Laws & Jurisprudence
Testimony Given In A Candid And Straightforward Manner | Evidence
9:13 PM
It is settled in jurisprudence that, absent any showing that the lower court overlooked circumstances which would overturn the final outcome of the case, due respect must be made to its assessment and factual findings, moreover, such findings, when affirmed by the Court of Appeals, are generally binding and conclusive upon this Court. After a thorough examination of the records of this case, we find no compelling reason to doubt the veracity of the findings and conclusions made by the trial court.
With regard to appellant’s inquiry into the credibility of the lone eyewitness of the prosecution, we depend upon the principle that the trial court is in a better position to adjudge the credibility of a witness. In People v. Vergara, we elaborated on this premise in this wise:
When it comes to the matter of credibility of a witness, settled are the guiding rules some of which are that
(1) the appellate court will not disturb the factual findings of the lower court, unless there is a showing that it had overlooked, misunderstood or misapplied some fact or circumstance of weight and substance that would have affected the result of the case, which showing is absent herein;
(2) the findings of the trial court pertaining to the credibility of a witness is entitled to great respect since it had the opportunity to examine his demeanor as he testified on the witness stand, and, therefore, can discern if such witness is telling the truth or not; and
(3) a witness who testifies in a categorical, straightforward, spontaneous and frank manner and remains consistent on cross-examination is a credible witness.
Jurisprudence also tells us that when a testimony is given in a candid and straightforward manner, there is no room for doubt that the witness is telling the truth. A perusal of the testimony of Jefferson indicates that he testified in a manner that satisfies the aforementioned test of credibility. More importantly, during his time at the witness stand, Jefferson positively and categorically identified appellant as one of the individuals who stabbed his father.
- People of the Philippines vs. Joel Aquino y Cendana, G.R. No. 201092, January 15, 2014 | J. Leonardo-De Castro
DISCLAIMER: The author is not lawyer nor an authority on this topic. It is a product of humble research and study of law. The information provided is not a legal advice and it should not be used as a substitute for a competent legal advice from a licensed lawyer.
0 comments