Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. WELVIN DIU Y KOTSESA

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 181843 2014-07-14	MIGUEL CIRERA Y USTELO v. PEOPLE LEONEN, J.
This court held that "findings of facts and assessment of credibility of witnesses are matters best left to the trial court,"[100] which is in the best position to observe the witnesses' demeanor while being examined in court.[101] This court gives more weight to such findings if affirmed by the Court of Appeals.[102] The exception to the rule is when the trial court misconstrued facts which if properly appreciated could alter the outcome of the case.[103]
	GR No. 181843 2014-07-14	MIGUEL CIRERA Y USTELO v. PEOPLE LEONEN, J.
This court held that "findings of facts and assessment of credibility of witnesses are matters best left to the trial court,"[100] which is in the best position to observe the witnesses' demeanor while being examined in court.[101] This court gives more weight to such findings if affirmed by the Court of Appeals.[102] The exception to the rule is when the trial court misconstrued facts which if properly appreciated could alter the outcome of the case.[103]
	GR No. 197250 2013-07-17	PEOPLE v. REYNALDO “ANDY” SOMOZA Y HANDAYA LEONARDO-DE CASTRO, J.
The established rule in appellate review is that the trial court's factual findings are accorded great respect and even conclusive effect, especially if such findings are affirmed by the Court of Appeals.[43] This Court finds no compelling reason to diverge from the rule. A review of the records reveals that the prosecution's retelling of the events as they transpired hews closer to the truth.
	GR No. 201723 2013-06-13	PEOPLE v. PERCIVAL DELA ROSA Y BAYER REYES, J.
Records show that Samson, a friend of the victim who was with him at the time of the incident, straightforwardly testified that it was Dela Rosa who pulled out the bladed weapon during the assault and who stabbed the victim on his chest and at the back of his neck.[17] As aptly stated by the CA, the positive, categorical and unequivocal declaration of Samson identifying Dela Rosa as one of the assailants deserves more consideration than the defense's speculation on the state of darkness of the locus crimini or the number of times the victim was stabbed. During the trial, Samson also vividly described the manner by which Dela Rosa committed the crime, giving the RTC a clear picture of how Dela Rosa and Tabasa ganged up on the victim. Indeed, it is evident that the totality of the evidence for the prosecution, coupled with the defense's failure to discredit Samson's testimony, established Dela Rosa's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. As held in People of the Philippines v. Welvin Diu y Kotsesa and Dennis Dayaon y Tupit:[18]