People vs. Latoza.docx
1
7/17/2019 People vs. Latoza.docx http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/people-vs-latozadocx 1/1 Exempting Circumstances People vs. Susan Latoza GR. No. 186128 une 2!" 2#1# $acts% Susan Latoza &le' an appeal (rom t)e 'ecision o( t)e R*C an' C+ convicting )er o( parrici'e. S)e argues t)at t)e circumstantial evi'ence presente' ,as insu-cient to prove t)at s)e intentionall /ille' )er )us0an'. S)e insists t)at t)e gun &re' acci'entall ,)ile s)e ,as giving it to )er )us0an'. ssue% )et)er or not t)e exempting circumstance o( acci'ent ,as esta0lis)e' 0 Susan Latoza Ruling% No" exempting circumstance o( acci'ent ,as not esta0lis)e' 0 Susan Latoza. +rticle 12 3par.45 o( t)e RPC clearl states t)at +n +n person ,)o" ,)ile per(orming a la,(ul act ,it) 'ue care" causes an in7ur 0 mere acci'ent ,it)out (ault or intention o( causing it. *)us" it ,as incum0ent upon appellant to prove ,it) clear an' convincing evi'ence" t)e (ollo,ing essential reuisites (or t)e exempting circumstance o( acci'ent" to ,it% 1. S)e ,as per(orming a la,(ul act9 2. it) 'ue care9 !. S)e cause' t)e in7ur to )er )us0an' 0 mere acci'ent9 4. it)out (ault or intention o( causing it. :2;< =oreover" to prove t)e circumstance s)e must rel on t)e strengt) o( )er o,n evi'ence an' not on t)e ,ea/ness o( t)at o( t)e prosecution" (or even i( t)is 0e ,ea/" it can not 0e 'is0elieve' a(ter t)e accuse' )as a'mitte' t)e /illing. :28<
Transcript of People vs. Latoza.docx
7/17/2019 People vs. Latoza.docx
http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/people-vs-latozadocx 1/1
Exempting Circumstances
People vs. Susan LatozaGR. No. 186128 une 2!" 2#1#
$acts%
Susan Latoza &le' an appeal (rom t)e 'ecision o( t)e R*C an' C+convicting )er o( parrici'e. S)e argues t)at t)e circumstantial evi'encepresente' ,as insu-cient to prove t)at s)e intentionall /ille' )er)us0an'. S)e insists t)at t)e gun &re' acci'entall ,)ile s)e ,asgiving it to )er )us0an'.
ssue%
)et)er or not t)e exempting circumstance o( acci'ent ,asesta0lis)e' 0 Susan Latoza
Ruling%
No" exempting circumstance o( acci'ent ,as notesta0lis)e' 0 Susan Latoza. +rticle 12 3par.45 o( t)e RPC clearlstates t)at +n +n person ,)o" ,)ile per(orming a la,(ul act,it) 'ue care" causes an in7ur 0 mere acci'ent ,it)out (ault or
intention o( causing it. *)us" it ,as incum0ent upon appellant toprove ,it) clear an' convincing evi'ence" t)e (ollo,ing essentialreuisites (or t)e exempting circumstance o( acci'ent" to ,it%
1. S)e ,as per(orming a la,(ul act92. it) 'ue care9!. S)e cause' t)e in7ur to )er )us0an' 0 mere acci'ent94. it)out (ault or intention o( causing it.:2;<
=oreover" to prove t)e circumstance s)e must rel on t)e strengt) o(
)er o,n evi'ence an' not on t)e ,ea/ness o( t)at o( t)e prosecution"
(or even i( t)is 0e ,ea/" it can not 0e 'is0elieve' a(ter t)e accuse' )as
a'mitte' t)e /illing.:28<
