This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2011-03-02 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| Accused-appellant denies that he committed the crime, and offers up his version of events. He was unable to present any corroborating witnesses to testify that he did, indeed, go to AAA's house after the crime was committed. All accused-appellant presented is his bare denial that he committed the crime. In People v. Alarcon, We held, "Denial, if unsupported by clear and convincing evidence, is negative and self-serving evidence, which deserves no weight in law and cannot be given greater evidentiary value over the testimonies of credible witnesses who testify on affirmative matters."[40] | |||||
|
2010-11-23 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| The Court, however, deems it proper to increase the exemplary damages from P25,000.00 to P30,000.00 following jurisprudence[62] for all counts of rape. Article 2230 of the New Civil Code provides that "in criminal offenses, exemplary damages as a part of the civil liability may be imposed when the crime was committed with one or more aggravating circumstances. Such damages are separate and distinct from fines and shall be paid to the offended party." Furthermore, in People v. Matrimonio,[63] the Court awarded exemplary damages to dissuade other fathers with perverse tendencies or aberrant sexual behavior from sexually abusing their own daughters. | |||||