This case has been cited 4 times or more.
|
2003-06-17 |
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J. |
||||
| Treachery may still be appreciated even when the victim was warned of the danger to his person as long as the execution of the attack made it impossible for the victim to defend himself or to retaliate.[17] The essence of treachery is the swift and unexpected attack by an aggressor or an unarmed and unsuspecting victim who does not give any slightest provocation, depriving the latter of any real chance to defend himself.[18] | |||||
|
2001-08-28 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| The first issue raised by appellant is one of credibility. In criminal cases, when the issue is one of credibility of witnesses, appellate courts as a rule will not disturb the findings of the trial court considering that the trial court is in a better position to decide the question, having heard the witnesses themselves and observed their deportment and manner of testifying during the trial.[26] Hence, the assessment of witnesses' credibility lies within the trial court's province and expertise.[27] There are, of course, exceptions to this rule, as when the trial court has neglected to consider significant facts and circumstances of material importance which could lead to a different result. | |||||
|
2001-01-05 |
QUISUMBING, J. |
||||
| Where the credibility of a witness is an issue, the established rule is that great respect is accorded to the evaluation of the credibility of witnesses by the trial court. It is in the best position to determine the issue of credibility of a witness, having heard his testimony and observed his deportment and manner of testifying.[39] But, where there is a showing that the trial court overlooked material and relevant facts, which could affect the outcome of a case,[40] the Court will not hesitate to set aside the lower court's findings and assessments regarding the credibility of witnesses. | |||||
|
2000-07-24 |
PER CURIAM |
||||
| matters. We have long declared that the Supreme Court will not interfere with the judgment of the trial court in passing upon the credibility of opposing witnesses, unless there appears in the record some facts or circumstances of weight and influence which have been overlooked and, if considered, would affect the result.[44] Indeed, the testimony of the two eyewitnesses, Angelito Bon-ao and Danny Vidal, to the commission of the crime, is consistent, categorical and hardly suffers from grave inconsistencies. | |||||