02 Rule115 - People vs. Villaran, 269 SCRA 630, G.R. No. 119058 March 13, 1997

11/9/2016
SUPREMECOURTREPORTSANNOTATEDVOLUME269
630
SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. Villaran
*
G.R. No. 119058. March 13, 1997.
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiffappellee, vs.

ERLINDA VILLARAN y FERNANDEZ, accusedappellant.
Criminal Procedure Evidence Circumstantial evidence to
warrant conviction must constitute an unbroken chain of events
that can lead reasonably to the conclusion pointing to the accused,
to the exclusion of all others, as the author of the crime.
Circumstantial evidence to warrant conviction must constitute an
unbroken chain of events that can lead reasonably to the
conclusion pointing to the accused, to the exclusion of all others,
as the author of the crime, i.e., the circumstances proved must be
congruent with each other, consistent with the hypothesis of guilt
of the accused, and at the same time inconsistent with any other
hypothesis except that of guilt. Logically it is herewhere the
evidence is purely inferentialthat there should be an even
greater need than usual to apply with vigor the rules that the
prosecution cannot depend on the weakness of the defense and
that any conviction must rest on nothing less than a moral
certainty on the guilt of the accused.
Same Same A key element in the web of circumstantial
evidence is motive.Significantly, a key element in the web of
circumstantial evidence is motive, which the prosecution vainly
tried to establish. The trial court merely relied on the testimony of
Francisco Ong in deducing that the reason for the killing of
Danilo was that he stood in the way of the relationship of accused
appellant and her boyfriend. But whatever testimony given in
open court by Francisco
_______________
*
FIRST DIVISION.
631
http://www.central.com.ph/sfsreader/session/000001584508bfe69aa527c7003600fb002c009e/t/?o=False
1/14
11/9/2016
VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997
631
People vs. Villaran
Ong regarding the quarrels between accusedappellant and

Danilo could only be hearsay hence inadmissible in evidence.
Same Same When evidence is based on what was supposedly
told the witness, the same is without any evidentiary weight being
patently hearsay.Apparently, the alleged altercation between
appellant and the deceased that was intended to provide the
motive was at best secondhand evidence, hence worthless. What
was proved was the colloquy between Francisco and the deceased,
not the fact that an argument took place between the latter and
the accused. When evidence is based on what was supposedly told
the witness, the same is without any evidentiary weight being
patently hearsay.
Same Same The presumption of innocence must be overcome
by the prosecution with proof beyond reasonable doubt, and every
circumstance favoring her innocence must be duly taken into
account.Indeed the circumstances relied upon by the
prosecution are too inadequate for conviction having miserably
failed to meet the criteria herein set forth. The presumption of
innocence must be overcome by the prosecution with proof beyond
reasonable doubt, and every circumstance favoring her innocence
must be duly taken into account. The proof against her must
survive the test of reason the strongest suspicion must not be
permitted to sway judgment. The conscience must be satisfied
that on the defendant can be laid the responsibility for the offense
charged that not only did she perpetrate the act but that the act
also amounted to a crime. What is required then is moral
certainty.
Same Same Where the weakest link in the chain of evidence
is at the same time the most vital circumstance, there can be no
alternative but to acquit the accused.The only piece of evidence
that would otherwise link the accused directly to the death of
Danilo was that which could prove that she killed him so that she
could carry on a relationship with her negro friend. But such was
not proved at the trial and, as we have aptly held, where the
weakest link in the chain of evidence is at the same time the most
vital circumstance, there can be no alternative but to acquit the
accused.
APPEAL from a decision of the Regional Trial Court of

Olongapo City, Br. 72.
The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.
2/14
11/9/2016
632
632

People vs. Villaran
The Solicitor General for plaintiffappellee.

