Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

PEOPLE v. ANTONIO MANEGDEG

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 173242 2008-09-17	PEOPLE v. ESPERIDION BALAIS QUISUMBING, J.
It is axiomatic that positive identification by the prosecution witnesses of the accused as perpetrator of the crime is entitled to greater weight than his alibi and denial.[21]
	GR No. 132167 2002-01-08	PEOPLE v. ARMANDO QUENING Y VERSOZA QUISUMBING, J.
Finally, the award of damages needs modification. The trial court improperly awarded P50,000 as moral damages. Moral damages can be awarded only upon sufficient proof that the aggrieved party is entitled to it in accordance with Article 2217 of the Civil Code.[29] Nothing on record shows that the wife asked for moral damages. Since moral damages was not prayed for and no evidence to substantiate the award for moral damages was presented,[30] moral damages may not be awarded. Nonetheless, the heirs of the victim are entitled to civil indemnity in the amount of P50,000, pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence.[31]
	GR No. 135405 2000-11-29	PEOPLE v. JHONNETTEL MAYORGA y LUMAGUE alias PUROY BELLOSILLO, J.
The defense of alibi set up by the accused is equally untenable. The rule is that the defense of alibi when not supported by clear and convincing evidence deserves no weight in law as it can be easily fabricated or contrived. It cannot be given evidentiary value than the affirmative testimony of credible witnesses who harbor no ill motives against the accused, for as between a categorical testimony on one hand, and a bare denial on the other, the former is generally held to prevail.[17]