This case has been cited 2 times or more.
|
2011-06-15 |
VILLARAMA, JR., J. |
||||
| The elements of the crime charged for violation of said law are: (1) that any treasury or bank note or certificate or other obligation and security payable to bearer, or any instrument payable to order or other document of credit not payable to bearer is forged or falsified by another person; (2) that the offender knows that any of the said instruments is forged or falsified; and (3) that he either used or possessed with intent to use any of such forged or falsified instruments.[20] As held in People v. Digoro,[21] possession of false treasury or bank notes alone, without anything more, is not a criminal offense. For it to constitute an offense under Article 168 of the RPC, the possession must be with intent to use said false treasury or bank notes.[22] | |||||
|
2002-08-20 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| witness on the stand. Unless there are substantial matters that might have been overlooked or discarded, the findings of credibility by the trial court will not generally be disturbed on appeal.[11] In the case at bar, a careful and thorough review of the records reveals that the trial court was correct in convicting accused-appellant on the basis of the testimony of Franco Cuyos, who was not shown to have been impelled by ill motive to testify falsely against accused-appellant.[12] Not only was his testimony convincing and unequivocal, the same was also backed up by physical evidence, a mute but eloquent manifestation of truth[13] that the victim was indeed shot on the chest and at close range. Accused-appellant's defenses of denial and alibi were correctly disregarded by the trial court. Time and again, we have said that denial and alibi are the weakest defenses and cannot prevail over positive identification.[14] For alibi to prosper as a | |||||