Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

ROBERT P. WA-ACON v. PEOPLE

This case has been cited 4 times or more.

	GR No. 190846 2016-02-03	TOMAS P. TAN v. JOSE G. HOSANA BRION, J.
Prima facie evidence is defined as evidence good and sufficient on its face. Such evidence as, in the judgment of the law, is sufficient to establish a given fact, or the group or chain of facts constituting the party's claim or defense and which if not rebutted or contradicted, will remain sufficient.[61]
	GR No. 178626 2012-06-13	CECILIA U. LEGRAMA v. SANDIGANBAYAN PERALTA, J.
Under Article 217, a presumption was installed that upon demand by any duly authorized officer, the failure of a public officer to have duly forthcoming any public funds or property with which said officer is accountable should be prima facie evidence that he had put such missing funds or properties to personal use. When these circumstances are present, a "presumption of law" arises that there was malversation of public funds or properties as decreed by Article 217.[17] To be sure, this presumption is disputable and rebuttable by evidence showing that the public officer had fully accounted for the alleged cash shortage.
	GR No. 177780 2012-01-25	METROPOLITAN BANK v. ANTONINO O. TOBIAS III BERSAMIN, J.
Firstly, a presumption affects the burden of proof that is normally lodged in the State.[38] The effect is to create the need of presenting evidence to overcome the prima facie case that shall prevail in the absence of proof to the contrary.[39] As such, a presumption of law is material during the actual trial of the criminal case where in the establishment thereof the party against whom the inference is made should adduce evidence to rebut the presumption and demolish the prima facie case.[40] This is not so in a preliminary investigation, where the investigating prosecutor only determines the existence of a prima facie case that warrants the prosecution of a criminal case in court.[41]
	GR No. 168111 2008-07-04	ANTONIO TAN v. AMELITO BALLENA CHICO-NAZARIO, J.
In a preliminary investigation, a full and exhaustive presentation of the parties' evidence is not required, but only such as may engender a well-grounded belief that an offense has been committed and that the accused is probably guilty thereof.[58] Certainly, it does not involve the determination of whether or not there is evidence beyond reasonable doubt pointing to the guilt of the person. Only prima facie evidence is required; or that which is, on its face, good and sufficient to establish a given fact, or the group or chain of facts constituting the party's claim or defense; and which, if not rebutted or contradicted, will remain sufficient.[59] Therefore, matters of evidence are more appropriately presented and heard during the trial.[60]