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

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 803 views

    People of The Philippines Versus Renerio P. Vergara, Ernesto T. Cuesta JR., Pedro G. Dagao and Bernardo P. Cuesta, G.R. No. 110286, April 2, 1997

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous ubixYA
    The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Renerio Vergara for illegal fishing. Police officers witnessed Vergara throw an explosive device into the water while fishing, which killed fish. When approached, Vergara and his co-accused were caught with fish in their nets. At trial, one witness claimed another group was responsible, but the court found this testimony not credible since the witness was not with the accused. The appellate court affirmed it is the trial court's role to determine witness credibility, and the trial court properly found Vergara guilty based on the evidence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    People of The Philippines Versus Renerio P. Vergara, Ernesto T. Cuesta JR., Pedro G. Dagao and Bernardo P. Cuesta, G.R. No. 110286, April 2, 1997

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous ubixYA
    803 views2 pages
    The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Renerio Vergara for illegal fishing. Police officers witnessed Vergara throw an explosive device into the water while fishing, which killed fish. When approached, Vergara and his co-accused were caught with fish in their nets. At trial, one witness claimed another group was responsible, but the court found this testimony not credible since the witness was not with the accused. The appellate court affirmed it is the trial court's role to determine witness credibility, and the trial court properly found Vergara guilty based on the evidence.

    Original Description:

    nat res case digest

    Original Title

    110286

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Renerio Vergara for illegal fishing. Police officers witnessed Vergara throw an explosive device into the water while fishing, which killed fish. When approached, Vergara and his co-accused were caught with fish in their nets. At trial, one witness claimed another group was responsible, but the court found this testimony not credible since the witness was not with the accused. The appellate court affirmed it is the trial court's role to determine witness credibility, and the trial court properly found Vergara guilty based on the evidence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    803 views2 pages

    People of The Philippines Versus Renerio P. Vergara, Ernesto T. Cuesta JR., Pedro G. Dagao and Bernardo P. Cuesta, G.R. No. 110286, April 2, 1997

    Uploaded by

    Anonymous ubixYA
    The Supreme Court upheld the conviction of Renerio Vergara for illegal fishing. Police officers witnessed Vergara throw an explosive device into the water while fishing, which killed fish. When approached, Vergara and his co-accused were caught with fish in their nets. At trial, one witness claimed another group was responsible, but the court found this testimony not credible since the witness was not with the accused. The appellate court affirmed it is the trial court's role to determine witness credibility, and the trial court properly found Vergara guilty based on the evidence.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

    People of the Philippines versus Renerio P. Vergara, Ernesto T.

    Cuesta
    Jr., Pedro G. Dagao and Bernardo P. Cuesta,
    G.R. No. 110286, April 2, 1997.

    Facts:
    At about 7:30 in the morning of July 4, 1992, a team consisting of
    deputized Fish Warden and President of the Leyte Fish Warden
    Association Jesus P. Bindoy, Police Officers Casimiro Villas and Diosdado
    Moron of the Palo PNP Station, Leyte, Fish Wardens Mario Castillote and
    Estanislao Cabreros and Fish Examiner Nestor Aldas of the Department of
    Agriculture were on board, "Bantay-Dagat," a pumpboat, on "preventive
    patrol" along the municipal waters fronting barangays Baras and Candahug
    of Palo, Leyte, stumbled upon a blue-colored fishing boat at a distance of
    approximately 200 meters away. On the said boat were Renerio Vergara
    and his three co-accused Bernardo Cuesta, Pedro Dagao and Ernesto
    Cuesta, Jr., They were on a parallel course toward the general direction of
    Samar.
    Momentarily, the team saw Vergara throw into the sea a bottle known in
    the locality as "badil" containing ammonium nitrate and having a blasting
    cap on top which, when ignited and thrown into the water, could
    explode. The explosion would indiscriminately kill schools and various
    species of fish within a certain radius. Approximately three seconds after
    appellant had thrown the "badil" into the sea, the explosion occurred.
    Vergara and Cuesta then dove into the sea with their gear while Dagao and
    Cuesta, Jr., stayed on board to tend to the air hose for the divers.
    The team approached the fishing boat. SPO2 Casimiro Villas boarded
    the fishing boat while Fish Warden Jesus Bindoy held on to one end of the
    boat. Moments later, Vergara and Cuesta surfaced, each carrying a fishnet
    or "sibot" filled with about a kilo of "bolinao" fish scooped from under the
    water. Having been caught red-handed, the four accused were
    apprehended and taken by the patrol team to the "Bantay-Dagat" station at
    Baras, and later to the police station in Palo, Leyte. The fishing boat and its
    paraphernalia, as well as the two fishnets of "bolinao," were
    impounded. The accused, however, refused to sign and acknowledge the
    corresponding receipts therefor.
    On February 10, 1993, the trial court rendered judgment convicting
    Vergara. Vergara then appealed to the CA.

    Issue:

    Whether the Court committed grave abuse of authority when it


    completely ignored the testimony of Emilio Linde.

    Held:
    No. Emilio Linde sought to corroborate the claim of appellant that it
    was another unidentified group of fishermen who threw the bottle of
    explosives at a school of "bolinao" fish. It was obvious, however, said the
    trial court, that the statement of this defense witness was incredulous since
    he apparently had not at all been on board the fishing boat in the company
    of the accused at the time of the incident. Even the rather lengthy counteraffidavit of the four accused completely missed to mention Linde. The
    court a quo went on to observe that the demeanor of the accused at the
    witness stand and the substance of his testimony failed to elicit belief.
    Trial courts are tasked to initially rule on the credibility of witnesses for
    both the prosecution and the defense. Appellate courts seldom would
    subordinate, with their own, the findings of trial courts which concededly
    have good vantage points in assessing the credibility of those who take the
    witness stand. Nevertheless, it is not all too uncommon for this Court, in
    particular, to peruse through the transcript of proceedings in order to satisfy
    itself that the records of a case do support the conclusions of trial
    courts.The Court is convinced that the trial court has acted correctly in
    finding accused-appellant guilty of the offense charged.

    You might also like