This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2002-06-06 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Once again we must stress that matters concerning the credibility of the witnesses are best addressed to the sound judgment of the trial court.[13] It is well-settled that appellate courts will not interfere with the trial court's assessment in this regard, absent any indication or showing that the trial court has overlooked some material facts of substance or value or gravely abused its discretion.[14] As often held, the matter of assigning values to declarations at the witness stand is best and most competently performed or carried out by a trial judge who, unlike appellate magistrates, can weigh such testimony in the light of accused's behavior, demeanor, conduct, and attitude at the trial.[15] | |||||
|
2000-11-20 |
PARDO, J. |
||||
| Thus, insofar as the credibility of eyewitness Henry Cuevas is concerned, we advert to the rule that the matter of assigning values to declarations of witnesses at the witness stand is best and foremost competently performed or carried out by a trial judge who, unlike appellate magistrates, can weigh such testimony in light of the witness' behavior, demeanor, conduct and attitude at the trial.[13] | |||||