This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2006-10-30 |
TINGA, J. |
||||
| With respect to the non-presentation of the subject firearm, such is not fatal to the prosecution of an illegal possession case as long as the existence thereof can be established by testimony.[61] In this case, Ochinang testified that he saw Taan in possession of a ".38 caliber revolver"[62] which the latter used to shoot Ladaga.[63] Significantly, this was corroborated by the testimony of Dr. Rebugio, who conducted the post-mortem examination on Ladaga. He reported that Ladaga sustained a gunshot wound the entry of which is a hole 1.3 cm. in diameter located in the mid-posterior aspect of the hard palate while the exit thereof is another hole 1.3 cm in diameter in the upper third of the occipital area.[64] | |||||
|
2002-01-10 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Anent the first issue, the assessment of the credibility of witnesses by the trial court is generally accorded great respect.[17] In this case, the trial court found that appellant and his co-accused were positively and categorically identified as the offenders by the surviving victim, SPO1 Cura, and corroborated by eyewitnesses Figueroa and Tan. These witnesses testified that appellant and his brother Ferdinand grabbed the victim, Palmero Milanes, out of the jeepney by pulling his left hand.[18] Thereafter, appellant Alexander stabbed Milanes at the back using a "29" or a fan knife, while Ferdinand had his arms around Milanes' neck.[19] The knife lacerated the victim's lungs.[20] Thereupon, SPO1 Cura alighted from the jeep to pacify them, but appellant Alexander turned to Cura and also stabbed him in the stomach as the police officer was about to fire a warning shot.[21] Alexander and Ferdinand let go of Milanes and then assaulted Cura. But when the wounded Milanes had forced himself onto the driver's seat of the jeepney and started its engine to escape, Ferdinand shot and hit him at the back.[22] | |||||