Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. JOSE PILLAS Y AMORIN

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 181902 2011-08-31	PEOPLE v. EDGAR EVANGELIO Y GALLO PERALTA, J.
In his Brief, appellant denied having committed the crime charged and interposed alibi as a defense. He claims that at the time of the incident on October 3, 2001, at about 6:30 in the evening, he was sleeping in his house at Diit, Tacloban City, together with his mother and sisters. On the other hand, the appellant was positively identified by the prosecution witnesses as one of the perpetrators of the crime of robbery with rape. Both the trial court and the CA found the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses credible. The Court gives great weight to the trial court's evaluation of the testimony of a witness because it had the opportunity to observe the facial expression, gesture, and tone of voice of a witness while testifying, thus making it in a better position to determine whether a witness is lying or telling the truth.[9]
	GR No. 178771 2011-06-08	PEOPLE v. ALBERTO ANTICAMARA Y CABILLO PERALTA, J.
Appellant Lando denied having committed the crime charged and interposed alibi as a defense. He claims that at the time of the incident he was in his house at Tarlac, together with his family. On the other hand, the appellants were positively identified by AAA, as two (2) of the six (6) malefactors who forcibly took her and Sulpacio from the Estrella house in the early morning of May 7, 2002. Both the trial court and the CA found the testimony of AAA credible. The Court gives great weight to the trial court's evaluation of the testimony of a witness because it had the opportunity to observe the facial expression, gesture, and tone of voice of a witness while testifying; thus, making it in a better position to determine whether a witness is lying or telling the truth. [25]
	GR No. 179570 2010-02-04	EGAP MADSALI v. PEOPLE PERALTA, J.
As a rule, this Court gives great weight to the trial court's evaluation of the testimony of a witness, because the trial court had the opportunity to observe the facial expression, gesture, and tone of voice of a witness while testifying, thus, putting it in a better position to determine whether a witness was lying or telling the truth.[29]