This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2000-08-25 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| lone testimony. Criminals are convicted, not on the number of witnesses against them, but on the credibility of even one witness who is able to convince the court of the guilt beyond a shadow of doubt.[15] And once found credible, the rape victim's lone testimony is | |||||
|
2000-07-24 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| in both cases, the same is deleted considering that there is nothing in the record to justify the said award. The Court can only grant such amount for expenses if they are supported by receipts.[60] Moral damages may be recovered in criminal offenses resulting in physical injuries but there must be a factual basis for the award. None appears in this case.[61] As to exemplary damages, there being one aggravating circumstance, exemplary damages in the amount of P30,000.00[62] may be awarded in both cases, pursuant to Article 2230 of the New Civil Code. Four (4) Justices of the Court however continue to maintain the unconstitutionality of RA No. 7659 insofar as it, prescribes the death penalty; nevertheless, they submit to the ruling of the majority to the effect that the law is constitutional and that the death penalty can | |||||