Rule 129 Complete

8/12/2019 Rule 129 Complete

1/21

RULE 129

1. MACTAN-CEBU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT AUTHORITY (MCIAA)

vs. HEIRS OF MARCELINA L. SERO, et a.

G.R. NO. 174672 April 16, 2008

State!e"t #$ t%e Fa&ts:

On July 6, 1999, respondents filed !o"plint #inst se$erl defendnts forre!o$ery of o%ners&ip nd de!lrtion of nullity of se$erl 'rnsfer (ertifi!tes of'itle, four of %&i!& re re#istered in t&e n"es of t&e petitioner )!tn*(e+unterntionl Airport Aut&ority nd t&e Repu+li!. '&e su+-e!t properties %ere!uired +y t&e (i$il Aeronuti!s Ad"inistrtion t&rou#& e/proprition pro!eedin#sfor t&e e/pnsion nd i"pro$e"ent of t&e &u# Airport. u+seuently, &o%e$er,&u# irport %s ordered !losed on No$e"+er 29, 1989, nd ll its fun!tions ndopertions %ere trnsferred to petitioner )(AA

Respondents r#ue t&t t&e properties %&i!& %ere e/proprited in !onne!tion%it& t&e opertion of t&e &u# Airport s&ould +e re!on$eyed to t&e rel o%ners!onsiderin# t&t t&e purpose for %&i!& t&e properties %ere e/proprited is no lon#er

rele$nt in $ie% of t&e !losure of t&e &u# Airport. On June 14, 2001, t&e R'(dis"issed t&e !o"plint on t&e #rounds t&t t&e respondents &d no !use of !tion,nd t&t t&e !tion %s +rred +y pres!ription nd l!&es. '&e (ourt of Appelsre$ersed t&e Orders of t&e R'(. en!e, t&is petition.

State!e"t #$ t%e Iss'e:3&et&er t&e !ourt of ppels #r$ely erred in &oldin# t&t respondents &$e

!use of !tion #inst petitioner

R'":3&ile tril !ourt fo!uses on t&e f!tul lle#tions in !o"plint, it !nnot

disre#rd sttutes nd de!isions "teril nd rele$nt to t&e proper ppre!ition oft&e uestions +efore it. n resol$in# "otion to dis"iss, e$ery !ourt "ust te-udi!il noti!e of de!isions t&is (ourt &s rendered s pro$ided +y e!tion 1 of Rule129 of t&e Rules of (ourt.

'&e (ourt of Appels filed to !onsider t&e de!ision rendered +y t&eupre"e (ourt in )!tn*(e+u nterntionl Airport $. (ourt of Appels. n t&is!se, t&e title o$er t&e e/proprited lnd #rnted to t&e Repu+li! of t&e 5&ilippines infee si"ple %it&out ny !ondition t&t it %ould +e returned to t&e o%ners or t&t t&eo%ners &d ri#&t to repur!&se t&e s"e if t&e purpose for %&i!& it %se/proprited is ended or +ndoned or if t&e property %s to +e used ot&er t&n st&e &u# irport. 3&en lnd &s +een !uired for pu+li! use in fee si"ple,un!onditionlly, eit&er +y t&e e/er!ise of e"inent do"in or +y pur!&se, t&e for"ero%ner retins no ri#&ts in t&e lnd, nd t&e pu+li! use "y +e +ndoned, or t&e lnd"y +e de$oted to different use, %it&out ny i"pir"ent of t&e estte or title!uired, or ny re$ersion to t&e for"er o%ner.


2/21

RULE 129

2. *RACE *ARCIA, a.+.a. *RACE *ARCIA-RECIO vs. REERIC RECIO

G.R. No. 1822 O!to+er 2, 2001

State!e"t #$ t%e Fa&ts:Rederi! A. Re!io, ilipino, %s "rried to dit& "son, n Austrlin

(itien, in )l+on, Ril on )r!& 1, 1987. '&ey li$ed s &us+nd nd %ife inAustrli. o%e$er, Austrlin f"ily !ourt issued de!ree of di$or!e, dissol$in#t&e "rri#e of Rederi! nd dit& on )y 18, 1989.

On Jnury 12, 1994, Rederi! "rried Gr!e J. Gr!i %&ere it %ssole"nied t Our ldy of 5erpetul elp (&ur!&, (+ntun (ity. o%e$er, t&e!ouple li$ed seprtely sin!e O!to+er 22, 199 %it&out prior -udi!il dissolution oft&eir "rri#e nd %&ile t&ey %ere still in Austrli, t&eir !on-u#l ssets %eredi$ided on )y 16, 1996, in !!ordn!e %it& t&eir ttutory ;e!lrtions se!ured inAustrli. Gr!e filed (o"plint for ;e!lrtion of Nullity of )rri#e on t&e#round of +i#"y on )r!& , 1998, !li"in# t&t s&e lerned only in No$e"+er

1997, Rederi!


3/21

RULE 129

. ANICETO SALUO, /R. vs. AMERICAN E0PRESS INTERNATIONAL,

INC., a"#3 IAN T. FISH a" OMINIC MASCRINAS

G.R. No. 1907 April 19, 2006


Ani!eto G. ludo filed !o"plint for d"#es #inst t&e A"eri!n/press nterntionl, n!? @A)B. n t&e !o"plint, it %s lle#ed t&t ludo is ilipino !itien, of le#l #e, nd "e"+er of t&e ouse of Representti$es nd resident of !&on, )!&ro&on, out&ern eyte, 5&ilippines. '&e !o"plintf!ts of !o""on no%led#eD in t&e !onte/t of -udi!ilnoti!e &s +een e/plined s t&ose f!ts t&t re so !o""only no%n in t&e!o""unity s to "e it unprofit+le to reuire proof, nd so !ertinly no%n to sto "e it indisput+le "on# reson+le "en. '&e f!t of !on#ress"n +ein# dulyele!ted !ould +e properly ten -udi!il noti!e of +y tril !ourt, t&e s"e +ein# "tter of !o""on no%led#e in t&e !o""unity %&ere it sits. ie%ise, it is +oundto no% t&t under t&e (onstitution, one of t&e ulifi!tions of !on#ress"n is&$in# residen!e in t&e distri!t in %&i!& &e s&ll +e ele!ted.


4/21

RULE 129

4. CASENT REALTY E5ELOPMENT CORP. $s. PHILBANIN* CORP.G.R. No. 1071 epte"+er 14, 2007

State!e"t #$ t%e Fa&ts6

n 1984, (sent Relty ;e$elop"ent (orportion e/e!uted t%o pro"issorynotes in f$or of Rre Relty (orportion in$ol$in# t&e "ounts of 5&500,000 nd5&5 681,00. '&ese pro"issory notes %ere ssi#ned to 5&il+nin# (orportiont&rou#& ;eed of Assi#n"ent.

5&il+nin# lle#ed t&t despite de"nds, (sent filed to py t&epro"issory notes upon "turity su!& t&t its o+li#tion lredy "ounted to 5&5,67,0.90. 5&il+nin# !o"plint +efore t&e R'( for t&e !olle!tion of sid"ount. n its Ans%er, (sent rised s spe!il?ffir"ti$e defenses: t&t t&e prtiese/e!uted Dacion en Pago %&i!& !eded nd !on$eyed (sent


5/21

RULE 129

R'":1. '&e petition is prtly "eritorious.

in!e 5&il+nin# filed to file Reply, in effe!t, 5&il+nin# d"itted t&e#enuineness nd due e/e!ution of sid do!u"ents. '&is -udi!il d"ission s&ould&$e +een !onsidered +y t&e ppellte !ourt in resol$in# t&e de"urrer to e$iden!e.

