This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2012-01-18 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| In order that voluntary surrender is appreciated as a mitigating circumstance, the following requisites must concur: (a) the accused has not been actually arrested; (b) the accused surrenders himself to a person in authority or the latter's agent; and (c) surrender is voluntary.[38] The third requisite requires the surrender to be spontaneous, indicating the intent of the accused to unconditionally submit himself to the authorities, either because he acknowledges his guilt or he wishes to save them the trouble and expenses necessary for his search and capture.[39] | |||||
|
2010-11-17 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| This is so, as the rule now stands, "even in cases in which the accused pleads guilty to a capital offense, the prosecution is still required to present evidence to prove his guilt and the precise degree of his culpability."[25] In other words, notwithstanding the plea of guilt, evidence must be adduced to determine the precise participation of the accused in the perpetuation of the capital offense--whether as principal, accomplice, or accessory--as well as the presence or absence of modifying circumstances. And "the accused may also present evidence in his behalf"[26] either to rebut the prosecution's evidence or to show the presence of mitigating circumstances. | |||||
|
2001-01-29 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| For the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender to be appreciated, the accused must satisfactorily comply with three requisites: (1) he has not been actually arrested; (2) he surrendered himself to a person in authority or the latter's agent; and (3) the surrender is voluntary.[23] There must be a showing of spontaneity and an intent to surrender unconditionally to the authorities, either because the accused acknowledges his guilt or he wishes to spare them the trouble and expense concomitant to his capture.[24] | |||||