Monday, September 22, 2008
Case Digest for Evidence
Digested by Karen Styf Javier
People vs. Ramilla May 8, 1993
Facts: Murder with Aggravating Circumstance of Treachery and Evident Premeditation.
Issue: W/N the decision is faulted by the defense for not applying the equipoise rule and for giving credence to the lone witness.
Ruling: The equipoise rule is applicable only where the evidence of the prosecution and the defense are so evenly balanced as to call for the titling of the scales in favor of the accused who is presumed innocent under the bill of rights. The evidence of the prosecution is heavier than that of the defense and has overcome the constitutional presumption of innocence in favor of the appellant. Therefore, the rule is not applicable in this case because there is no equipoise.
Appeal dismissed and challenged decision is affirmed, with costs against appellant.
People vs. Plazo January 29, 2001
Facts: Murder. One Leonor Fabula witnessed the killing her son, Romeo Fabula. By herein Appellant Edison Plazo with the use of “Gatab”.
Issue: W/N Human Behavioral Response of a witness considering blood relationship be given credence in convicting the accused for the crime charged.
Ruling: Having had the opportunity to personally observe the witness demeanor and manner of testifying, the trial judge is in better position to pass judgment on their credibility. As observed, Leonor Fabula testified in straightforward, spontaneous and frank manner, which is necessary for single witness to be found worthy of credence to support conviction.
Witnessing a crime is an unusual experience that elicits different reactions from the witnesses and for which no clear-cut standard form of human behavior response can be drawn when one is confronted with a strange, startling, or frightful experience.
Blood relationship between a witness and a victim does not, by itself, impair the credibility of a witness. On the contrary, relationship strengthens credibility, for it is unnatural for an aggrieved relative to falsely to accuse someone other than the actual culprit. The earnest desire to seek justice for a dead kin is not served should the witness abandon his conscience and prudence and bame one who is innocent of the crime.
People vs. Ramilla May 8, 1993
Facts: Murder with Aggravating Circumstance of Treachery and Evident Premeditation.
Issue: W/N the decision is faulted by the defense for not applying the equipoise rule and for giving credence to the lone witness.
Ruling: The equipoise rule is applicable only where the evidence of the prosecution and the defense are so evenly balanced as to call for the titling of the scales in favor of the accused who is presumed innocent under the bill of rights. The evidence of the prosecution is heavier than that of the defense and has overcome the constitutional presumption of innocence in favor of the appellant. Therefore, the rule is not applicable in this case because there is no equipoise.
Appeal dismissed and challenged decision is affirmed, with costs against appellant.
People vs. Plazo January 29, 2001
Facts: Murder. One Leonor Fabula witnessed the killing her son, Romeo Fabula. By herein Appellant Edison Plazo with the use of “Gatab”.
Issue: W/N Human Behavioral Response of a witness considering blood relationship be given credence in convicting the accused for the crime charged.
Ruling: Having had the opportunity to personally observe the witness demeanor and manner of testifying, the trial judge is in better position to pass judgment on their credibility. As observed, Leonor Fabula testified in straightforward, spontaneous and frank manner, which is necessary for single witness to be found worthy of credence to support conviction.
Witnessing a crime is an unusual experience that elicits different reactions from the witnesses and for which no clear-cut standard form of human behavior response can be drawn when one is confronted with a strange, startling, or frightful experience.
Blood relationship between a witness and a victim does not, by itself, impair the credibility of a witness. On the contrary, relationship strengthens credibility, for it is unnatural for an aggrieved relative to falsely to accuse someone other than the actual culprit. The earnest desire to seek justice for a dead kin is not served should the witness abandon his conscience and prudence and bame one who is innocent of the crime.
Wednesday, September 17, 2008
Evidence 2nd set of cases
1. Paraffin Test
2. Polygraph Test
3. Res Ipsa Loquitor
4. Human Behavioral Response
5. Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus
2. Polygraph Test
3. Res Ipsa Loquitor
4. Human Behavioral Response
5. Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
List of Cases for Evidence
1. Circumstantial Evidence
o People vs Santiago (398 SCRA 234)
2. Sufficient Evidence
o Ong vs People (342 SCRA 372)
o People vs Luna (395 SCRA 647)
o People vs Esperida (395 SCRA 679)
o People vs Acosta Sr. (396 SCRA 348)
3. Totality of Circumstances Test
o People vs Timon (381 SCRA 577)
4. Moral Certainty Test
o People vs Ratunil (334 SCRA 737)
5. DNA Testing
6. Equipoise Rule
o People vs Ramilla (227 SCRA 583)
7. Exclusionary Rule
o People vs Encinada (280 SCRA 72)
8. Buy-Bust Operations
9. Alibi
o When will it prosper?