Public Attorneys Office and Romeo C. Alinea for
accusedappellant.
BELLOSILLO, J.:
ERLINDA VILLARAN y FERNANDEZ was found guilty of
murder and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. She was also
ordered to indemnify
the heirs of the victim in the amount
1
of P50,000.00.
The information charged that in the evening of 10
October 1990 in Olongapo City the accused, with intent to
kill, feloniously induced one Danilo C. Ong, her livein
partner, to eat pan de sal containing sodium
cyanide, a
2
poisonous substance, which caused his death.
There was no eyewitness, nay, not a scintilla of proof, to
the alleged inducement of Danilo by Erlinda to eat the
poisoned bread. The prosecution relied mainly on
circumstantial evidence to establish her guilt.
Through the testimonies of Francisco Ong, Richard
Patilano and Felicisima Francisco the prosecution tried to
establish that on 10 October 1990, at about ninethirty in
the evening, Pat. Francisco Ong, younger brother of Danilo,
was relaxing in his house when the accused Erlinda
Villaran appeared and informed him that his brother was
ill. Erlinda narrated to him that she was awakened when
Danilo arrived from work that evening. Since it was rather
late she simply advised him to lie down and sleep. Shortly
thereafter she was surprised to see Danilo frothing,
shivering. Francisco asked why she did not rush Danilo to
the hospital and she replied that she could not carry him.
When Francisco further asked why she did not seek help
from her neighbors instead of going all the way to his
house, which was rather far, she answered that her
neighbors were reluctant and uncooperative.
_______________
1
Decision penned by Judge Eliodoro G. Ubiadas, RTCBr. 72, Olongapo
City.
2
Rollo, p. 3.
633
3/14
11/9/2016
VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997
633
People vs. Villaran
Francisco then accompanied Erlinda back to her house

where Danilo was. He checked the pulse of Danilo. There
was hardly any pulsebeat. With the help of Alfredo Lugto, a
neighbor, they brought Danilo to the hospital.
While in the emergency room a doctor asked Erlinda
whether Danilo ate or took anything. She replied that she
did not see him take anything. As first aid was being
administered to Danilo his dentures were removed by
Francisco upon request of one of the doctors. Francisco
claimed that he smelled a strong and distinct odor from the
dentures and recalled smelling something strikingly
similar back at the house of Danilo and Erlinda.
Francisco claimed that Erlinda acted strangely at the
hospital. According to him, it was odd for Erlinda to remain
outside the hospital all the while that Danilo was in the
emergency room, seemingly unaffected by the seriousness
of his condition. Moreover, when Danilo died some thirty
(30) minutes after, she initially refused to keep watch over
his body so that Francisco could leave and notify his other
brothers and sisters of Danilos demise, although she
relented upon Franciscos insistence.
On their way home to get clothes for Danilo, Francisco
asked Erlinda whether his brother had eaten or taken
anything before going to sleep that evening, as he believed
that Danilo could not have died without having taken
something toxic. Erlinda told him later that she saw a big
bag of pan de sal on top of their table.
Upon reaching the house of the livein partners,
Francisco immediately proceeded to the sink where he saw
the bag of bread mentioned by Erlinda. He sniffed the
bread and, according to him, he noted the same pungent
odor he sensed when he removed the dentures of Danilo.
Francisco then brought the pan de sal to Dr. Richard
Patilano, medicolegal officer of the Olongapo City General
Hospital, who advised him to have the bread examined by
the NBI. The following day, forensic chemist Felicisima
Francisco of the NBI con
634
634

People vs. Villaran
4/14
11/9/2016
ducted a laboratory examination of the pan 3de sal. The

examination revealed traces of sodium cyanide.
Meanwhile, the cadaver of Danilo was autopsied by Dr.
Richard Patilano. Samples of the pan de sal were taken to4
the NBI which found that they contained sodium cyanide.
From the particles of the pan de sal recovered from the
victims body, Dr. Patilano ascertained
the cause of death
5
to be chemical poisoning. The results
of both tests
6
confirmed the conclusion of Dr. Patilano.
Pat. Francisco Ong also testified that the last time he
talked to Danilo was in the morning of the day he died. On
that occasion Danilo confided to him that he had several
quarrels with Erlinda because of her forthcoming tryst
with her negro boyfriend who was supposed to arrive
shortly.
Testifying in her defense Erlinda, without detracting
much from the facts presented by the prosecution, gave a
more detailed account of what happened that night. She
said she was asleep when she was awakened by some noise
coming from the lavatory. She sat on her bed and waited
for a while. A few minutes later, Danilo came out from the
lavatory. He asked her where Jimmy Ong was. She told
Danilo that she had in fact fallen asleep waiting for Jimmy
but he did not arrive. Jimmy is a nephew of Danilo who
was living with them. Then Danilo told her that he would
just lie down where Jimmy usually slept, which was not far
from where Erlinda was.
After some five (5) minutes, Erlinda heard moans
emanating from the direction of Danilo. She did not mind
the moaning at first. But he continued. It was only then
that she moved closer to Danilo. She found the latter
already unconscious. She tried to revive him. She switched
on the light. She saw Danilo soaking wet and perspiring
profusely. She ran out of the house to seek help but no one
responded including their
_______________
3
Exh. I, Records, p. 109.
Exh. H, id., p. 110.
Exh. B, id., p. 92.
See Notes 3 and 4.