Rule 129, e!tion 4 of t&e Rules of (ourt pro$ides:e!tion 4.Judicial admissions.FFAn d"ission, $er+l or %ritten, "de +y prty in t&e !ourse of t&e pro!eedin# in t&e s"e !se, does not reuire proof.'&e d"ission "y +e !ontrdi!ted only +y s&o%in# t&t it %s "det&rou#& plp+le "iste or t&t no su!& d"ission %s "de.On ppel to t&e (A, 5&il+nin# !li"ed t&t e$en t&ou#& it filed to file

Reply, ll t&e ne% "tters lle#ed in t&e Ans%er re dee"ed !ontro$erted ny%y,pursunt to Rule 6, e!tion 10.

( #reed %it& (sent. Rule 8, e!tion 8 spe!ifi!lly pplies to !tions ordefenses founded upon %ritten instru"ent nd pro$ides t&e "nner of denyin# it. tis "ore !ontrollin# t&n Rule 6, e!tion 10 %&i!& "erely pro$ides t&e effe!t of

filure to file Reply. '&us, %&ere t&e defense in t&e Ans%er is +sed on n!tion+le do!u"ent, Reply spe!ifi!lly denyin# it under ot& "ust +e "de=ot&er%ise, t&e #enuineness nd due e/e!ution of t&e do!u"ent %ill +e dee"edd"itted. in!e 5&il+nin# filed to deny t&e #enuineness nd due e/e!ution of t&eDacion nd (onfir"tion tte"ent under ot&, t&en t&ese re dee"ed d"itted nd"ust +e !onsidered +y t&e !ourt in resol$in# t&e de"urrer to e$iden!e.

2. Ad"ission of t&e #enuineness nd due e/e!ution of t&e Dacion nd(onfir"tion tte"ent does not pre$ent t&e introdu!tion of e$iden!e s&o%in# t&tt&eDacione/!ludes t&e pro"issory notes. (sent, +y %y of defense, s&ould &$epresented e$iden!e to s&o% t&t t&eDacionin!ludes t&e pro"issory notes.

'&e pro"issory notes "tured nd Rre Relty ssi#ned t&ese pro"issorynotes to 5&il+nin# t&rou#& ;eed of Assi#n"ent dted Au#. 8, 1986.

t is !ler fro" t&e deed t&t t&e pro"issory notes %ere #i$en s se!urity fort&e lon #rnted +y 5&il+nin# to Rre Relty. '&rou#& t&e ;eed of Assi#n"ent,5&il+nin# stepped into t&e s&oes of Rre Relty s (sent


6/21

RULE 129

7. LAN BAN OF THE PHILIPPINES $s.FELICIANO F. 8YCOCOG.R. No. 140160 Jnury 1, 2004FELICIANO F. 8YCOCO$s. THE HONORABLE RORI*O S. CASPILLO,Pa3" /'e #$ t%e RTC, T%3 /'&a Re#", B3a"&% 2, Caa"at'a" Ct:

a" t%e e;a3t!e"t #$ A3a3a" Re$#3!

G.R. No. 1467 Jnury 1, 2004

State!e"t #$ t%e Fa&ts:eli!ino . 3y!o!o is t&e re#istered o%ner of 94.1690 &e!tre unirri#ted

nd untennted ri!e lnd situted in t&e itios of A+ln#, #uin#n nd5in"un#&iln, Crrio of n Jun, i!+, Nue$ !i-.

n line %it& t&e (AR5 of t&e #o$ern"ent, 3y!o!o $oluntrily offered to sellt&e lnd to t&e ;AR for 514.9 "illion.After t&e ;AR


7/21

RULE 129

.672 &e!tre portion of t&e 94.1690 &e!tre lnd %&i!& %s found to &$e +eenpre$iously sold +y 3y!o!o to t&e Repu+li!.

