Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. GERRY SARABIA

This case has been cited 6 times or more.

	GR No. 180499 2008-07-09	PEOPLE v. CONRADO CACAYAN TINGA, J,
The issues raised by the appellant involve weighing of evidence already passed upon by the RTC and the Court of Appeals. The age-old rule is that the task of assigning values to the testimonies of witnesses in the stand and weighing their credibility is best left to the trial court which forms its first-hand impressions as a witness testifies before it. It is also axiomatic that positive testimony prevails over negative testimony.[30] The denial and alibi of appellant fail in light of AAA's positive identification that he raped her on the alleged dates which is corroborated by physical evidence showing forced coitus.
	GR No. 176265 2008-04-30	PEOPLE v. JOSE MAGBANUA Y MORIÑO TINGA, J,
The issues raised by the appellant involve weighing of evidence already passed upon by the trial court and the appellate court. The age-old rule is that the task of assigning values to the testimonies of witnesses in the stand and weighing their credibility is best left to the trial court which forms its first-hand impressions as a witness testifies before it. It is also axiomatic that positive testimony prevails over negative testimony.[17]
	GR No. 173612 2008-03-26	DOMINADOR MALANA v. PEOPLE TINGA, J,
Except as to the penalty of death, now commuted to reclusion perpetua pursuant to Republic Act No. 9346,[19] we affirm appellants' conviction. There is no cogent reason to disturb the finding of guilt made by the trial court and affirmed by the appellate court. The issues raised by appellants involve weighing of evidence already passed upon by the trial court and the appellate court. Appellants question the credibility of the testimony of Vicente and Suzette and the weight given by the trial court to the testimony of the bomb specialist. The age-old rule is that the task of assigning values to the testimonies of witnesses in the stand and weighing their credibility is best left to the trial court which forms its first-hand impressions as a witness testifies before it. It is also axiomatic that positive testimony prevails over negative testimony.[20]
	GR No. 140203 2003-01-31	PEOPLE v. EDDIE S. FERNANDEZ PARDO, J.
Alibi and denial are the weakest of all defenses[24] and will not prevail as against the straightforward, candid and positive testimony of the prosecution witness.[25]
	GR No. 140203 2002-01-31	PEOPLE v. EDDIE S. FERNANDEZ PARDO, J.
Alibi and denial are the weakest of all defenses[24] and will not prevail as against the straightforward, candid and positive testimony of the prosecution witness.[25]
	GR No. 144035 2001-09-27	PEOPLE v. VICENTE BASQUEZ Y MANZANO PANGANIBAN, J.
We are not persuaded. We find no cogent reason to disturb the trial court's assessment of the testimony of Despe. Its declaration that he was biased and partial to appellant was neither arbitrary nor baseless. The age-old rule is that the task of assigning values to the testimonies of witnesses and weighing their credibility is best left to the trial court, which had firsthand impressions of their demeanor and conduct.[25] The trial court observed: "The transcript of stenographic notes of the proceedings from pages 35 up to 42 on clarificatory questions of the court on Jose Despe, revealed said witness was evasive in trying to hide his apparent predilection in favor of accused by going around the bush, in answer to the questions of the court, glaringly declarative of his apparent intention, to exonerate the accused of the offense charged.