635
VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997
635
People vs. Villaran

5/14
11/9/2016
landlord. When she noticed the tricycle of Alfredo Lugto

parked in front of his house she knocked at the door,
opened it and went straight inside. But her plea for
assistance was met with a blank stare, an unconcerned
attitude from the Lugto household. She returned home and
found Danilo momentarily regaining consciousness. She
repeated her appeal to Lugto, even just to call Danilos
brother Francisco, but sensing Alfredos reluctance she
decided to go directly to Francisco.
At Franciscos residence, Erlinda explained to Francisco
the condition of his brother. Hurriedly, Erlinda returned to
her house together with Francisco. Shocked to see Danilo
almost lifeless, Francisco started shouting, shit, shit, as
Erlinda went straight to the lavatory to urinate. They then
brought Danilo to the Olongapo City General Hospital.
Erlinda stayed outside the emergency room and prayed.
She was uneasy her knees were trembling. Then Francisco
told her that Danilo was dead.
Erlinda denied that there was any feud between her and
Danilo and that she was slapped by Danilo during a
supposed pot session, as claimed by Francisco. She asserted
that everything was fine with her and Danilo and so was
her relationship with his brothers and sisters.
The crux of the controversy is whether the evidence of
the prosecutionwhich was mainly circumstantialwas
sufficient to support the conviction of accusedappellant.
She contends that the trial court erred in convicting her of
murder on the basis merely of circumstantial evidence
since the prosecution failed
to satisfy all the requisites for
7
conviction based thereon.
We agree with Erlinda hence, we acquit her.
Circumstantial evidence to warrant conviction must
constitute an unbroken chain of events that can lead
reasonably to the conclusion pointing to the accused,
to the
8
exclusion of all others, as the author of the crime, i.e., the
circumstances proved must be
_______________
7
Rollo, p. 44.
People v. Payawal, G.R. No. 93728, 21 August 1995, 247 SCRA 433.
636
636

People vs. Villaran
6/14
11/9/2016
congruent with each other, consistent with the hypothesis

of guilt of the accused, and at the same time 9inconsistent
with any other hypothesis except that of guilt. Logically it
is herewhere the evidence is purely inferentialthat
there should be an even greater need than usual to apply
with vigor the rules that the prosecution cannot depend on
the weakness of the defense and that any conviction must
rest on nothing
less than a moral certainty on the guilt of
10
the accused. Likewise, it is also in the absence of direct
evidence indubitably showing that accusedappellant was
the perpetrator
of the killing that motive becomes
11
important.
Significantly, a key element in the web of circumstantial
evidence 12
is motive, which the prosecution vainly tried to
establish. The trial court merely relied on the testimony of
Francisco Ong in deducing that the reason for the killing of
Danilo was that he stood in the way of the relationship of
accusedappellant and her boyfriend. But whatever
testimony given in open court by Francisco Ong regarding
the quarrels between accusedappellant and Danilo could
only be hearsay hence inadmissible in evidence
Q: Mr. Ong, when was the last time you saw your brother
alive?
A: In the morning of October 10, 1980.
COURT:
Q: What particular time in the morning?
A: Around ten to eleven oclock in the morning of October
10.
xxxx
ATTY. DE DIOS:
Q: What was the topic of your conversation?
_______________
9
People v. Adofina, G.R. No. 109778, 8 December 1994, 239 SCRA 67.
10
See Note 8.
11
People v. Yip Wai Ming, G.R. No. 120959, 14 November 1996.
12
Ibid.
637
VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997
637
People vs. Villaran
7/14
11/9/2016
A: He told me he had a problem and that he had a quarrel

with Erlinda Villaran because I heard that the negro
boyfriend of Erlinda Villaran will (sic) be coming.
xxxx
ATTY. DE DIOS:
Q: You said you saw your brother in the morning of
October 10 between ten to eleven oclock, you said you
saw your brother and you said he had a problem, did he
tell you what was his problem about?
xxxx
A: Yes, Maam, he told me that for the past few days, they
had altercations because Erlindas negro boyfriend will
(sic) be coming?
xxxx
Q: Do you know if there was any occasion wherein your

