Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

This case has been cited 2 times or more.

	GR No. 187052 2012-09-13	PEOPLE v. MELISSA CHUA VILLARAMA, JR., J.
Before us is an appeal from the September 15, 2008 Decision[1] of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 01006. The Court of Appeals had affirmed with modification the Decision[2] of the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila, Branch 33, in Criminal Case No. 03-217999-403. The RTC found appellant Melissa Chua, a.k.a. Clarita Ng Chua, guilty beyond reasonable doubt of illegal recruitment in large scale and four counts of estafa. The Court of Appeals modified the penalty imposed upon appellant for each count of estafa to an indeterminate penalty of imprisonment for 4 years and 2 months of prision correccional, as minimum, to 13 years of reclusion temporal, as maximum.
	GR No. 158788 2008-04-30	ELY AGUSTIN v. PEOPLE AUSTRIA-MARTINEZ, J.
Although the Court has held that frame-up is inherently one of the weakest defenses,[61] as it is both easily concocted and difficult to prove,[62] in the present case, the lower courts seriously erred in ignoring the weakness of the prosecution's evidence and its failure to prove the guilt of petitioner beyond reasonable doubt. The rule requiring a claim of frame-up to be supported by clear and convincing evidence[63] was never intended to shift to the accused the burden of proof in a criminal case. As the Court held in People of the Philippines v. Ambih:[64]