This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2005-12-09 |
CHICO-NAZARIO, J. |
||||
| On this matter, it has been held that where a party fails to present a fact necessary to his case when it is within his power to do so, it will be presumed that such fact does not exist. [50] On this point, petitioner relies heavily on this Court's holding in the case of People of the Philippines v. Lopez[51] where we ruled that the testimony of an informer is not indispensable in view of the testimony of the prosecution witnesses who participated in the "buy-bust" operation. Such reliance is misplaced. | |||||