Lawyerly

You're currently signed in as:
User

JULIUS AMANQUITON v. PEOPLE

This case has been cited 3 times or more.

	GR Nos. 204481-82 2015-10-14	ALBERT G. AMBAGAN v. PEOPLE VELASCO JR., J.
It is a cardinal principle in criminal law that the prosecution has the burden of proving the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt.[53] It is the primordial duty of the prosecution to present its side with clarity and persuasion, so that conviction becomes the only logical and inevitable conclusion, with moral certainty.[54] If the prosecution fails to discharge its heavy burden, then it is not only the right of the accused to be freed, it becomes the Court's constitutional duty to acquit him.[55]
	GR Nos. 186739-960 2013-04-17	LEOVEGILDO R. RUZOL v. SANDIGANBAYAN VELASCO JR., J.
Verily, an accused is entitled to an acquittal unless his or her guilt is shown beyond reasonable doubt and it is the primordial duty of the prosecution to present its side with clarity and persuasion, so that conviction becomes the only logical and inevitable conclusion, with moral certainty.[39] As explained by this Court in People v. Berroya:[40]
	GR No. 188456 2009-09-10	H. HARRY L. ROQUE v. COMELEC VELASCO JR., J.
Contrary to what the petitioners posit, the duly notarized JVA, as couched, explained the nature and the limited purpose[53] of the joint venture and expressly defined, among other things, the composition, scope, and the 60-40 capital structure of the aggroupment.[54] The JVA also contains provisions on the management[55] and division of profits.[56] Article 3[57] of the JVA delineates the respective participations and responsibilities of the joint venture partners in the automation project.