Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 137296 2003-06-26	PEOPLE v. DIONISIO VICENTE Y QUINTO SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
Treachery is present in this case. The fact that the attack is frontal does not negate the finding of treachery. Even a frontal attack can be treacherous if sudden and unexpected and the victim is unarmed.[51] Here, the victim was suddenly stabbed when he was extending his hand to the appellant. With his mindset, the victim could not have any inkling that there was danger to his life when he approached appellant.
	GR No. 133246 2000-07-31	PEOPLE v. ANTONIO DE LA TONGGA MENDOZA, J.
In addition, consistent with the prevailing doctrine, the heirs of the victim are entitled to the award of moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00 considering the mental anguish suffered by them on account of the victim's death.[25]
	GR No. 134262 2000-06-28	PEOPLE v. ABDULAJID SABDANI y SHUMARHARI PANGANIBAN, J.
The qualifying circumstance of treachery is present when the means, method and forms of execution employed give the person attacked no opportunity for self-defense or retaliation, and when such means, method and form of execution are deliberately and consciously adopted by the accused without danger to his or her person.[17] The essence of treachery is the swift and unexpected attack on an unarmed victim.[18] Hence, the Court has recognized that "even a frontal attack can x x x be treacherous if it is sudden and unexpected and the victim is unarmed."[19]