Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. PEDRO DARAMAY JR.

This case has been cited 8 times or more.

	GR Nos. 147656-58 2003-05-09	PEOPLE v. BERNABE GUTIERREZ Y GUTIERREZ YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
Needless to state, the oft-repeated principle is that the assessment of the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies is a matter best undertaken by a trial court because of its unique opportunity to observe the witnesses firsthand and to note their demeanor, conduct and attitude under examination. Its findings on such matters are binding and conclusive on appellate courts unless some facts or circumstances of weight and substance have been overlooked, misapprehended or misinterpreted.[24]
	GR No. 143084 2003-04-01	PEOPLE v. JOSE TORELLOS Y AVENDAÑO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
The prosecution was able to establish by overwhelming evidence that appellant had carnal knowledge of complainant by means of force and intimidation. We find no reason to depart from this finding. It has been a time-honored doctrine that the trial court's factual findings are conclusive and binding upon appellate courts unless some facts or circumstances of weight and substance have been overlooked, misapprehended or misinterpreted.[8] After a careful scrutiny of the evidence on record and the stenographic notes of the witnesses' testimonies, we find sufficient basis for the trial court's conclusion that, indeed, appellant employed force and intimidation in sexually molesting complainant.
	GR Nos. 139637-38 2003-01-22	PEOPLE v. MANUEL ESPERIDA YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
After a careful review of the evidence on record, specifically the testimony of the complainant, we find that the trial court did not err in giving credence to complainant's version of the case. The assessment of the credibility of witness and their testimony is a matter best undertaken by the trial court because of its unique opportunity to observe the witnesses firsthand; and to note their demeanor, conduct and attitude under examination. Its findings on such matters are binding and conclusive on appellate courts unless some facts or circumstances of weight and substance have been overlooked, misapprehended or misinterpreted.[7]
	GR No. 147968 2002-12-04	PEOPLE v. ROGELIO BITANCOR PANGANIBAN, J.
the guilt of the accused is usually only the offended party's testimony.[15] Verily, when a woman says she has been raped, she says in effect all that is necessary to show that rape has been committed; and if her testimony meets the test of credibility, the accused may be convicted on that sole basis.[16] Appellant's denial
	GR No. 146423 2002-11-12	PEOPLE v. TEODORO DIVINA Y DURO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
complainant were lovers. As in most rape cases, complainant's testimony in this case is uncorroborated. It is true that the lone testimony of the rape victim is sufficient to sustain a conviction;[11] and that evidence is weighed, not counted.[12] In each
	GR No. 133582 2002-09-27	PEOPLE v. TEDDY ANGGIT YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
be denominated as moral damages which are based on different jural foundations and assessed by the court in the exercise of sound discretion.[50] Thus, another award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity is in accord with prevailing case law.[51] All of the foregoing civil liabilities shall be borne by the two accused-appellants solidarily, pursuant to Article 110 of the Revised Penal Code. WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Cebu City, Branch 18, in Criminal Case No. CBU-41296, convicting accused-appellants Teddy Anggit and Ariel Cabiluna of the crime of rape and sentencing them to suffer the penalty
	GR No. 140639 2002-09-27	PEOPLE v. JOSEPH BARTOLO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
unique opportunity to observe the witnesses firsthand; and to note their demeanor, conduct and attitude under examination. Its findings on such matters are binding and conclusive on appellate courts unless some facts or circumstances of weight and substance have been overlooked, misapprehended or misinterpreted. Since appellate courts have access only to inanimate transcripts of stenographic notes of the testimonies of the witnesses during the trial and to the various documentary evidence adduced by both parties, they must rely on the assessment of the trial court regarding the credibility of the witnesses.[22] In the instant case, the Court sees no reason to depart from the findings of the trial court. The alibi and denial raised by accused-appellant cannot prevail over the positive identification of credible prosecution witnesses[23] and the ante mortem statement of the victim.[24] Moreover, accused-appellant failed to
	GR No. 138664 2002-08-06	PEOPLE v. SOTERO SERADO YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.
under examination. Its findings on such matters are binding and conclusive on appellate courts unless some facts or circumstances of weight and substance have been overlooked, misapprehended or misinterpreted. Since appellate courts have access only to inanimate transcripts of stenographic notes of the testimonies of the witnesses during the trial and to the various documentary evidence adduced by both parties, they must rely on the assessment of the trial court regarding the credibility of the witnesses.[8] Accused-appellant nonetheless submits that the trial court overlooked gross inconsistencies in Arlene's testimonies which cast doubt on her credibility. Specifically, accused-appellant points out that in her direct examination, Arlene testified that after accused-appellant