Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 133436 2004-04-14	PEOPLE v. CONRADO AYUMAN SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ, J.
We have ruled that facts or circumstances which are not only consistent with the guilt of the accused but also inconsistent with his innocence, constitute evidence which, in weight and probative force, may surpass even direct evidence in its effect upon the court. [16]
	GR No. 135536 2002-06-06	PEOPLE v. VICENTE GARCIA TURTOGA QUISUMBING, J.
In the present case, motive proved to be the key element in establishing appellant's guilt through circumstantial evidence presented before the trial court. Robbery as a motive explains the killing.[48] Coupled with evidentiary facts from which it may be inferred that the accused was the malefactor, motive could be sufficient to support a conviction.[49]
	GR No. 130627 and Nos. 139477-78 2001-05-31	PEOPLE v. AGUEDA T. ALBA PARDO, J.
In People v. Taliman,[29] we held that coupled with enough circumstantial evidence, motive may be sufficient to support a conviction. Motive was clearly established in this case.
	GR No. 134402 2001-02-05	PEOPLE v. NARCISO BAYANG Y LEYPOS PARDO, J.
We have held time and again that when there are facts or circumstances that are consistent with the guilt of the accused and inconsistent with his innocence, such constitute evidence of weight and probative force. This evidence may even surpass direct evidence in its effect upon the court.[35] We find adequate evidence to warrant conviction of the accused.