This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2014-07-23 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| Generally, the burden lies upon the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt rather than upon the accused that he was in fact innocent. However, if the accused admits killing the victim, but pleads self-defense, the burden of evidence is shifted to him to prove such defense by clear, satisfactory and convincing evidence that excludes any vestige of criminal aggression on his part.[14] Self-defense, when invoked, as a justifying circumstance implies the admission by the accused that he committed the criminal act.[15] | |||||
|
2013-10-23 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| Self-defense, when invoked, as a justifying circumstance implies the admission by the accused that he committed the criminal act.[14] Generally, the burden lies upon the prosecution to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt rather than upon the accused that he was in fact innocent. However, if the accused admits killing the victim, but pleads self-defense, the burden of evidence is shifted to him to prove such defense by clear, satisfactory and convincing evidence that excludes any vestige of criminal aggression on his part.[15] | |||||
|
2013-07-17 |
VILLARAMA, JR., J. |
||||
| In any event, the mandatory setting for hearing a motion for reconsideration to reverse or modify a judgment or final order of the Sandiganbayan is already settled. This Court categorically ruled in the recent case of Flores v. People[26] | |||||