Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. ERIC BAID Y OMINTA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 150382 2003-10-02	PEOPLE v. EDDIE BASITE BELLOSILLO, J.
Although courts are not ordinarily bound by expert testimonies, they may place whatever weight they may choose upon such testimonies in accordance with the facts of the case. The relative weight and sufficiency of expert testimony is peculiarly within the province of the trial court to decide, considering the ability and character of the witness, his actions upon the witness stand, the weight and process of the reasoning by which he has supported his opinion, his possible bias in favor of the side for whom he testifies, the fact that he is a paid witness, the relative opportunities for study and observation of the matters about which he testifies, and any other matters which deserve to illuminate his statements. The opinion of the expert may not be arbitrarily rejected; it is to be considered by the court in view of all the facts and circumstances in the case and when common knowledge utterly fails, the expert opinion may be given controlling effect. The problem of the credibility of the expert witness and the evaluation of his testimony is left to the discretion of the trial court whose ruling thereupon is not reviewable in the absence of abuse of discretion.[26]
	GR Nos. 118986-89 2001-02-19	PEOPLE v. HERNANI DICHOSON MENDOZA, J.
The trial court correctly sentenced accused-appellant to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua for each of the three counts of rape. In addition, however, accused-appellant is likewise liable to pay complainant indemnity in the amount of P50,000.00 and moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00 for each of the three counts of rape.[43] With regard to the penalty[44] imposed by the trial court in Criminal Case No. 16249 (acts of lasciviousness), the Court sees no need to modify the same considering that it falls within the range provided under Art. 336 taking into account the pertinent provisions of the Indeterminate Sentence Law.
	GR No. 125542 2000-10-25	PEOPLE v. ERLINDO TALO MENDOZA, J.
deed. The damages awarded by the trial court should be modified. In accordance with recent rulings of this Court,[53] complainant Doris Saguindang must be paid P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages, and the additional amount of P25,000.00, as exemplary damages, in view of the attendance of the aggravating circumstances, pursuant to Art. 2229 of the Civil Code.[54] WHEREFORE, the decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 15, Ozamis City, is AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that accused-appellant is ordered to pay complainant Doris Saguindang the amounts of P50,000.00, as civil indemnity, P50,000.00, as moral damages, and
	GR No. 120897 2000-10-11	PEOPLE v. SEVERO DAYUHA Y DASO PARDO, J.
The trial court is correct in the imposition of the penalty of reclusion perpetua and the award of P50,000.00 as moral damages. We award an additional P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, consistent with the ruling that rape victims are entitled to such an award without need of proof except the fact of the commission of the rape.[18]