State!e"t #$ t%e Iss'e:3ON t&e -ust !o"penstion deter"ined +y t&e tril !ourt %s supported +y

su+stntil e$iden!e, %&en it %s +sed only on -udi!il noti!e of t&e pre$ilin#"ret $lue of lnd +sed on t&e lle#ed pri!e of trnsfer of tenurl ri#&ts, ten%it&out noti!e nd &erin# in $ioltion of rule 129 of t&e rules of !ourt

R'":n rri$in# t t&e $lution of 3y!o!o


8/21

RULE 129


9/21

RULE 129

On e+rury 28, 2000, t&e (ourt rendered u""ry Jud#"ent< #inst t&erespondent (orportion.

'&e (A ffir"ed t&e de!ision of t&e R'(. '&e (A &eld t&t t&e indi$idulrespondents %ere not li+le to petitioner for d"#es, si"ply +e!use @1B t&ey &d

not re!ei$ed t&e pro!eeds of t&e irre$o!+le etter of (redit, %&i!& %s t&e su+-e!tof t&e ;eed of Assi#n"ent= nd @2B t&e #oods su+-e!t of t&e 'rust Re!eiptA#ree"ent &d +een found to +e none/istent. '&e ppellte !ourt too -udi!il noti!eof t&e pr!ti!e of +ns nd finn!in# institutions to in$esti#te, e/"ine nd ssessll properties offered +y +orro%ers s !ollterls, in order to deter"ine t&e fesi+ilitynd d$is+ility of #rntin# lon.

State!e"t #$ t%e Iss'e6

3ON t&e +n pr!ti!es +e t&e proper su+-e!t of -udi!il noti!e under e!. 1,Rule 129 of t&e Rules of (ourt

R'":

Judicial Noticeof Bank Practices

'&is point +rin#s us to t&e lle#ed error of t&e ppellte !ourt in tin#-udi!il noti!e of t&e pr!ti!e of +ns in !ondu!tin# +!#round !&e!s on+orro%ers nd sureties. 3&ile !ourt is not "ndted to te -udi!il noti!e of t&ispr!ti!e under e!tion 1 of Rule 129 of t&e Rules of (ourt, it ne$ert&eless "y do sounder e!tion 2 of t&e s"e Rule. '&e ltter Rule pro$ides t&t !ourt, in itsdis!retion, "y te -udi!il noti!e of P"tters %&i!& re of pu+li! no%led#e, orou#&t to +e no%n to -ud#es +e!use of t&eir -udi!il fun!tions.P'&us, t&e (ourt &s ten -udi!il noti!e of t&e pr!ti!es of +ns nd ot&er finn!ilinstitutions. 5re!isely, it &s noted t&t it is t&eir unifor" pr!ti!e, +efore ppro$in# lon, to in$esti#te, e/"ine nd ssess %ould*+e +orro%ers< !redit stndin# orrel estte offered s se!urity for t&e lon pplied for.

3ROR, t&is 5etition is PARTIALLY GRANTD. '&e ssiled;e!ision is A!!IR"D#+ut t&e %rd of "orl nd e/e"plry d"#es s %ell sttorney


10/21

RULE 129

>. *ENER 5S. E LEON, SCRA ?@ 19 O&t#e3 2??1


Respondent ;e eon filed for!i+le entry !se #inst petitioner Gener,

lle#in# t&t &e is t&e ori#inl !li"nt nd !tul possessor in #ood fit& under +on fide !li" of o%ners&ip to !ertin pr!el of #ri!ulturl lnd in Cul!n. '&esid lnd %s prt of t&e +ed of t&e An#t Ri$er %&i!& %s for"erly d-!ent to t&e+oundry of lot t&t is !o$ered +y t&e (ertifi!te of 'itle of ;e eon. A flood !usedt&t prt of t&e ri$er to de$elop nd ele$ted nd dried up lnd %&ere ;e eone/tended o!!uption, plntin# nd !ulti$tin# !o!onuts, +nns nd $e#et+les. n)y 1989, Gener lle#edly t&rou#& for!e, t&ret nd inti"idtion unl%fully enteredt&e property nd depri$ed ;e eon possession t&ereof. ;e eon de"nd Gener to$!te t&e pre"ises +ut %s i#nored. fforts to settle t&e dispute "i!+ly t&ru t&e+r#y -usti!e syste" did not prosper pro"ptin# ;e eon to file n e-e!t"ent !se#inst Gener.

