Evidence 4th set of cases

1. People vs Caraig March 28, 2003
2. Serapio vs Sandiganbayan January 28, 2003
3. People vs Abino December 11, 2001
4. People vs Reynes December 12, 2001
5. People vs Alviar 59 SCRA 136
6. People vs Cañete July 11, 2002
7. Peope vs Ganan Jr. 265 SCRA 260
8. Gutib vs Court of Appeals 312 SCRA 365
9. Comelec vs Court of Appeals January 26, 1994
10. People vs City Court of Silay 74 SCRA 247
11. People vs Mahinay July 18, 1995

evidence2008.4thset - Upload a Document to Scribd

Taxation Cases

1. Smart vs City of Davao
2. Figuerras vs CA

Download:

TAX1.Finals - Upload a Document to Scribd

Evidence Cases: 3rd Set

1. People vs Paloma September 23, 1997
2. People vs Lenantud February 22, 2001
3. People vs Sorrel August 29, 1997
4. People vs Ponferada 220 SCRA 46
5. People vs Dumanlang August 7, 2002
6. People vs Surio August 7, 2002
7. Luces vs People January 20, 2003
8. People vs Lim October 18, 1990

evidence2008.3rdset - Upload a Document to Scribd

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.

Evidence 2nd set of cases

1. Paraffin Test

• People vs de Guzman 250 SCRA 118

2. Polygraph Test

• People vs Adoviso 309 SCRA 1

3. Res Ipsa Loquitor

• Batiquin vs CA 258 SCRA 334

4. Human Behavioral Response

• People vs Plazo 350 SCRA 433
• People vs Lilo 396 SCRA 624
• People vs Bates 400 SCRA 95

5. Falsus in Uno, Falsus in Omnibus

• People vs Ducay 225 SCRA 1

evidence2008.2ndset - Upload a Document to Scribd

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

o People vs Vallejo

6. Equipoise Rule

o People vs Ramilla (227 SCRA 583)

Synopsis

7. Exclusionary Rule

o People vs Encinada (280 SCRA 72)

8. Buy-Bust Operations

o People vs Uy (327 SCRA 335)

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)

Evidence 2008 - Upload a Document to Scribd

Provisional Remedies Cases for MIDTERMS

1. Henares vs LTFRB
2. Villena vs Rupisan
3. Holy Spirit vs Defensor

For a .doc copy, please click here. It's not a good copy, I have no time to edit.

provrem unedited - Upload a Document to Scribd

Read this document on Scribd: provrem unedited

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!

Taxation Cases for MIDTERMS

1. COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, petitioner, vs. COURT OF TAX APPEALS and PHILIPPINE CASINO OPERATORS CORPORATION, respondents
2. NESTLE PHILIPPINES, INC., (FORMERLY FILIPRO, INC.) petitioner, vs. HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS, COURT OF TAX APPEALS and COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, respondents.
3. CARRARA MARBLE PHILIPPINES, INC., petitioner, vs. COMMISIONER OF CUSTOMS, respondent.
4. TRANSGLOBE INTERNATIONAL, INC., petitioner, vs. COURT OF APPEALS and COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS, respondents.

Note: Clicking on the title of this post would direct you to a downloadable .doc copy of these cases

Taxation 1 - Upload a Document to Scribd

Read this document on Scribd: Taxation 1

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!