This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2003-02-19 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| "The Court finds no merit the defense of alibi and general denials of accused. The positive identification by prosecution witnesses upon the persons of the accused as perpetrator of the crime negates all allegations "that accused were at some other place at the time of the commission of the offense or that they did not commit the offense as charged."[23] and found all accused guilty of Robbery with Homicide and imposing a penalty of "reclusion perpetua to death". The imposition of said penalty is erroneous and inappropriate.[24] But because of the possibility that death could be the correct imposable penalty, the Court en banc entertained the automatic review of the decision of the trial court. Hence, herein automatic review pursuant to Article 47 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended. | |||||
|
2001-12-14 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Regarding first alleged error, we are in agreement with the Office of the Solicitor General that the trial court's findings on the credibility of witnesses are entitled to the highest degree of respect. Absent any showing that it has overlooked, misapprehended, or misapplied some facts of weight and substance which, if properly considered, would have altered the result of the case, the assessment of the trial court regarding the credibility of the witnesses deserves to be sustained on appeal. For having had the distinct opportunity of directly observing the demeanor and conduct of the witnesses under oath, the trial court is in a better position to ascertain whether or not a witness is telling the truth.[33] | |||||
|
2001-09-21 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Indeed, the evaluation of the credibility of the witnesses and their testimonies is a matter best left to the discretion of the trial court which, having had the opportunity to observe the demeanor and conduct of witnesses while on the stand, was in the best position to assess their capacity for truth.[29] In the absence of evidence that the trial court overlooked, misapprehended, or misapplied some facts or circumstances of weight and substance which, if properly considered, would have altered the result of the case, its findings on the credibility of the witnesses shall be accorded respect by this Court.[30] We see no reason to overturn the findings of the trial court in this case. | |||||