This case has been cited 8 times or more.
|
2014-02-19 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Thus, in view of the foregoing, we affirm the penalty imposed by the Court of Appeals which was reclusion perpetua for each conviction of simple rape. The award of moral damages in the amount P50,000.00 is likewise upheld. However, the award of civil indemnity should be reduced from P75,000.00 to P50,000.00 in line with jurisprudence.[32] For the same reason, the award of exemplary damages should be increased from P25,000.00 to P30,000.00.[33] Moreover, the amounts of damages thus awarded are subject further to interest of 6% per annum from the date of finality of this judgment until they are fully paid.[34] | |||||
|
2014-01-15 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Furthermore, the only person that could corroborate appellant's alibi is his friend and former co-worker, Paul Maglaque. However, we have consistently assigned less probative weight to a defense of alibi when it is corroborated by friends and relatives since we have established in jurisprudence that, in order for corroboration to be credible, the same must be offered preferably by disinterested witnesses.[18] Clearly, due to his friendship with appellant, Maglaque cannot be considered as a disinterested witness. | |||||
|
2013-12-11 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| In view of the foregoing, we therefore affirm the conviction of appellant for simple rape with a penalty of reclusion perpetua. The award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity as well as P50,000.00 as moral damages is upheld. However, the award of exemplary damages is increased from P25,000.00 to P30,000.00 in line with jurisprudence.[30] Moreover, the amounts of damages thus awarded are subject further to interest of 6% per annum from the date of finality of this judgment until they are fully paid.[31] | |||||
|
2013-11-27 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| We have also recently reiterated that the failure of the victim to shout for help does not negate rape and the victim's lack of resistance especially when intimidated by the offender into submission does not signify voluntariness or consent.[22] Furthermore, it is doctrinally settled that "delay in reporting rape incidents, in the face of threats of physical violence, cannot be taken against the victim"[23] because "delay in reporting an incident of rape is not an indication of a fabricated charge [and] does [not] necessarily cast doubt on the credibility of the complainant."[24] It is likewise settled in jurisprudence that human reactions vary and are unpredictable when facing a shocking and horrifying experience such as sexual assault, thus, not all rape victims can be expected to act conformably to the usual expectations of everyone.[25] | |||||
|
2013-11-27 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Furthermore, we have recently reiterated that we give less probative weight to a defense of alibi when it is corroborated by friends and relatives.[24] We apply the same principle in the case at bar and declare that for the defense of denial to prosper, like alibi, it is necessary that the corroboration is credible, the same having been offered preferably by disinterested witnesses. In so doing, we regard the testimony of appellant's daughter, which in no way can be considered as disinterested and unbiased, as invalid corroboration unworthy of belief. | |||||
|
2013-11-27 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Likewise, we reject appellant's allegation that AAA did not "tenaciously" resist his sexual advances. The victim's testimony will bear out that she did exert efforts to refuse appellant's carnal desires by slapping the accused, kicking him and trying to create noise but she was physically overpowered and intimidated by the threat of mortal harm posed by appellant's knife as well as debilitated by illness. Nevertheless, we have in the past held that failure of a rape victim to shout, fight back, or escape from the scoundrel is not tantamount to consent or approval because the law imposes no obligation to exhibit defiance or present proof of struggle.[17] | |||||
|
2013-10-23 |
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J. |
||||
| Moreover, we have held that for alibi to prosper, it is necessary that the corroboration is credible, the same having been offered preferably by disinterested witnesses.[22] Based on this doctrine, the corroborating testimony of appellant's son, EEE, who, undoubtedly, is a person intimately related to him cannot serve to reinforce his alibi. | |||||
|
2013-03-13 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| As can be gleaned from the records, the RTC and CA correctly imposed the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment ranging from seven (7) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to twelve (12) years and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum, with the accessory penalties provided for by law considering that Pielago voluntarily surrendered to the police authorities before a warrant of arrest could be issued against him. However, in line with the existing jurisprudence on the matter, the award of exemplary damages should be increased from P25,000.00 to P30,000.00.[31] In addition, and in conformity with the current policy, we also impose on all the monetary awards for damages interest at the legal rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this decision until fully paid.[32] | |||||