This case has been cited 6 times or more.
|
2010-06-29 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| Although the alibi of accused-appellant Orias appears to have been corroborated by a CAFGU member by the name of Robert Arellano and by a vendor present during the dance, said defense is unworthy of belief not only because of its inherent weakness and the fact that accused-appellant Orias was positively identified by Rosemarie, but also because it has been held that alibi becomes more unworthy of merit where it is established mainly by the accused himself, his relatives, friends, and comrades-in-arms,[37] and not by credible persons.[38] | |||||
|
2007-09-11 |
CARPIO MORALES, J. |
||||
| What is decisive in treachery is that "the attack was executed in such a manner as to make it impossible for the victim to retaliate."[54] In the case at bar, petitioner, a policeman, and his co-accused were armed with two M-16 armalites and a revolver. The victim and his companions were not armed.[55] The attack was sudden and unexpected,[56] and the victim was already kneeling in surrender when he was shot the second time. Clearly, the victim and his companion Eduardo had no chance to defend themselves or retaliate. | |||||
|
2000-06-29 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| To further exculpate themselves, the accused invoked alibi. Ordoño testified that at the time of the incident he was at work in the place of Barangay Captain Valentin Oriente,[27] while Medina claimed that he went to carry bananas for a certain aunt Resurreccion.[28] However, such allegations deserve no credit as alibi becomes worthless when it is established mainly by the accused themselves.[29] The defense of alibi is always considered with suspicion and received with caution, not only because it is inherently weak and unreliable, but also because it can easily be fabricated.[30] | |||||