Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. RIO TIBON Y DEISO

This case has been cited 6 times or more.

	GR No. 205412 2015-09-09	PEOPLE v. ADRIAN GUTING Y TOMAS LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Prevailing jurisprudence pegs the amount of civil indemnity and moral damages awarded to the heirs of the victim of Parricide at P75,000.00 each.[25] The temperate damages awarded by the RTC in the amount of P30,000.00 should be decreased to P25,000.00 to also conform with the latest jurisprudence.[26] It is fitting to additionally award exemplary damages in the sum of P30,000.00 considering the presence of the qualifying circumstance of relationship.
	GR No. 190892 2015-08-17	VICENTE H. MANULAT v. PEOPLE PERALTA, J.
It has been settled that the commission of parricide is punished more severely than homicide since human beings are expected to love and support those who are closest to them.[57] Recent jurisprudence fixes civil indemnity in the amount of P75,000.00, which is automatically granted to the offended party, or his/her heirs in case of the former's death, without need of further evidence other than the fact of the commission of murder, homicide, parricide and rape.[58] As regards to the penalty, the court a quo and CA were correct in imposing reclusion perpetua under Article 246 of the Revised Penal Code. However, the award of moral damages should be increased from P50,000.00 to P75,000.00 in view of the award of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity. Furthermore, petitioner should pay the heirs of the victim F30,000.00 by way of exemplary damages to deter others from committing such bestial act of killing one's spouse.
	GR No. 180496 2014-04-02	PEOPLE v. ROY SAN GASPAR DEL CASTILLO, J.
In addition and pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, an increased amount of P30,000.00 as exemplary damages on account of relationship, a qualifying circumstance which was alleged and proved, must likewise be awarded in the crime of parricide.[51]
	GR No. 199875 2012-11-21	PEOPLE v. EDWIN ISLA Y ROSSELL MENDOZA, J.
Article 12 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC) provides for one of the circumstances which will exempt one from criminal liability which is when the perpetrator of the act was an imbecile or insane, unless the latter has acted during a lucid interval. This circumstance, however, is not easily available to an accused as a successful defense. Insanity is the exception rather than the rule in the human condition. Under Article 800 of the Civil Code, the presumption is that every human is sane. Anyone who pleads the exempting circumstance of insanity bears the burden of proving it with clear and convincing evidence. It is in the nature of confession and avoidance. An accused invoking insanity admits to have committed the crime but claims that he or she is not guilty because of insanity. The testimony or proof of an accused's insanity must, however, relate to the time immediately preceding or simultaneous with the commission of the offense with which he is charged.[13]
	GR No. 184757 2011-10-05	PEOPLE v. ANICETO BULAGAO LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Accused-appellant, in his appeal, did not insist on the allegation in the trial court that he was suffering from mental retardation. Nevertheless, we agree with the finding of the trial court that there was no proof that the mental condition accused-appellant allegedly exhibited when he was examined by Yolanda Palma was already present at the time of the rape incidents. Anyone who pleads the exempting circumstance of insanity bears the burden of proving it with clear and convincing evidence.[32] Besides, this Court observes that neither the acts of the accused-appellant proven before the court, nor his answers in his testimony, show a complete deprivation of intelligence or free will. Insanity presupposes that the accused was completely deprived of reason or discernment and freedom of will at the time of the commission of the crime.[33] Only when there is a complete deprivation of intelligence at the time of the commission of the crime should the exempting circumstance of insanity be considered.[34]
	GR No. 189834 2011-03-30	PEOPLE v. JAY MANDY MAGLIAN Y REYES VELASCO JR., J.
Moral damages should also be awarded even absent allegation and proof of the emotional suffering by the victim's heirs. The amount should be decreased to PhP 50,000 in accordance with jurisprudence.[30] Exemplary damages in the lowered amount of PhP 30,000 are likewise in order in this case charging parricide, as the qualifying circumstance of relationship is present.[31]