Gener on t&e ot&er &nd denied ll lle#tions of t&e respondent nd !li"edto +e t&e rel o%ner of t&e property s e$iden!ed +y t&e notried deed of sle %&i!&%s e/e!uted in O!to+er 1988 +y Cen-"in Jouin %&o is t&e &eir of t&e for"erpossessor of t&e lnd, 5ro!eso Jouin. '&e lnd %s de!lred for t/tion purposesin t&e n"e of Gener nd de!lred t&e lnd s pri$te. ;e eon


11/21

RULE 129

R'"6

'&e !ourt ruled t&t in t&e e-e!t"ent !se t&e issue to +e resol$ed is %&o%ould +e entitled to t&e p&ysi!l or "teril possession of t&e property in dispute.Respondent ;e eon &s &is !li" founded fro" t&e presenttion of testi"onil

e$iden!e of $rious %itnesses %&ile Gener &s &is !li" founded on do!u"entrye$iden!e %&i!& t&e )'( filed to ppre!ite durin# t&e tril. As #inst t&e "eretesti"onil e$iden!e relied upon +y respondents t&t t&ey %ere for!i+ly e-e!ted fro"t&e lnd +y petitioner on )y 8, 1989, t&e do!u"entry e$iden!e of petitioner


12/21

RULE 129

. TUASON 5. COURT OF APPEALS, 241 SCRA


13/21

RULE 129

petitioner !o""ittin# t&e !ri"es, nd 'uson did not fit t&e des!ription of t&esuspe!t sin!e &e does not &$e "ole in +et%een &is eye+ro%s, insted &e &s s!r,nd is tller t&n %&t s&e &d pre$iously des!ri+ed. f indeed )dro# nd Kuintl&d #ood loo t petitioner durin# t&e ro++ery, t&ey !ould not &$e erroneouslydes!ri+ed petitioner.

Also, t&e tril !ourt !nnot !on$i!t petitioner on t&e +sis of dedu!tion t&tis irrtionl +e!use it is not deri$ed fro" n est+lis&ed f!t. '&e re!ords do nots&o% ny f!t fro" %&i!& t&e tril !ourt !n lo#i!lly dedu!e t&e !on!lusion t&tpetitioner !o$ered up &is s!r %it& +l! !olorin# to "e it pper s "ole. u!&n illo#i!l resonin# !nnot !onstitute e$iden!e of #uilt +eyond reson+le dou+t. tis "isppli!tion to t&e rule in !li+rtin# t&e !redi+ility of %itness nd +y no"ens !n it +e !ter#oried s f!t properly est+lis&ed +y e$iden!e. Also, t&etesti"ony of Cr+rieto nd Kuintl !nnot +e !redi+le sin!e t&ey "erely testified t&tt&ey s% petitioner %it&in t&e $i!inity %&ere t&e !ri"es %ere !o""itted. Cy itself,t&is !ir!u"stn!e !nnot led to t&e !on!lusion t&t petitioner truly !o""itted t&e!ri"es. 5etitioner li$es in t&e s"e $i!inity s t&e $i!ti" nd &is presen!e in t&e

$i!inity is not unnturl. n ddition, )dro#Qs identifi!tion of petitioner fro" line*up t t&e NC %s not spontneous nd independent. An NC #ent i"properlysu##ested to t&e" petitionerQs person.

