Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. ENDRIQUITO REYNALDO

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 139229 2002-04-22	PEOPLE v. ESMERALDO CANA Y DEL VALLE QUISUMBING, J.
A: I was taught. COURT: The Court take (sic) notice that in Grade I you will not learn how to read and write fully. That is of judicial notice.[63] Nevertheless, after careful reading of the records, we find that even if the alleged leading questions were not allowed, Jovelyn's testimony appears credible and comprehensive. She gave a candid, plain, and straightforward account on how she was raped by appellant. She spoke in a manner reflective of honest and unrehearsed testimony. Moreover, when it comes to the issue of credibility, this Court generally defers to the assessment and evaluation given by the trial court[64] because of its unique position to observe the demeanor of the witnesses. In this case, we reiterate the truism that it is highly inconceivable that a young barrio lass, inexperienced with the ways of the world, would fabricate a charge of defloration, undergo a medical examination of her private parts, subject herself to public trial, and tarnish her family's honor and reputation, unless she was motivated by a potent desire to seek justice for the wrong committed against her.[65]
	GR No. 135242 2002-04-19	PEOPLE v. RICARDO BAYLEN QUISUMBING, J.
Rape is committed by having carnal knowledge of a woman by, inter alia, using force or intimidation. The act of holding a knife by itself is strongly suggestive of force or at least intimidation, and threatening the victim with a knife is sufficient to bring a woman to submission.[25] In this case, complainant was terrified because appellant poked his knife on her chest and threatened to kill her and her family in order to sate his lust. Appellant's claim that force is negated by the absence of external injuries on the part of complainant lacks logical basis and is bereft of merit. That appellant consummated the rape of complainant with the use of force and intimidation at the time, place, and manner detailed by the prosecution has been proved beyond reasonable doubt.
	GR Nos. 137481-83 & 138455 2001-03-07	PEOPLE v. CONRADO SALADINO Y DINGLE BELLOSILLO, J.
Indeed, it is highly unlikely for a young girl like Lourdes to falsely accuse an uncle of a heinous crime, undergo a medical examination of her private parts, subject herself to the humiliation of a public trial and tarnish her family's honor and reputation, unless motivated by a potent desire to seek justice for the wrong committed against her.[9] In the absence of evidence of improper motive on the part of the victim to falsely testify against the accused, her testimony deserves credence.[10]
	GR No. 136254 2000-12-04	PEOPLE v. REYNALDO DAGPIN Y PAUSAL BELLOSILLO, J.
It is oft repeated in rape cases that it is highly inconceivable that a barrio lass like Ellen, inexperienced in the ways of the world, would fabricate a charge of defloration, undergo a medical examination of her private parts, subject herself to public trial and tarnish her family's honor and reputation, unless she was motivated by a potent desire to seek justice for the wrong committed against her.[7] And inasmuch as there was no showing that she was impelled by any improper motive in making the accusation against him, her complaint is entitled to full faith and credit.[8]
	GR No. 128900 2000-07-14	PEOPLE v. ALBERTO S. ANTONIO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
The matter of assigning values to declarations on the witness stand is best and most competently performed by the trial judge who, unlike appellate magistrates, can weigh the testimony of a witness in the light of his demeanor, conduct and attitude as he testified, and is thereby placed in a more competent position to discriminate between the true and the false.[18] There are other reasons why the eyewitness testimony of SG Bobis was given full faith and credit. SG Bobis, a mere security guard, realized he was no match to appellants Antonio and SPO4 Nieto. The former, a wealthy businessman, is known as an intimate friend of people in power. Appellant Antonio admitted in court that he surrendered himself and his gun to Mayor Jinggoy Estrada, who was his good friend. Hours later, he went to see then Vice President Joseph Estrada in Tagaytay City so he (Antonio) could tell his friend, the Vice President, what happened in his own words.[19]