People vs. Claudio Teehankee, Jr. G.R. No. 111206-08

Download as docx, pdf, or txt
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 3
At a glance
Powered by AI
A man shot and killed two people and injured another after demanding to see their IDs. He was convicted of murder and attempted murder by the trial court and substantial damages were awarded.

Claudio Teehankee Jr. stopped two people on the street, demanded to see their IDs, and then shot and killed one person and injured another after an exchange. A third person was also killed.

The trial court awarded damages for death, injuries, lost income, moral damages, and legal fees to the victims and their families. The amounts varied between the victims.

PEOPLE vs. CLAUDIO TEEHANKEE, JR. G.R. No.

111206-
08
Topic: Judgement (Damages that may be awarded)
FACTS: Roland John Chapman, Maureen Hultman, and another friend, Jussi
Olavi Leino, were coming home from a party at around three o'clock in the
morning of 13 July 1991. Leino was walking Hultman home along Mahogany
street in Dasmariñas Village, Makati City when Claudio Teehankee Jr., the
accused, came up behind them in his car. He stopped the two and demanded that
they show some identification. Leino took out his wallet and showed Teehankee
his ID. Teehankee grabbed the wallet. Chapman, who was waiting in a car for
Leino, stepped in and asked Teehankee: "Why are you bothering us?" Teehankee
drew out his gun and shot Chapman in the chest, killing him instantly. After a few
minutes, Teehankee shot Leino, hitting him in the jaw. Then he shot Hultman on
the temple before driving away. Leino survived and Hultman died two months later
in hospital due to brain hemorrhages caused by the bullet fragments. The
sforegoing events were witnessed by Domingo Florence and Agripino Cadenas,
private security guards, and Vincent Mangubat, a driver, all three being employs of
residents of the village.
The RTC convicted the accused of murder qualified by treachery in the
death of Roland Chapman and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and to pay the
heirs the sum of P50,000.00 for the death of Chapman and P500,000.00 as
moderate or temperate and exemplary damages. The RTC likewise convicted the
accused of murder qualified by treachery for the death of Maureen Hultman and
sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and to pay the heirs of the deceased the sum of
P50,000.00 as indemnity, P2,350,461.83 as actual damages, P13,000,000.00 for
loss of earning capacity, and P1,000,000.00 as moral, moderate and exemplary
damages. The RTC convicted the accused of frustrated murder qualified by
treachery for the shooting of Jussi Leino and sentenced him the indeterminate
penalty of 8 years of prision mayor, as minimum, to 10 years and 1 day of prision
mayor, as maximum, and to pay the offended party the sum of P30,000.00; plus
P118,369.84 and another sum equivalent in Philippine Pesos of U.S. $55,600.00,
both as actual damages; an amount equivalent in Philippine Pesos of U.S.
$40,000.00, as loss of earning capacity of said offended party; and P1,000,000.00,
as moral, moderate and exemplary damages. The trial court also ordered the
accused to pay the offended parties a total of P3,000,000.00 for attorney’s fees and
expenses of litigation.

ISSUE: WON the computation of damages awarded by the RTC were correct.

RULING: No. In the killing of Chapman, the Supreme Court held that the trial
court should not have lumped together the awards for moderate or temperate and
exemplary damages without specifying the particular amount which corresponds to
each, as they are of a different kind. The said amount cannot be given as temperate
or moderate damages for the records do not show any basis for sustaining the
award. Nor can it be given as exemplary damages. The killing of Chapman was not
attended by either evident premeditation or treachery.
With regard to the damages awarded to the heirs of Hultman, the SC ruled in
this regard. The Court holds that the award of the RTC as moral and exemplary
damages is amply justified by the circumstances considering all the anguish and
suffering the family went through in the 97 days that Maureen was in the hospital
before she died. Moreover, the Court found that the grant of exemplary damages
was called for by the circumstances of the case. The award for exemplary damages
is designed to permit the courts to mold behavior that has socially deleterious
consequences. Its imposition is required by public policy to suppress the wanton
acts of an offender. Meanwhile, the SC found that the award given to Leino as
indemnity for moral damages was justified and reasonable, since the shooting of
Leino was also committed with treachery, the Court additionally adjudged an
exemplary damages payable to Leino.
With regard to the loss of earning capacity, the Supreme Court ruled that to
be compensated for loss of earning capacity, it is not necessary that the victim, at
the time of injury or death, is gainfully employed. It also bears emphasis that in the
computation of the award for loss of earning capacity of the deceased, the life
expectancy of the deceased's heirs is not factored in. The rule is well-settled that
the award of damages for death is computed on the basis of the life expectancy of
the deceased, and not the beneficiary.

You might also like