'&e respondent ppellte !ourt, &o%e$er, dis"issed t&is !li" of petitioner sself*ser$in#. A#in, t&e rulin# "is!onstrues t&e "enin# ofself$ser%inge%idence.&elf$ser%ing e%idence is not to +e literlly ten s e$iden!e t&t ser$esoneQs selfis& interest. Lnder our l% of e$iden!e,self$ser%ing e%idence is one "de+y prty out of !ourt t one ti"e= it does not in!lude prtyQs testi"ony s %itness in !ourt. t is e/!luded on t&e s"e #round s ny &ersy e$iden!e, t&t ist&e l! of opportunity for !ross*e/"intion +y t&e d$erse prty, nd on t&e!onsidertion t&t its d"ission %ould open t&e door to frud nd to f+ri!tion oftesti"ony. On t&e ot&er &nd, prtyQs testi"ony in !ourt is s%orn nd ffords t&eot&er prty t&e opportunity for !ross*e/"intion. (lerly, petitionerQs testi"ony in!ourt on &o% &e %s identified +y t&e prose!ution %itnesses in t&e NC &edurtersis not self*ser$in#.

)oreo$er, Jud#es s&ould not t on!e loo %it& disf$or t t&e defense ofli+i. Ali+i s&ould +e !onsidered in li#&t of ll t&e e$iden!e on re!ord for it !n tiltt&e s!les of -usti!e in f$or of t&e !!used. >Alt&ou#& li+i is no%n to +e t&e%eest of ll defenses for it is esy to !on!o!t nd diffi!ult to dispro$e,ne$ert&eless, %&ere t&e e$iden!e for t&e prose!ution is %e nd +etrys l! of!on!reteness on t&e uestion of %&et&er or not t&e !!used !o""itted t&e !ri"e!&r#ed, t&e defense of li+i ssu"es i"portn!e.D

'&e !se t +en!& re"inds us of t&e %rnin# t&t -ud#es see" disposed "oreredily to !redit t&e $er!ity nd reli+ility of eye%itnesses t&n ny "ount of!ontrry e$iden!e +y or on +e&lf of t&e !!used , %&et&er +y %y of li+i,insuffi!ient identifi!tion, or ot&er testi"ony. '&ey re un"indful t&t in so"e !sest&e e"otionl +ln!e of t&e eye%itness is distur+ed +y &er e/perien!e t&t &erpo%ers of per!eption +e!o"es distorted nd &er identifi!tion is freuently "oreuntrust%ort&y.


14/21

RULE 129

9.REPUBLIC *LASS CORPORATION 5. UA, 47 SCRA 4?GR No. 14441= 0 July 2004


Repu+li! Glss (orportion @RG(B nd Ger$el, n!. @Ger$elB to#et&er %it&

%ren!e (. Ku %ere sto!&olders of dte, n!. @dteB. dte o+tined lonsfro" )etropolitn Cn nd 'rust (o"pny @)etro+nB nd 5ri$te ;e$elop"ent(orportion of t&e 5&ilippines @5;(5B %it& RG(, Ger$el nd Ku s sureties.A"on# t&e"sel$es, RG(, Ger$el nd Ku e/e!uted A#ree"ents for (ontri+ution,nde"nity nd 5led#e of &res of to!s @A#ree"entsB. '&e A#ree"ents ll sttedt&t in !se of defult in t&e py"ent of dte


15/21

RULE 129

R'"6

3&ile Ku


16/21

RULE 129

1?. FULE 5. COURT OF APPEALS

GR No. *7 909 4, 22 June 198 8, 162 (R A 4 46


5etitioner %s !on$i!ted of $ioltion of C.5. 22, t&e Coun!in# (&e!s %,on t&e +sis of n unsi#ned stipultion of f!ts entered into +et%een t&e prose!utionnd t&e defense durin# pre*tril. On ppel t&e respondent ppellte !ourt up&eld t&estipultion of f!ts nd ffir"ed t&e -ud#"ent of !on$i!tion.