brother and Erlinda quarreled in your presence?
xxxx
COURT:
Alright, witness may answer.
A: In my presence, no Maam. But I was informed by my

brother personally that
he caught Erlinda Villaran
13
having a pot session.
Apparently, the alleged altercation between appellant and

the deceased that was intended to provide the motive was
at best secondhand evidence, hence worthless. What was
proved was the colloquy between Francisco and the
deceased, not the fact that an argument took place between
the latter and the accused. When evidence is based on what
was supposedly told the witness, the same14 is without any
evidentiary weight being patently hearsay.
In reaching its verdict, the trial court considered various
circumstantial evidence culled almost entirely from the
testimony of the deceaseds brother Francisco Ong, and
from which the motive behind the crime was apparently
inferred. These circumstances, reiterated by the
prosecution in its Ap
_______________
13
TSN, 29 October 1991, pp. 1517, 2122.
14
People v. Del Rosario, G.R. No. 109633, 20 July 1994, 234 SCRA 246.
638
8/14
11/9/2016
638

People vs. Villaran
pellees Brief, are: (a) that Danilo died of poisoning as a

result of having eaten pan de sal containing sodium
cyanide which was found on the table in the kitchen of
appellant and the victim (b) that at the time the poisoning
occurred only appellant and the deceased were in the
house (c) that the victim was a tricycle driver who had no
quarrel with his fellow tricycle drivers nor with his
neighbors, thereby ruling out any motive to kill him on the
part of any third party (d) that prior to the poisoning,
appellant and the victim had been quarrelling very often
because of the supposed arrival of her negro boyfriend (e)
that when the victims mouth was already frothing
appellant did nothing to take him immediately to the
hospital but resorted to delaying medical attendance by
first proceeding to the house of the victims brother located
at a far distance (f) that appellants excuse that she could
not take Danilo to the hospital because she could not carry
him was too shallow to justify her strange demeanor (g)
that while the victim was being given first aid treatment at
the hospital appellant seemed unperturbed (h) that
appellant showed lack of concern for the victim when she
displayed her reluctance to watch over his remains and
enable his brother to notify the other members of their
family and, (i) that appellant did not attend the wake for a
day because her boyfriend supposedly arrived and was seen
with her, and that later she had much money in her wallet.
We have carefully examined the records to determine, in
the absence of direct evidence, if the circumstances singled
out by the court a quo indeed support its inference that
Erlinda killed Danilo. But, without much polemics, we
conclude that the circumstances which the prosecution
capitalized on to establish the criminal liability of the
accused are miserably inadequate in weight and value
required by the Rules.
This is especially true when15 the veracity of such
circumstances is open to question, which is so in this case.
The circumstances that the victim had no quarrel with his
fellow
_______________
15
People v. Ilaoa, G.R. No. 94308, 16 June 1994, 233 SCRA 231.
639
9/14
11/9/2016
VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997
639
People vs. Villaran
tricycle drivers as well as with his neighbors, and that

prior to the poisoning the appellant and the victim had
been quarrelling over the expected arrival of appellants
boyfriend are plainly hearsay and consequently cannot be
admitted. Moreover, we are not at all convinced in the
reasoning of the trial court that
x x x x The victim and the accused were living alone in the said
house at No. 77, 14th St., New Kalalake, Olongapo City until two
weeks before the victims death and they were joined by the
victims nephew Jimmy Ong. Strangely, however, on the evening
of the incident, Jimmy Ong was not in the house.
Immediately after the accused found the victim moaning and
suffering and was seen with his mouth frothing with saliva and
convulsing, the accused instead of taking the victim to the
hospital and asking the neighbors help for that purpose did not
do anything of that sort claiming that the caretaker of the house
was not around and that the neighbor Alfredo Lugto or anybody
else in the immediate vicinity were not willing to help.
Significantly, however, that it was the same Alfredo Lugto who
took her on board of his tricycle to the residence of Francisco Ong,
a place which is quite far from the place of the incident. And that
must have been the reason why Francisco Ong was asking the
questions why he did not bring Danilo Ong to the hospital, why he
did not ask for the neighbors help and why he did not insist that
the neighbors help her in bringing Danilo Ong to the hospital. The
accused gave the lame excuse that he cannot (sic) bring Danilo
Ong to the hospital because she is (sic) only a woman and that the
neighbors whose help she has (sic) asked all refused to give help.
But Alfredo Lugtu whom the accused claims was not willing to
help was the same person who took her in his tricycle in going to
the house of Francisco Ong.
The actuations of the accused while in the hospital indicate her
culpability and involvement in the poisoning of Danilo Ong. While
Danilo Ong was being treated in the emergency room of the
Olongapo City General hospital, the accused made herself scarce
by staying outside of the premises and was seen merely talking to
the people outside. After Danilo Ong died, when she was asked by
Francisco Ong to watch over the deceased in the hospital so that
Francisco Ong can fetch his brothers and sisters, the accused
refused to be near the deceased claiming that she was afraid. And
then again, during the wake of the deceased she was for one
whole day nowhere to be found. And when she came back on the
day of the burial she
10/14
11/9/2016
640
640

