Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. ALEX BALAGAT

This case has been cited 7 times or more.

	GR No. 214883 2015-09-02	PEOPLE v. CRISTINA SAMSON MENDOZA, J.
Let it be underscored that appeal in criminal cases throws the whole case open for review and it is the duty of the appellate court to correct, cite and appreciate errors in the appealed judgment whether they are assigned or unassigned.[12] Considering that what is at stake here is no less than the liberty of the accused, this Court has meticulously and thoroughly reviewed and examined the records of the case and finds that there is merit in her appeal.
	GR No. 212196 2015-01-12	PEOPLE v. RAMIL DORIA DAHIL MENDOZA, J.
Let it be underscored that appeal in criminal cases throws the whole case open for review and it is the duty of the appellate court to correct, cite and appreciate errors in the appealed judgment whether they are assigned or unassigned.[21] Considering that what is at stake here is no less than the liberty of the accused, this Court has meticulously and thoroughly reviewed and examined the records of the case and finds that there is merit in the appeal. The Court holds that that there was no unbroken chain of custody and that the prosecution failed to establish the very corpus delicti of the crime charged.
	GR No. 192261 2011-11-16	PEOPLE v. GARET SALCENA Y VICTORINO MENDOZA, J.
Prefatorily, it must be emphasized that an appeal in a criminal case throws the whole case open for review and it is the duty of the appellate court to cite, appreciate and correct errors in the appealed judgment whether they are assigned or unassigned.[15]
	GR No. 186467 2011-07-13	PEOPLE v. JAIME GATLABAYAN Y BATARA MENDOZA, J.
Let it be underscored that appeal in criminal cases throws the whole case open for review and it is the duty of the appellate court to correct, cite and appreciate errors in the appealed judgment whether they are assigned or unassigned. [13] Considering that what is at stake here is no less than the liberty of the accused, this Court has meticulously and thoroughly reviewed and examined the records of the case, and finds that there is merit in the appeal.
	GR No. 177191 2011-05-30	MICHAEL SAN JUAN Y CRUZ v. PEOPLE NACHURA, J.
"fn">[30] We find the Petition meritorious on the basis of such review. Well-settled is the rule that findings of fact of the trial court are given great respect. But when there is a misappreciation of facts as to compel a contrary conclusion, the Court will not hesitate to reverse the factual findings of the trial court. In such a case, the
	GR No. 185378 2010-09-27	PEOPLE v. JENNEFER CARIN Y DONOGA CARPIO MORALES, J.
In People v. Balagat[29] where the specimen examined by the forensic chemist was delivered by one who did not appear to have been part of the buy-bust team and did not take the witness stand, the Court found the prosecution's failure to show that there was no breach in the chain of custody of the specimen sufficed to merit appellant's acquittal.
	GR No. 174198 2010-01-19	PEOPLE v. ZAIDA KAMAD Y AMBING BRION, J.
We draw attention at the outset to the unique nature of an appeal in a criminal case; the appeal throws the whole case open for review and it is the duty of the appellate court to correct, cite and appreciate errors in the appealed judgment whether they are assigned or unassigned.[15] We find the present appeal meritorious on the basis of such review.