Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. ALLAN JUNIO Y CORTEZ

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 202838 2014-09-17	PEOPLE v. JULITO GERANDOY PEREZ, J.
An affidavit of desistance is generally looked upon with disfavor by Courts. In so many cases, retractions arc generally unreliable and considered as an after thought.[42] As held in People v. Junio:[43]
	GR No. 188897 2011-06-06	PEOPLE v. IRENO BONAAGUA Y BERCE PERALTA, J.
It has been repeatedly held by this Court that it looks with disfavor on affidavits of desistance. As cited in People v. Alcazar, [29] the rationale for this was extensively discussed in People v. Junio: [30]
	GR No. 186494 2010-09-15	PEOPLE v. ROY ALCAZAR Y MIRANDA PEREZ, J.
It has been repeatedly held by this Court that it looks with disfavor on affidavits of desistance. The rationale for this was extensively discussed in People v. Junio,[32] cited in People v. Alicante.[33]
	GR No. 179570 2010-02-04	EGAP MADSALI v. PEOPLE PERALTA, J.
Moreover, Imam Musli Mohammad, while testifying as prosecution witness, attested that the parents of AAA and Sajiron were not present during the marriage,[15] thus controverting CCC's allegation that he was present and gave consent to the marriage. Although Imam Musli Muhammad, when presented as an accused witness, recanted his earlier testimony that CCC was not present at the wedding, the same cannot be given credit. Recantations are frowned upon by the courts. A recantation of a testimony is exceedingly unreliable, for there is always the probability that such recantation may later on be itself repudiated. Courts look with disfavor upon retractions, because they can easily be obtained from witnesses through intimidation or for monetary considerations. Hence, a retraction does not necessarily negate an earlier declaration. They are generally unreliable and looked upon with considerable disfavor by the courts.[16] Moreover, it would be a dangerous rule to reject the testimony taken before a court of justice, simply because the witness who has given it later on changes his mind for one reason or another.[17]
	GR No. 174372 2009-01-20	PEOPLE v. ELPIDIO ANTONIO CARPIO MORALES, J.
Apropos is this Court's pronouncement in People v. Junio:[21]