This case has been cited 1 times or more.
|
2004-06-14 |
PUNO, J. |
||||
| While it is true that the courts are not bound to accept or reject an entire testimony, and may believe one part and disbelieve another,[66] our Constitution and the law mandate that all doubts must be resolved in favor of the accused. Calsis committed an obvious blunder in identifying the supposed assailants which this Court cannot simply let go. On the contrary, it creates reasonable doubt in our minds if Calcis really saw the persons he allegedly saw or if he was even where he said he was that evening. For, it is elementary that the positive identification of the accused is crucial in establishing his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. That is wanting in the instant case. | |||||