This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2015-12-07 |
REYES, J. |
||||
| In addition to the foregoing, jurisprudence tells us that where there is no evidence that the witnesses of the prosecution were actuated by ill motive, it is presumed that they were not so actuated and their testimony is entitled to full faith and credit.[25] It bears stressing that the defense failed to present any possible reason for Analiza, Rosario, and the other prosecution witnesses to wrongly implicate Mercado in the crimes. The prosecution's case against Mercado was not even weakened by the mere fact that he was the lone accused sitting on the prisoners' bench at the time he was identified by prosecution witnesses inside the courtroom during hearings. The prosecution witnesses sufficiently explained in court how they came to know of Mercado, and their degree of familiarity with him, especially Analiza who was his girlfriend.[26] | |||||
|
2015-07-29 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| Even though the lower courts found that abuse of superior strength attended the commission of the crime, it was not appreciated as a qualifying or aggravating circumstance because it cannot serve to qualify or aggravate the felony at issue since it is jurisprudentially settled that when the circumstance of abuse of superior strength concurs with treachery, the former is absorbed by the latter.[17] | |||||
|
2015-07-01 |
MENDOZA, J. |
||||
| Third, contrary to Celedonio's argument, Marquez was a credible witness. Jurisprudence also tells us that where there is no evidence that the witnesses of the prosecution were actuated by ill motive, it is presumed that they were not so actuated and their testimony is entitled to full faith and credit.[21] | |||||
|
2014-07-09 |
PEREZ, J. |
||||
| In addition to the foregoing, we require the appellant to also pay exemplary damages in the amount P30,000.00.[27] | |||||