Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

GIOVANI SERRANO Y CERVANTES v. PEOPLE

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 178512 2014-11-26	ALFREDO DE GUZMAN v. PEOPLE BERSAMIN, J.
The elements of frustrated homicide are: (1) the accused intended to kill his victim, as manifested by his use of a deadly weapon in his assault; (2) the victim sustained fatal or mortal wound but did not die because of timely medical assistance; and (3) none of the qualifying circumstances for murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, is present.[7] Inasmuch as the trial and appellate courts found none of the qualifying circumstances in murder under Article 248 to be present, we immediately proceed to ascertain the presence of the two other elements.
	GR No. 202867 2013-07-15	PEOPLE v. REGIE LABIAGA CARPIO, J.
In Serrano v. People,[19] we distinguished a frustrated felony from an attempted felony in this manner: 1.) In [a] frustrated felony, the offender has performed all the acts of execution which should produce the felony as a consequence; whereas in [an] attempted felony, the offender merely commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts and does not perform all the acts of execution.
	GR No. 199579 2012-12-10	RAMON JOSUE Y GONZALES v. PEOPLE REYES, J.
Given the foregoing, and in the absence of any circumstance that would have qualified the crime to murder, we hold that the trial court committed no error in declaring the petitioner guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of frustrated homicide. Applying the rules provided by the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the trial court correctly imposed for such offense an indeterminate penalty of six (6) months and one (1) day of prision correccional as minimum, to eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor as maximum. The award of actual damages is also sustained. However, we hold that in line with prevailing jurisprudence,[17] the victim is entitled to an award of moral damages in the amount of P10,000.00.
	GR No. 188562 2011-08-17	PEOPLE v. RODEL LANUZA Y BAGAOISAN LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
The elements of frustrated homicide are: (1) the accused intended to kill his victim, as manifested by his use of a deadly weapon in his assault; (2) the victim sustained fatal or mortal wound/s but did not die because of timely medical assistance; and (3) none of the qualifying circumstance for murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, is present.[17] Evidence to prove intent to kill in crimes against persons may consist, inter alia, of the means used by the malefactors; the nature, location and number of wounds sustained by the victim; the conduct of the malefactors before, at the time of, or immediately after the killing of the victim; the circumstances under which the crime was committed; and the motive of the accused.[18] These elements are extant in the case at bar.