School Work

Evidence Digests 2-15-14

Digests of Evidence Cases for February 15, 2014 for Third Year, Second Semester, 2014.
of 13
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Related Documents
  Ofcial RecordsPeople v. CabuangFacts October 1988, 11 p.m. - Evelyn De Vera and Cousin Maria ParanaVictim! ere al#in$ %ome alon$ an unin%abited place in Pan$asinan.Cabuan$ emer$ed &rom t%e rice paddies it% a 'as%li$%t, as#in$ %ere t%ey ere $oin$. Evelyn al#ed &aster, but Maria stopped to tal# to Cabuan$.Evelyn loo#ed bac#, and t%en sa Mataban$. Cabuan$ t%en $rabbed Maria,and Mataban$ ran a&ter Evelyn. Evelyn as able to %ide amon$ plants in ayard. (ater, s%e sa a tricycle it% t%e t%ree, alon$ it% its driver andanot%er person at t%e rear. )%e %eard %er cousin cryin$ &or %elp.)%e t%en ent %ome to %er sister, but as not able to tell %er becauses%e as scolded. *%e ne+t mornin$, Maria as &ound dead and na#ed alon$t%e road. Evelyn e+ecuted a s orn statement identi&yin$ t%e t o, since s%e#ne t%em as %er baran$ay-mates, and t%ey ere in close pro+imity t%eni$%t be&ore t%estreet as illuminated. )%e identied t%em in a lineup. *%eot%er t o remain unidentied.n Or$C%emboo# and ot%er belon$in$s ere &ound t%erea&ter. )%e died/ %ours be&ore autopsy. On t%e basis o& t%e statement, t%e t o ereconvicted. ppeal IssuesWhether the TC erred in nding that Evelyn identied the!since the entry in the police blotter stated that the assailants erestill unidentied even a#ter she as $uestioned by the police.%eld&Ratio 0o. On initial uestionin$, s%e as still in s%oc# t%ere as t%us t%e 11a.m. blotter report, t%en t%e statement later t%at day. *%e delay is notpre2udicial. 3eluctance a&ter a startlin$ occurrence is understandable. *%e &e %oursbet een t%e blotter and t%e statement do not pre2udice %er credibility.Entries in a police blotter, t%ou$% re$ularly done, are not conclusiveproo&. *%ey are only  prima facie  evidence o& t%e &acts t%erein. *estimony inopen court is commonly more len$t%y and detailed. *%e court must base itsndin$s on all t%e evidence $at%ered. *%ey ere clearly identied.Denial and alibi do not avail. Cabuan$ says %e as at t%e a#e o& t%edau$%ter o& 4uinio t%e %ole ni$%t, but did not elaborate or corroborate.Matabuan$ said %e never le&t %is %ouse, but as inconsistent and  uncorroborated. 5t as not impossible &or eit%er to %ave been t%ere. Postiveidentication prevails. *%e circumstantial evidence su6ces. *%ey ere al#in$ in anunin%abited place %en t%e t o suddenly appeared and $rabbed Maria. )%esa t%em on a tricycle it% Maria cryin$. *%e ne+t day, s%e as &ound deadby t%e same road. People v. 'abrielFacts 7abriel, c%ar$ed in conspiracy it% 3amon Doe &or t%e murder o&  *ono$. 0ovember 1989,  p.m., 0ort% arbor, a st$%t occurred bet een *ono$ and 7abriel and 3amon. *%ey ere bro#en up by onloo#ers. 7abrieland 3amon ent to Marcos 3oad, but returned it% blades, approac%ed *ono$, and stabbed %im in t%e stomac% and bac#. *%ey le&t %im on t%e$round, and as dead on arrival. (e#ense )ersion  - 7abriel sa *ono$drun#, and parried a blo &rom %im. *ono$ t%en attac#ed 3amon, but 3amonran a ay. *ono$ t%en met :Mando:, %o as li#e ise bo+ed and &ou$%t bac#.3amon returned it% a bolo, and despite 7abriel;s arnin$s, bot% stabbed *ono$ and 'ed. e stayed it% t%e victim. <itness 7on=ales arrived a&ter %e as ta#en to t%e %ospital, as#ed %at %appened, and anted %im to testi&y.is re&usal, plus t%e &act t%at 7on=ales o ed %im P>?? earned %er ire t%us,t%e c%ar$e. ppeal. IssuesWhether the TC erred in giving credence to 'o*ales+ andOchobillo+s testiony,in nding evident preeditation and treachery%eld&Ratio 0o. *%eir testimonies ere direct and candid. *%at %er o in$ %im adebt o& only P>?? resultin$ in t%e c%ar$e is unbelievable. er supposed$rud$e a$ainst %im since %e enticed customers to patroni=e a di@erent  carinderia is unbelievable, since %e %imsel& as eatin$ at 7on=ales;carinderia. :Mando: is a $ment o& t%e ima$ination, as not a sin$le itness as presented reA %is identity. 