State!e"t #$ t%e Iss'e:

3&et&er t&e !on$i!tion, +sed solely on stipultion of f!ts %&i!& %s notsi#ned +y eit&er t&e petitioner or &is !ounsel, %s proper

R'":

'&e o"ission of t&e si#nture of t&e !!used nd &is !ounsel, s "ndtorilyreuired +y *t&e Rules, renders t&e stipultion of f!ts ind"issi+le in e$iden!e. '&ef!t t&t t&e l%yer of t&e !!used, in &is "e"orndu", !onfir"ed t&e stipultion off!ts does not !ure t&e defe!t +e!use Rule 118reuires t&e si#nture of +ot& t&e!!used nd &is !ounsel. 3&t t&e prose!ution s&ould &$e done, upon dis!o$erin#t&e l! of t&e reuired si#ntures, %s to su+"it e$iden!e to est+lis& t&e ele"entsof t&e !ri"e, insted of relyin# solely on t&e supposed d"ission of t&e !!used.3it&out sid e$iden!e independent of t&e d"ission, t&e #uilt of t&e !!used!nnot +e dee"ed est+lis&ed +eyond reson+le dou+t.


17/21

RULE 129

11.PEOPLE 5. BANAN*, *R N#. 17114, /'"e 2??4, 4? SCRA 7>?

State!e"t #$ t%e Fa&ts6'&e !o""ission of t&e offense of ille#l sle of re#ulted dru#s reuires

"erely t&e !onsu""tion of t&e sellin# trns!tion. n >+uy*+ustD opertion, su!&

s in t&e !se t +r, %&t is i"portnt is t&e f!t t&t t&eposeur$'u(erre!ei$edt&es)a'ufro" t&e ppellnts nd t&t t&e s"e %s presented s e$iden!e in(ourt. n s&ort, proof of t&e trns!tion suffi!es. '&e prose!ution dispensed %it&t&e dire!t testi"ony of (iro/ '. O"ero, 5N5 forensi! !&e"ist, !onsiderin# t&t t&eprose!ution nd t&e defense stipulted t&t: @1B &e !ondu!ted t&e l+ortory nlysisof t&e 716.4 #r"s of %&ite !rystlline su+stn!e= @2B t&t &e stted in &is initil+ortory Report nd &is (&e"istry Report No. ;*18*00 t&t t&e su+stn!e ispositi$e formet)(lamp)etamine )(droc)lorideors)a'u, nd= @B t&e se$en @7B plsti!+#s ofs)a'u &s +een identified. Nonet&eless, O"ero presented to t&e tril !ourtt&e spe!i"en nd it %s identified +y 5O1 (rpentero s t&e s"e %&ite !rystllinesu+stn!e !ontined in +l! s&oulder +# &nded to &er +y ppellnt Cndn#.

Lpon order of t&e tril !ourt, it %s turned o$er to t&e 5N5 (ri"e +ortory,t&rou#& O"ero, for sfeeepin#.

State!e"t #$ t%e Iss'e63&et&er or not t&e !ourt uo #r$ely erred in !on$i!tin# !!used*ppellnt

&erein on t&e +sis solely of t&e stipultion of f!ts in t&e pre*tril order of July 6,2000, %&i!& pre*tril order lt&ou#& si#ned +y !!used*ppellnt &erein %s&o%e$er, not si#ned +y !ounsel

R'"6Appellnt A+u+r no% r#ues t&t t&e nitil +ortory Report nd t&e

(&e"istry Report No. ;*18*00 re ind"issi+le for +ein# &ersy +e!use O"ero,t&e 5N5 forensi! !&e"ist, did not testify. '&is is non$se*uitur!on!lusion. nPeople %s. +(,%e ruled t&t forensi! !&e"ist is pu+li!offi!er nd s su!&, &is report !rries t&e presu"ption of re#ulrity in t&eperfor"n!e of &is fun!tion nd duties. (orollrily, under e!tion 44 of Rule 10,Re$ised Rules of (ourt, entries in offi!il re!ords "de in t&e perfor"n!e ofoffi!il duty re pri" f!ie e$iden!e of t&e f!ts t&erein stted. O"eropositi$e formet)(lamp)etamine )(droc)loride, ors)a'ure, t&erefore, !on!lusi$e in t&e+sen!e of e$iden!e pro$in# t&e !ontrry, s in t&is !se. &econd#it "ust +e stressedt&t Atty. nriue rises &is o+-e!tion to t&e nitil +ortory Report nd(&e"istry Report No. ;*18*00 only no%. e s&ould &$e o+-e!ted to t&eird"issi+ility t t&e ti"e t&ey %ere +ein# offered. Ot&er%ise, t&e o+-e!tion s&ll +e!onsidered %i$ed nd su!& e$iden!e %ill for" prt of t&e re!ords of t&e !se s!o"petent nd d"issi+le e$iden!e. '&e f"ilir rule in t&is -urisdi!tion is t&t t&ed"issi+ility of !ertin do!u"ents, if not ur#ed +efore t&e !ourt +elo%, !nnot +erised for t&e first ti"e on ppel.
http://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/mar2000/128046.htmlhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/mar2000/128046.htmlhttp://sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2000/mar2000/128046.html


