This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2004-02-05 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| Non-flight is not proof of innocence.[20] The culprit of a crime may choose to remain within the area of the crime scene because he lives there and flight may only raise suspicion on him. No case law exists to support appellant's claim that their non-flight precludes the possibility that they are guilty of the crime. To accept the defense offered by appellant would allow people to commit a crime and avoid liability by simply choosing to stay in the crime scene afterwards. | |||||