5t s%ould %ave been easy, since t%ere eremany bystanders. 5& t%ere as a $rud$e, it is unli#ely t%at s%e ould as# %im %at %appened. 5t is unbelievable t%at s%e arrived only a&ter t%e $%t, since%er store as ri$%t in &ront. Delay is li#e ise acceptable.ccused emp%asi=es t%e -dvance In#oration heet  by Pat. )teveCasimoro, %ic% only named 3amon Doe as t%e suspect. But t%is cannotde&eat positive testimony, since entries in o6cial records are only prima &acieevidence. urt%er, t%e )%eet as never &ormally o@ered. *%e )%eet asprepared a&ter intervie in$ Camba, an alle$ed itness - %e as neverpresented. *%e reuisites &or t%e admissibility o& an o6cial record are1! t%e entry as made by a police o6cer or a person specially en2oined by la to do so! 5t as made in t%e per&ormance o& %is duties or a duty specially en2oinedby la  and >!e %ad su6cient #no led$e o& t%e &acts eit%er personally ort%rou$% o6cial in&ormation. *%e 5) is inadmissible, since Casimoro %ad no personal #no led$e o& t%e incident. 5t only came &rom Camba, and t%is is not o6cial in&ormation,since the person ho a/es the stateent ust have personal/no ledge and the duty to give the stateent #or the record.  *%e discrepancies, i.e. t%e precise location o& t%e stab, pm vs />?pm, minute interval, are minor and inconseuential. is presence does notindicate innocence.  %at! *reac%ery is present, since a&ter t%e end o& t%e $%t, t%ey snuc# up on%im it% eapons. Evident premeditation is 0O* present.  lapse o& minutes is not enou$% &or calm and cool re'ection. (ela Cru* v. isonFacts ppeal &rom validity o& Deed o& )ale. Complainant Epi&ania D(C dieddurin$ C pendency, substituted by niece (aureana. Epi&ania alle$ed t%at in199, s%e discovered t%at %er Pan$asinan riceland as trans&erred to %ernep%e , Eduardo )ison, t%rou$% a Deed o& )ale dated 1989. )%e led acomplaint it% t%e 3*C to declare it null on t%e $round o& &raud, as %einserted it in t%e middle o& t%e docs o& trans&er to Demetrio.)pouses )ison denied &raud, since t%e Deed as notari=ed, and as  investi$ated by t%e D3, evidenced by a6davits and Certications &rom t%eP3 and t%e payment o& C7*. *%ey bore %er si$nature. *%ey alle$edpossession since 1989, corroborated by t%e careta#er. *%e 3*C ruled in %er&avor, notin$ s%e %ad  residence certs &or 1989, and t%at s%e %ad no reasonto sell since s%e as doin$ne, but t%e C %eld t%e sale valid. IssuesWhether or not the sale is valid.%eld&Ratio Valid. )%e asserts t%at s%e as 9 yFo and unable to read andunderstand en$lis%, but s%e testied t%at s%e :read t%e document on top:.urt%er, t%e 3*C noted mental acuity durin$ %er testimony.  comparison o& t%e Deeds &or Demetrio and Eduardo s%o s $larin$ di@erences t%at cannot bemissed. Di@erent type riter it% a bi$$er &ont, di@erent date, di@erentresidence cert. number. urt%er, t%e deed as notari=ed. Gn&ortunately, t%e notary public %asdied. *%us, t%e rule t%at ac#no led$ed documents are public documentsadmissible it%out proo& o& aut%enticity and due e+ecution t%ey arepresumed re$ular, and Epi&ania &ailed to rebut t%is t%rou$% clear andconvincin$ evidence. *%ou$% s%e %ad ban# accounts, s%e %ad stopped ma#in$ ba$oon$, and%er deposit decreased &rom 1M to >H/#, s%o in$ t%at s%e needed money. *%epossibility o& sale &or cas% is t%us not remote, considerin$ t%at ? days later,s%e sold to Demetrio. *%e series o& o6cial actsleadin$ to t%e trans&er lends credence -a6davit o& tenant, D3 investi$ation report, a6davit o& trans&eror, P3clearance, 3evenue District O6cer approval, appearance t ice be&ore t%eMunicipal $rarian 3e&orm o6cer, D3 visitors lo$boo#. *oo varied to %aveaccomplis%ed t%rou$% &raud. Even Demetrio said t%e land as sold toEduardo.

antenna 10

Jul 23, 2017
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks