This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2008-10-17 |
AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J. |
||||
| As to the failure of the prosecution to name the friend of AAA who celebrated a birthday prior to the date of the rape incident, this omission is minor for it has nothing to do with the fact that appellant had carnal knowledge of AAA without her consent. Neither is the failure of the prosecution to present the testimony of the adult who was in AAA's house when appellant lured her into his house a fatal omission. It should be borne in mind that in criminal cases the prosecution has the discretion to decide on who to call as witness during the trial and its failure to do so does not give rise to the presumption that "evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced" simply because such witness is also at the disposal of the defense which could easily ask that said witness be summoned.[97] | |||||
|
2006-01-24 |
AZCUNA, J. |
||||
| In contrast, appellant's alibi and denials have not been proven by positive, clear and satisfactory evidence. It bears stressing that alibi is the weakest of all defenses because it is facile to fabricate and difficult to disprove, and is generally rejected.[31] For alibi to prosper, it is not enough to prove that the defendant was somewhere else when the crime was committed, but he must likewise demonstrate that it was physically impossible for him to have been at the scene of the crime at the time.[32] In this case, appellant admits that on the night in question, he approached the victim and the latter allegedly attempted to strike him. In response thereto, appellant allegedly fired a warning shot in the air then left after reprimanding the group. However, this defense cannot prevail over the positive identification of appellant as the author of the crime by no less than three credible witnesses.[33] | |||||
|
2004-01-20 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Against the positive identification made by prosecution witnesses of Demate and Morales as the perpetrators of the crime, all that appellant Demate can offer is a shaky alibi. Alibi is a weak defense. Settled is the rule that the defense of alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification of the accused as the author of the crime by credible witnesses.[53] | |||||
|
2003-09-18 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack on the victim which renders the latter unable and unprepared to defend himself by reason of the suddenness and severity of the attack.[13] Even if the attack was frontal, it does not negate the finding of treachery. A frontal attack can be treacherous if sudden and unexpected and the victim is unarmed.[14] | |||||