This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2009-04-07 |
VELASCO JR., J. |
||||
| In the instant case, the defense of frame-up has not been substantiated by accused-appellant. No clear and convincing evidence has been adduced showing the police officers' alleged extortion. As we have previously held, against the positive testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, accused-appellant's plain denial of the offenses charged, unsubstantiated by any credible and convincing evidence, must simply fail.[17]What is more, if accused-appellant were truly aggrieved, he could have filed a complaint against the arresting officers.[18] We are, thus, constrained to uphold the presumption of regularity in the performance of duties by the police officers. | |||||