Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

ANDY QUELNAN Y QUINO v. PEOPLE

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR No. 211199 2015-03-25	PEOPLE v. RANDY ROLLO Y LAGASCA PEREZ, J.
It is jurisprudential that factual findings of trial courts especially those which revolve on matters of credibility of witnesses deserve to be respected when no glaring errors bordering on a gross misapprehension of the facts, or where no speculative, arbitrary and unsupported conclusions, can be gleaned from such findings. The evaluation of the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies are best undertaken by the trial court because of its unique opportunity to observe the witnesses' deportment, demeanor, conduct and attitude under grilling examination.[12]
	GR No. 200987 2014-08-20	PEOPLE v. RONALDO BAYAN Y NERI PEREZ, J.
Generally, factual findings of trial courts especially those which revolve matters of credibility of witnesses deserve to be respected when no glaring errors bordering on a gross misapprehension of the facts, or where no speculative, arbitrary and unsupported conclusions, can be gleaned from such findings.[20] The evaluation of the credibility of witnesses and their testimonies are best undertaken by the trial court because of its unique opportunity to observe the witnesses' deportment, demeanor, conduct and attitude under grilling examination.[21]
	GR No. 185128 2012-01-30	RUBEN DEL CASTILLO v. PEOPLE PERALTA, J.
It must be put into emphasis that this present case is about the violation of Section 16 of R.A. 6425. In every prosecution for the illegal possession of shabu, the following essential elements must be established: (a) the accused is found in possession of a regulated drug; (b) the person is not authorized by law or by duly constituted authorities; and (c) the accused has knowledge that the said drug is a regulated drug.[26]