This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2007-12-04 |
REYES, R.T., J. |
||||
| That treachery or alevosia was present is incontrovertible. The essence of this qualifying circumstance is the sudden and unexpected attack by the assailant on an unsuspecting victim, depriving the latter of any real chance to defend himself.[51] It is employed to ensure the commission of the crime without the concomitant risk to the aggressor. The rule is well-settled in this jurisdiction that treachery may still be appreciated even though the victim was forewarned of danger to his person.[52] What is decisive is that the attack was executed in a manner that the victim was rendered defenseless and unable to retaliate.[53] | |||||
|
2003-04-30 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| It is axiomatic that the assessment on the credibility of witnesses is a function best discharged by the trial court which is in a better position to determine conflicting testimonies after having heard the witnesses, and observed their deportment and manner of testifying. This Court will not interfere with the trial court's findings on the credibility of witnesses unless those findings are arbitrary, or facts and circumstances of weight and influence have been overlooked, misunderstood or misapplied by the judge which, if considered, would have affected the outcome of the case.[15] None of the exceptions have been shown to exist in the instant case. | |||||