This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2010-12-13 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Indeed, the accused is estopped from assailing the legality of his arrest if he fails to raise such issue before arraignment.[5] However, this waiver is limited only to the arrest. The legality of an arrest affects only the jurisdiction of the court over the person of the accused. A waiver of an illegal warrantless arrest does not carry with it a waiver of the inadmissibility of evidence seized during the illegal warrantless arrest.[6] | |||||
|
2010-10-20 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| The oft-repeated principle is that the assessment of the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies is 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.[11] 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, misinterpreted, or the court gravely abused its discretion.[12] None of these exceptions are present in this case. | |||||