than the commission of the crime.[92] | |||||