Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. LORENZO OLIVA Y ROSELA

This case has been cited 5 times or more.

	GR No. 211002 2015-01-21	RICHARD RICALDE v. PEOPLE LEONEN, J.
In a long line of cases,[78] this court has given full weight and credit to the testimonies of child victims. Their "[y]outh and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity."[79] XXX, then only 10 years old, had no reason to concoct lies against petitioner.[80]
	GR No. 194612 2014-01-27	PEOPLE v. FLORO MANIGO Y MACALUA DEL CASTILLO, J.
"The legal aphorism is that factual findings of the trial court, its calibration of the testimonies of the witnesses, and its assessment of their probative weight are given great respect if not conclusive effect, unless it ignored, misconstrued, misunderstood, or misinterpreted cogent facts and circumstances of substance which, if considered, would alter the outcome of the case."[12] A careful scrutiny of the records reveals that the case at bench is not an exception.
	GR No. 199226 2014-01-15	PEOPLE v. ROEL VERGARA Y CLAVERO LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
It is settled jurisprudence that testimonies of child victims are given full weight and credit, because when a woman, more so if she is a minor, says that she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape was committed. Youth and immaturity are generally badges of truth and sincerity.[23]
	GR No. 188124 2010-06-29	PEOPLE v. JONEL FALABRICA SERENAS PEREZ, J.
In convicting appellants, the lower courts relied heavily on the testimonies of witnesses Cesar and Dianne, which they deemed to be credible. Jurisprudence dictates that factual findings of the trial court, its calibration of the testimonies of the witnesses, and its conclusions anchored on its findings are accorded great respect, if not conclusive effect, more so when affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The exception is when it is established that the trial court ignored, overlooked, misconstrued, or misinterpreted cogent facts and circumstances that, if considered, would change the outcome of the case.[21]
	GR No. 176634 2010-04-05	PEOPLE v. ROMEO MIRANDA Y MICHAEL LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
Although the Court of Appeals already modified the award for damages of the RTC, the Court deems it necessary to again review the said award. While the Court affirms the award of: (1) civil indemnity in the amount of P75,000.00, inasmuch as Miranda was originally sentenced to death, and (2) moral damages in the amount of P75,000.00, as the same is awarded without need of pleading or proof of basis; the Court increases the award of exemplary damages from P25,000.00 to P30,000.00 in line with prevailing jurisprudence.[26]