This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2010-01-21 |
CARPIO, J. |
||||
| Sumbillo's alibi that he was on duty as Barangay Tanod cannot prevail over the positive and categorical testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. Sumbillo's testimony, corroborated by the accomplices and other witnesses, does not prove that it was physically impossible for Sumbillo, Francisco Sericon, Joselito Sericon, and Felix Gayuso, Jr. to be at the crime scene or its immediate vicinity at the time of the incident. Alibi is the weakest defense not only because it is inherently weak and unreliable, but also because it is easy to fabricate. It is generally rejected when the accused is positively identified by a witness.[23] | |||||
|
2009-08-28 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| We reiterate, the efficacy of a decision is not necessarily impaired by the fact that the ponente only took over from a colleague who had earlier presided over the trial. It does not follow that the judge who was not present during the trial, or a fraction thereof, cannot render a valid and just decision.[17] Here, Judge Andres Q. Cipriano took over the case after Judge Manauis recused himself from the proceedings. Even so, Judge Cipriano not only heard the evidence for the defense, he also had an opportunity to observe Dr. Cleofas Antonio who was recalled to clarify certain points in his testimony. Worth mentioning, too, is the fact that Judge Cipriano presided during the taking of the testimonies of Fidel Foz, Jr. and Alvin Pascua on rebuttal. | |||||