Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
TURCO
MELO, J. | Aug. 14, 2000 | Appeal
APPELLANT: Rodegelio Totong Turco, Jr.
APPELLEE: People of the Philippines
SUMMARY: Turco was convicted of rape. He appealed and argued that court erred in finding
him guilty based only on testimony. Although medical certificate was presented, medicolegal officer was not present at the trial. Court held that, in cases of rape, due to its intimate
nature, primary consideration is credibility of complainants testimony, which standing
alone, even without medical examination, is sufficient to convict.
DOCTRINE: 1. The primordial consideration in a determination concerning the crime of rape is the
credibility of complainants testimony.
2. Court places significance on distinction between admissibility of evidence and its probative value. Since
admissibility is determined by relevance and competence, admissibility is therefore an affair of logic and law.
Probative value or weight given to evidence, once admitted, depends on judicial evaluation guided by R133 and
jurisprudence.
FACTS
ISSUE
RATIO
I.
II.
People v Bernaldez
While the medical certificate could be admitted as
an exception to the hearsay rule since entries in
official records constitute exceptions to the hearsay
evidence rule (R130 S4), since it involved an
opinion of one who must first be established as
an expert witness, it could not be given weight or
credit unless doctor who issued it is presented in
court to show his qualifications.