This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2011-07-25 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Granting arguendo that the First Division erred in admitting the testimonies of the Payumos given during the first trial, which proceedings were nullified by this Court in the Cabigao case, the same would still not justify a new trial. It must be emphasized that an erroneous admission or rejection of evidence by the trial court is not a ground for a new trial or reversal of the decision if there are other independent evidence to sustain the decision, or if the rejected evidence, if it had been admitted; would not have changed the decision.[40] In the case at bench, a meticulous reading of the November 27, 1998 Decision reveals that the combined testimonies of the other complainants, namely, Reynaldo Ruanto, Crisanto Ruanto, Apolinario Ruanto, and Exequiel Bonde, have sufficiently established the commission of the crime charged in the information and the participation of the accused in the said crime. Seemingly, it- would not debilitate the cause of the prosecution even if the testimonies of the Payumos would be expunged from the records. | |||||