Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 182555 2010-09-07	LENIDO LUMANOG v. PEOPLE VILLARAMA, JR., J.
As succinctly explained by this Court in People v. Gardon[190]
	GR No. 175333 2007-09-21	PEOPLE v. SONNY RENTORIA Y VELASCO CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
The RTC and the Court of Appeals both found no issue detracting from the credibility and integrity of such testimonies. Lest it be forgotten, appellate courts have consistently deferred to the findings and conclusions made by a trial judge principally because it is the latter who gets the opportunity to directly and intimately observe the witnesses and to determine, by their demeanor on the witness stand, the probative strength or weakness of that which they declare.[40] More so in the case at bar, wherein the examination of CCC was done in the private confines of the chambers of the trial court judge due to the child's delayed mental status. The intimate setting enabled the trial court judge to observe more carefully the probative strength and weakness of what the eyewitness had declared.