This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2011-07-27 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| As regards the mitigating circumstance of immediate vindication of a grave offense, the same cannot likewise be appreciated in the instant case. Article 13, paragraph 5 of the Revised Penal Code requires that the act be "committed in the immediate vindication of a grave offense to the one committing the felony (delito), his spouse, ascendants, descendants, legitimate, natural or adopted brothers or sisters, or relatives by affinity within the same degrees." The established rule is that there can be no immediate vindication of a grave offense when the accused had sufficient time to recover his equanimity.[66] In the case at bar, the accused-appellant points to the alleged attempt of Felipe and Timboy Lagera on the virtue of his wife as the grave offense for which he sought immediate vindication. He testified that he learned of the same from his stepson, Raymond, on November 2, 2002. Four days thereafter, on November 6, 2002, the accused-appellant carried out the attack that led to the deaths of Felipe and Ranil. To our mind, a period of four days was sufficient enough a time within which the accused-appellant could have regained his composure and self-control. Thus, the said mitigating circumstance cannot be credited in favor of the accused-appellant. | |||||
|
2004-05-27 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| The award by the court a quo of P50,000 as civil indemnity is in accordance with jurisprudence.[34] The amount of P25,000 as exemplary damages should also be given because of the presence of the aggravating circumstance of recidivism. However, the court erred in awarding the amount of P940,716 as loss of earning capacity. In "accordance with the formula adopted by the Court in Villa Rey Transit, Inc. vs. CA (31 SCRA 511 [1970]), and using the American Expectancy Table of Mortality,"[35] the loss of Tamayo's earning capacity is to be computed as follows: Net earning capacity = Life expectancy x (Gross Annual Income Living Expenses) where: Life expectancy = 2/3 (80 the age of the deceased) = 2/3 (80-24) x [(P200x365)-P36,500] =P1,362,545 | |||||
|
2002-05-29 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| In the case at bar, other than the self-serving testimony of accused-appellant, there is absolutely no evidence on record that would show that Glicerio attacked him. Likewise, the Court is totally unconvinced that the firing upon Flordeliza was accidental. Indeed, the trial court, which had the unparalleled opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses as they testify,[18] correctly sustained the version presented by the prosecution. We extensively reviewed the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and found their declarations to be materially corroborated, consistent and credible. It is hard to believe that the prosecution eyewitness, a disinterested party who was not shown to have been moved by improper motive, would perjure herself and falsely implicate accused-appellant in the present case. [19] | |||||
|
2002-05-09 |
PUNO, J. |
||||
| The version of the accused does not inspire belief. The incident happened in plain view of many witnesses at the flea market. He even claimed he was with a certain Guale and one Sonny Boy at that time.[14] Yet, nobody corroborated his story. Indeed, his narration on how the victim "attacked" him is improbable. In the witness chair, he admitted that the victim was bigger than him and that his left hand was restrained by the victim.[15] It is thus incredible how he could pull out his knife from his right side, with the use of his left hand,[16] raise that knife high enough to hit the shoulder of the victim and inflict an 11-cm. deep wound upon him. It is more probable that the victim was sitting down when the accused attacked him from behind as the prosecution witnesses testified. Equally incredulous is the claim that after being injured, the victim still tried to approach and attack him, hence, he had to retreat. The accused's uncorroborated plea of self-defense cannot be entertained, especially when it is, in itself, extremely doubtful.[17] | |||||