§ People vs Ballesteros (285 SCRA 438)
o Weak and Unreliable
§ People vs Paragas (384 SCRA 664)
§ People vs Crisanto (358 SCRA 647)
Wednesday, September 03, 2008
Provisional Remedies Cases for MIDTERMS
For a .doc copy, please click here. It's not a good copy, I have no time to edit.
Wednesday, August 27, 2008
UM Shootfest
A cross-post from Khakiness
I "googled" UM shootfest this morning to see if there are any news articles about it posted on the internet, and I stumbled upon Neil Bravo's (a classmate in law school) article in The Daily Mirror here. The complete list of winners is also in that article.
Anyway, I thought that it would be nice to write my own version of the UM Shootfest.
This is the second time that the University of Mindanao College of Law hosted a shootfest open to all UM Law Students, Lawyers, UM Professors, and also opened its doors to guest shooters. For two years now, the committee was headed by "Coach" Ryan Neil Lofranco.
Ok, so why the term "coach" before Ryan's name? It's because the girls (Moi, Thea, Karen, Janice, Darlene, etc.) are so excited to join the the shootfest although we don't have our own guns. Coach Ryan agreed to "prostitute" his gun by lending it to those who want to join the fun... And, just like a real coach, he gave us the needed tips and advice on proper and safe gun handling.
It was not only a time for fun, it was also a chance for us students to have camaraderie with our professors. It was a break from the daily quizzes, recitations, mind-boggling questions, and classroom terrorism, not that we are indeed terrorized.... Lol!
Lawstudents are not only bookworms, we know how to beat stress off our necks, too!
I "googled" UM shootfest this morning to see if there are any news articles about it posted on the internet, and I stumbled upon Neil Bravo's (a classmate in law school) article in The Daily Mirror here. The complete list of winners is also in that article.
Anyway, I thought that it would be nice to write my own version of the UM Shootfest.
This is the second time that the University of Mindanao College of Law hosted a shootfest open to all UM Law Students, Lawyers, UM Professors, and also opened its doors to guest shooters. For two years now, the committee was headed by "Coach" Ryan Neil Lofranco.
Ok, so why the term "coach" before Ryan's name? It's because the girls (Moi, Thea, Karen, Janice, Darlene, etc.) are so excited to join the the shootfest although we don't have our own guns. Coach Ryan agreed to "prostitute" his gun by lending it to those who want to join the fun... And, just like a real coach, he gave us the needed tips and advice on proper and safe gun handling.
It was not only a time for fun, it was also a chance for us students to have camaraderie with our professors. It was a break from the daily quizzes, recitations, mind-boggling questions, and classroom terrorism, not that we are indeed terrorized.... Lol!
Lawstudents are not only bookworms, we know how to beat stress off our necks, too!
Thursday, August 21, 2008
Taxation Cases for MIDTERMS
- COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, petitioner, vs. COURT OF TAX APPEALS and PHILIPPINE CASINO OPERATORS CORPORATION, respondents
- NESTLE PHILIPPINES, INC., (FORMERLY FILIPRO, INC.) petitioner, vs. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, COURT OF TAX APPEALS and COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, respondents.
- CARRARA MARBLE PHILIPPINES, INC., petitioner, vs. COMMISIONER OF CUSTOMS, respondent.
- TRANSGLOBE INTERNATIONAL, INC., petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, respondents.
Thursday, August 14, 2008
International Humanitarian Law Day
The University of Mindanao was one of the donees of the 47 volumes of International Humanitarian Law books and resources given by the International Committee of the Red Cross last August 12, 2008,
August 12 is the International Humanitarian Law Day. Law students from Ateneo de Davao University, Cor Jesu College, and University of Mindanao attended the event which was held at The Royal Mandaya Hotel. Each school had their own one-hour presentation concerning International Humanitarian Law.