People vs. Villaran
has been seen with so much money in her wallet. In the evening
of the day of the wake she was according to the NBI report
having
16
conversation in English with an unidentified man x x x x
There is nothing unusual about the fact that no one else

was present in the house that fateful evening except the
deceased and appellant, and that Danilos nephew Jimmy
Ong who was a member of the household was not around.
Anyone could have entered the premises since the door of
the house was always left open. Even if it were true that
the deceased had no known friction with his fellow tricycle
driversalthough this was not sufficiently and
competently establishedit cannot be discounted that
Danilo may have unknown enemies who with some evil
design enticed him to eat pan de sal that was adulterated
with sodium cyanide. In other words, the victim himself
could have brought the poisoned bread from outside, or
even ate part of it on the way home, which was not remote.
In attempting to pin down Erlinda, the prosecution
would point out that she tarried in bringing the deceased to
the hospital that she claimed that no one was willing to
help her when in fact it was the same neighbor Alfredo
Lugto who took her to Franciscos house and that she
behaved indifferently and insensitively while Danilo was in
the emergency room. In this regard, we can only say that
the workings 17of a human mind when under stress are
unpredictable
different people react differently to
different situations, and there is no standard norm of
human response when one is confronted
with a strange,
18
startling or frightful experience. Some people may have
the presence of mind and immediately think of bringing the
victim to the hospital, while others may feel helpless and
do nothing or be dependent on others. At that time,
Erlindas concern was to find out what was wrong with the
deceased.
_______________
16
Records, pp. 234235.
17
People v. Pomentel, G.R. No. 87781, 11 December 1992, 216 SCRA
375.
18
People v. Acob, G.R. No. 114382, 20 July 1995, 246 SCRA 715.
11/14
11/9/2016
641
VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997
641
People vs. Villaran
She believed that Pat. Francisco Ong being a police officer

was in a better position to know what to do under the
circumstances.
19
The NBI report showing that Erlinda was nowhere in
sight for one whole day during the wake, and that she was
seen with so much cash and having a conversation in
English with an unidentified man should likewise be struck
down for being
hearsay as it could not be tested by cross
20
examination.
The NBI agent who conducted the
investigation should have
been presented in open court to
21
testify on the report, otherwise, the admission of the
report would be a violation of the constitutional right of the
accused to confront
the witness against her and to cross
22
examine him.
Indeed the circumstances relied upon by the prosecution
are too inadequate for conviction having miserably failed to
meet the criteria herein set forth. The presumption of
innocence must be overcome by the prosecution with proof
beyond reasonable doubt, and every circumstance favoring
her innocence must be duly taken into account. The proof
against her must survive the test of reason the strongest
suspicion must not be permitted to sway judgment. The
conscience must be satisfied that on the defendant can be
laid the responsibility for the offense charged that not only
did she perpetrate the act but that the act also amounted
to
23
a crime. What is required then is moral certainty.
The only piece of evidence that would otherwise link the
accused directly to the death of Danilo was that which
could prove that she killed him so that she could carry on a
rela
_______________
19
Exhs. J and J1, Records, pp. 207208.
20
People v. Gueron, No. L29365, 25 March 1983, 121 SCRA 115.
21
See Note 18.
22
People v. Melosantos, G.R. No. 115304, 3 July 1995, 245 SCRA 569.
23
People v. Dularte, Jr., G.R. No. 98015, 7 September 1995, 248 SCRA
107, citing People v. Dramayo, No. L21325, 29 October 1971, 42 SCRA 59.
642
12/14
11/9/2016
642

