This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2003-10-15 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| The contentions of appellant have no merit, for which reason his conviction must be affirmed. It is a long-settled rule in criminal jurisprudence that when the issue is one of credibility of witnesses, an appellate court will normally not disturb the factual findings of the trial court[12] in the absence of a clear showing that the court had failed to appreciate facts and circumstances which if taken into account, would materially affect the result of the case.[13] The trial court's evaluation of the testimonies of witnesses is accorded great respect because it had the opportunity to observe the demeanor and conduct of witnesses on the stand.[14] | |||||