It was a successful event. Thanks ICRC!
August 12 is the International Humanitarian Law Day. Law students from Ateneo de Davao University, Cor Jesu College, and University of Mindanao attended the event which was held at The Royal Mandaya Hotel. Each school had their own one-hour presentation concerning International Humanitarian Law.
It was a successful event. Thanks ICRC!
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Los Baños Rural Bank vs Africa
Petitioner Los Baños questioned the decision of the Court of Appeals in granting respondent Pacita Africa's application for the issuance of a writ of preliminary injunction to restrain petitioner from proceeding with the foreclosure and consolidation of the title over the subject property after such property was allegedly sold to Macy Africa by forging Pacita Africa's signature.
Los Baños argued that they should not be enjoined from foreclosing hte property because the foreclosure sale has long been effected and since it is a consummated act, it can no longer be restrained.
The SC held that in the instant case, the status quo was the situation of the parties at the time of filing the Amended Complaint, at the poin where the property was already foreclosed. But, the last actual uncontested status that preceeded the conroversy was when the property in dispute was still registered int he name of Macy Africa, petitioner not having consolidated in its name the title thereto.
Moreover, the court also held that the requisites for the issuance of a preliminary injunction are present and established by Pacita Africa. A writ of preliminary injunction is issued to preserve the status quo ante, upon an applican't showing of two important requisites; namely: (1) the right to be protected exists prima facie, and (2) the acts sought to be enjoined are violative of that right. It must be proven that the violation sought to be prevented would cause an irreparable injustice.
The issuance of the wirt of preliminary injuction would no doubt preserve the status quo.
Los Baños argued that they should not be enjoined from foreclosing hte property because the foreclosure sale has long been effected and since it is a consummated act, it can no longer be restrained.
The SC held that in the instant case, the status quo was the situation of the parties at the time of filing the Amended Complaint, at the poin where the property was already foreclosed. But, the last actual uncontested status that preceeded the conroversy was when the property in dispute was still registered int he name of Macy Africa, petitioner not having consolidated in its name the title thereto.
Moreover, the court also held that the requisites for the issuance of a preliminary injunction are present and established by Pacita Africa. A writ of preliminary injunction is issued to preserve the status quo ante, upon an applican't showing of two important requisites; namely: (1) the right to be protected exists prima facie, and (2) the acts sought to be enjoined are violative of that right. It must be proven that the violation sought to be prevented would cause an irreparable injustice.
The issuance of the wirt of preliminary injuction would no doubt preserve the status quo.
Provisional Remedies
List of Cases
July 15, 2008
1. Los Baños Rural Bank vs Africa 384 SCRA 535
2. Mabayo Farms Inc. cs Court of Appeals
3. Dayrit vs Philippine Bank of Communications 386 scra 117 (murag wala jud ni labot bah)
4. G & S Transport vs Court of Appeals 382 SCRA 262
5. Bustamante vs Court of Appeals 381 SCRA 171
6. Rosario Textile Mills Inc. vs Court of Appeals 409 SCRA 515
Receivership:
1. Commodities Storage & Ice Plant Corp. v. Court of Appeals, 274 SCRA 439
2. Francisco vs Rodriguez 6 SCRA 443
3. Alcantara vs Abbas 9 SCRA 54
4. Philtrust vs Ata. Maria 53 P 463
July 15, 2008
1. Los Baños Rural Bank vs Africa 384 SCRA 535
2. Mabayo Farms Inc. cs Court of Appeals
3. Dayrit vs Philippine Bank of Communications 386 scra 117 (murag wala jud ni labot bah)
4. G & S Transport vs Court of Appeals 382 SCRA 262
5. Bustamante vs Court of Appeals 381 SCRA 171
6. Rosario Textile Mills Inc. vs Court of Appeals 409 SCRA 515
Receivership:
1. Commodities Storage & Ice Plant Corp. v. Court of Appeals, 274 SCRA 439
2. Francisco vs Rodriguez 6 SCRA 443
3. Alcantara vs Abbas 9 SCRA 54
4. Philtrust vs Ata. Maria 53 P 463
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)