People vs. Villaran
tionship with her negro friend. But such was not proved at
the trial and, as we have aptly held, where the weakest
link in the chain of evidence is at the same time the most
vital circumstance,24 there can be no alternative but to
acquit the accused.
We can only speculate at this stage on how Danilo Ong
met his death for there is absolutely nothing on record that
can provide us with anything better than what has
heretofore been surmised. Nonetheless, we cannot write
finis to this ponencia without addressing an appeal to law
enforcement agencies for the exercise of utmost diligence,
extreme care and professionalism in their investigatory
work to the prosecution, in the preparation, presentation
and submission of evidence and, to the trial court, in its
evaluation of the case before it. The lukewarm stance and
miniscule circumspection exhibited in this case hardly
speak well of the manner in which this case has been
handled, starting from the initial phase of the
investigation
25
and even up to the court proceedings stage.
WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from convicting
accusedappellant ERLINDA VILLARAN y FERNANDEZ
of murder in Crim. Case No. 71090 of the Regional Trial
Court of Olongapo City is REVERSED and SET ASIDE,
and a new one entered ACQUITTING her of the crime
charged as her guilt has not been proved beyond reasonable
doubt. Costs de oficio.
It appearing that accusedappellant is presently
detained, her IMMEDIATE RELEASE FROM CUSTODY
is ordered unless she is being held for another cause.
SO ORDERED.
Padilla (Chairman), Vitug, Kapunan and
Hermosisima, Jr., JJ., concur.
_______________
24
People v. Magborang, No. L16937, 30 September 1963, 9 SCRA 108.
25
People v. Payawal, G.R. No. 113995, 16 August 1995, 247 SCRA 424.
643
VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997
643
Almeda vs. Court of Appeals
13/14
11/9/2016
Judgment reversed and set aside, appellant acquitted and

ordered released.
Note.Circumstantial evidence concededly constitutes
the legal evidence that may support a conviction, affording
as it does the basis for a reasonable inference of the
existence of the fact thereby sought to be proved. (People
vs. Agustin, 246 SCRA 673 [1995])
o0o
Copyright2016CentralBookSupply,Inc.Allrightsreserved.
14/14

02 Rule115 - People vs. Villaran, 269 SCRA 630, G.R. No. 119058 March 13, 1997

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

02 Rule115 - People vs. Villaran, 269 SCRA 630, G.R. No. 119058 March 13, 1997

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

11/9/2016

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

G.R. No. 119058. March 13, 1997.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiffappellee, vs.

VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997

People vs. Villaran

Ong regarding the quarrels between accusedappellant and

APPEAL from a decision of the Regional Trial Court of

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

The Solicitor General for plaintiffappellee.

Decision penned by Judge Eliodoro G. Ubiadas, RTCBr. 72, Olongapo

VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997

People vs. Villaran

Francisco then accompanied Erlinda back to her house

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

ducted a laboratory examination of the pan 3de sal. The

Exh. I, Records, p. 109.

Exh. H, id., p. 110.

Exh. B, id., p. 92.

See Notes 3 and 4.

VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997

People vs. Villaran

landlord. When she noticed the tricycle of Alfredo Lugto

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

congruent with each other, consistent with the hypothesis

People v. Yip Wai Ming, G.R. No. 120959, 14 November 1996.

VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997

People vs. Villaran

A: He told me he had a problem and that he had a quarrel

Q: Do you know if there was any occasion wherein your

Alright, witness may answer.

A: In my presence, no Maam. But I was informed by my

Apparently, the alleged altercation between appellant and

TSN, 29 October 1991, pp. 1517, 2122.

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

pellees Brief, are: (a) that Danilo died of poisoning as a

VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997

People vs. Villaran

tricycle drivers as well as with his neighbors, and that

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

There is nothing unusual about the fact that no one else

Records, pp. 234235.

People v. Pomentel, G.R. No. 87781, 11 December 1992, 216 SCRA

VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997

People vs. Villaran

She believed that Pat. Francisco Ong being a police officer

Exhs. J and J1, Records, pp. 207208.

People v. Gueron, No. L29365, 25 March 1983, 121 SCRA 115.

See Note 18.

SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People v. Magborang, No. L16937, 30 September 1963, 9 SCRA 108.

VOL. 269, MARCH 13, 1997

Almeda vs. Court of Appeals

Judgment reversed and set aside, appellant acquitted and

Вам также может понравиться