Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 404 views

    Evidence Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Jeremiah John Soriano Nicolas
    The document summarizes two court cases dealing with evidence: [1] Northwest Airline v. Chiong involved a civil case where Northwest later filed criminal charges against Chiong for false testimony. The court ruled the legal maxim "falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" did not apply because Chiong's testimony was not shown to willfully falsify material points. Records also showed Chiong passed an immigration checkpoint on the date in question. [2] People v. Judge Laguio involved a warrantless arrest where drugs and a gun were found. The court ruled the arrest was illegal as there was no overt criminal act witnessed. As the search was incidental to an

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Evidence Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Jeremiah John Soriano Nicolas
    404 views1 page
    The document summarizes two court cases dealing with evidence: [1] Northwest Airline v. Chiong involved a civil case where Northwest later filed criminal charges against Chiong for false testimony. The court ruled the legal maxim "falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" did not apply because Chiong's testimony was not shown to willfully falsify material points. Records also showed Chiong passed an immigration checkpoint on the date in question. [2] People v. Judge Laguio involved a warrantless arrest where drugs and a gun were found. The court ruled the arrest was illegal as there was no overt criminal act witnessed. As the search was incidental to an

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document summarizes two court cases dealing with evidence: [1] Northwest Airline v. Chiong involved a civil case where Northwest later filed criminal charges against Chiong for false testimony. The court ruled the legal maxim "falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" did not apply because Chiong's testimony was not shown to willfully falsify material points. Records also showed Chiong passed an immigration checkpoint on the date in question. [2] People v. Judge Laguio involved a warrantless arrest where drugs and a gun were found. The court ruled the arrest was illegal as there was no overt criminal act witnessed. As the search was incidental to an

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    404 views1 page

    Evidence Case Digest

    Uploaded by

    Jeremiah John Soriano Nicolas
    The document summarizes two court cases dealing with evidence: [1] Northwest Airline v. Chiong involved a civil case where Northwest later filed criminal charges against Chiong for false testimony. The court ruled the legal maxim "falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus" did not apply because Chiong's testimony was not shown to willfully falsify material points. Records also showed Chiong passed an immigration checkpoint on the date in question. [2] People v. Judge Laguio involved a warrantless arrest where drugs and a gun were found. The court ruled the arrest was illegal as there was no overt criminal act witnessed. As the search was incidental to an

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    Topic: Evidence; Falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus (False in one, False in all) Title: Northwest Airline v. Chiong G.R.

    no. 155550, January 31, 2008 Ponente: Nachura, J. Facts: In the course of a civil proceeding, Northwest, filed a separate criminal complaint for False Testimony against Chiong based on the latters testimony that he did not leave the Philippines after April 1, 1989 contrary to the notations in his seaman service record book that he had left the country on April 17, 1989, and returned on October 5 of the same year. The RTC favored Chiong by the evidence that Chiong passed through the PCG counter on April 1, 1989, and that his passport was accordingly stamped, obviously for purposes of his departure on that day.
    Issue: Is the falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus applicable? Ruling: No. Analysis: The legal maxim falsus in uno, falsus in omnibus, cited by Northwest, is not a positive rule of law and is not strictly applied in this jurisdiction. Before this maxim can be applied, the witness must be shown to have willfully falsified the truth on one or more material points. The principle presupposes the existence of a positive testimony on a material point contrary to subsequent declarations in the testimony. However, the records show that Chiongs testimony did not contain inconsistencies on what occurred on April 1, 1989. Yet, Northwest never even attempted to explain or impugn the evidence that Chiong passed through the PCG counter on April 1, 1989, and that his passport was accordingly stamped, obviously for purposes of his departure on that day.

    Topic: Competent Evidence Title: People v. Judge Laguio, G.R. No. 128587 Ponente: Garcia, J March 16, 2007

    Facts: Private respondent was walking from the Maria Orosa Apartment and was about to enter the parked BMW car when the police operatives arrested him. When frisked, there was found inside the front right pocket of Wang and confiscated from him an unlicensed guns and shabu in the car. Issue: Is the evidence competent? Ruling: no Analysis: There can be no valid warrantless arrest in flagrante delicto under paragraph (a) of Section 5 Rule 113 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure. It is settled that "reliable information" alone, absent any overt act indicative of a felonious enterprise in the presence and within the view of the arresting officers, is not sufficient to constitute probable cause that would justify an in flagrante delicto arrest. Hence the warrantless arrest was illegal. Ipso jure, the warrantless search incidental to the illegal arrest was likewise unlawful. Therefore the evidence obtained was illegal.

    You might also like