Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
86939
on the application for bail. Their testimonies were considered reproduced for the trial on the
merits. Edwin Labos was recalled as a rebuttal witness.
[4] TSN, 24 November 1986, 4-9.
[5] TSN, 23 January 1987, 5.
[6] TSN, 19 December 1986, 6-8.
[7] TSN, 23 January 1987, op. cit., 3.
[8] TSN, 19 August 1987, 5-6.
[9] TSN, 27 February 1987, 11-14.
[10] TSN, 18 March 1987, 4-9.
[11] TSN, 14 October 1987, 2-5.
[12] Id., 7-8.
[13] TSN, 14 October 1987, 4; 7.
[14] TSN, 10 February 1988, 6; TSN, 29 February 1988, 4.
[15] TSN, 29 February 1988, 6.
[16] TSN, 29 February 1988, 10-11.
[17] TSN, 10 February 1988, 10-12.
[18] TSN, 9 November 1987, 5; 10.
[19] Id., 4.
[20] TSN, 20 November 1987, 6-8.
[21] TSN, 11 December 1987, 5-6.
[22] TSN, 16 December 1987, 3-4.
[23] TSN, 11 December 1987, op. cit., 6-7.
[24] Id., 5-10.
[25] TSN, 3 June 1987, 4-5; 8-9; 12-13.
[26] OR, 305-318; Rollo, 30-43. Per Judge Teresita Dizon-Capulong.
[27] OR, 318; Rollo, 43.
[28] OR, 315-317.
[29] OR, 318.
[30] Id., 329-347.
[31] Id., 351-352.
[32] Id., 356.
[33] Rollo, 86-125.
Should be falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, i.e., false in one thing, false in everything.
[34]
Appeals, 179 SCRA 5 [1989]; People vs. Sanchez, 213 SCRA 70 [1992].
[48] See WIGMORE, J.H., op. cit., note 43, Section 1747.
[49] People vs. Collantes, 208 SCRA 853 [1992].
[50] People vs. Tismo, 204 SCRA 535 [1991]; People vs. Simon, 209 SCRA 148 [1992].
[51] OR, 349.
People vs.
[52] de la Cruz, 207 SCRA 632 [1992], citing
MORAN, Comments on the Rules of Court, vol. 4, 1980 ed., 340-41. See also, Reyes vs.
People, 71 Phil. 598 [1941].
[53] People vs. Penesa, 81 Phil. 398 [1948].
[54] People vs. Pama, G.R. Nos. 90297-98, 11 December 1992.
[55] People vs. Roallos, 113 SCRA 584 [1982]; People vs. Clamor, 198 SCRA 642 [1991].
People vs. Pineda, 20 SCRA 748 [1967]; People vs. Boniao, G.R. No. 100800, 27
[56]
January 1993.
[57] Section 8, Rule 117, Rules of Court.
[58] Id.
A conspiracy exists when two or more persons come to an agreement concerning the
[59]
commission of a felony and decide to commit it. (Article 8, Revised Penal Code).
[60] People vs. Alonzo, 73 SCRA 483 [1976]; People vs. Pascual, 204 SCRA 618 [1991].
These are two of the three requisites of evident premeditation. The third requisite is that
[61]
there must be a sufficient lapse of time between the determination and execution to allow
him to reflect upon the consequences of his act. (People vs. Narit, 197 SCRA 334 [1991];
People vs. Barba, 203 SCRA 436 [1991]; People vs. Buka, 205 SCRA 567 [1992]).
[62] People vs. Ampo-an, 187 SCRA 173 [1990].
[63] Section 19(1), Article III, 1987 Constitution.
[64] Article 50, Revised Penal Code.
[65] Article 61(3), Id.