18/21

RULE 129

12. PEOPLE $s. ROMEO POLICARPIO, *.R. N#. L-


19/21

RULE 129

12.a. PEOPLE OF THE PHILLIPINES v. BENNY *O

*.R. N#. 144


20/21

RULE 129

1. PEOPLE $s. /ONATHAN BARLIS, *.R. N#. L-1?1?? Ma3&% 24, 1994


On 0 Jnury 1990, Jont&n Crlis, surrendered to t&e poli!e nd d"itted

t&t &e %s %it& t&e #roup %&i!& %s responsi+le for t&e illin# of onorinCllerd inside &er &ouse nd t&t on t&e s"e o!!sion, one of &is !o"pnions,PCu+oyP too t&ree "enQs %t!&es %&ile &is ot&er !o"pnion, erdie too so"e"oney %&i!& t&ey lter di$ided "on# t&e"sel$es. '&erefter, ssisted +y Atty.(onfesor C. nsno, Jont&n si#ned s%orn stte"ent %&erein &e nrrted indetil &o% t&e !ri"e %s !o""itted nd t&e e/tent of &is prti!iption t&erein. n &iss%orn stte"ent, &e d"itted t&t &e too one ldiesQ #old ne!l!e, one ldiesQ eio%t!&, one di"ond stone, ,000.00, !s& nd ssorted pie!es of -e%elry. '&e onlye$iden!e of su!& tin# is t&e ppellntQs s%orn stte"ent. '&e Offi!e of t&eoli!itor Generl in t&e Crief for t&e Appellee #rees %it& Crlis t&t it %s n errorfor t&e tril !ourt to order t&e restitution of -e%elries sin!e t&ere %s no proof of loss

t&ereof. t "intins, &o%e$er, t&t it %s pro$ed t&t %itness Adel Ar#te lost &er%rist %t!& nd !s& of less t&n 5100.00, %&i!& f!t %s not disputed +y t&eppellnt= &en!e, t&e ele"ent of unl%ful tin# of property %s "ply est+lis&ed.

State!e"t #$ t%e Iss'e6

3&et&er e/tr*-udi!il !onfessions independently "de %it&out !ollusion%&i!& re identi!l %it& e!& ot&er in t&eir essentil detils nd re !orro+orted +yot&er e$iden!e on re!ord re d"issi+le s !ir!u"stntil e$iden!e

R'"6

'&e prose!ution filed to !orro+orte t&e e/tr-udi!il !onfession of t&eppellnt on t&e ro++ery %it& e$iden!e of corpus delicti.

'o sustin !on$i!tion for t&e !ri"e of ro++ery %it& &o"i!ide, it isne!essry t&t t&e ro++ery itself +e pro$ed s !on!lusi$ely s ny ot&er essentilele"ent of t&e !ri"e. '&e tin# %it& intent to #in of personl property +elon#in#to not&er, +y "ens of $iolen!e #inst or inti"idtion of ny person, or usin# for!eupon t&in#s re t&e essentil ele"ents of ro++ery. '&ere is ro++ery %it& &o"i!ide%&en +y reson or on o!!sion of ro++ery %it& t&e use of $iolen!e #inst orinti"idtion of person, t&e !ri"e of &o"i!ide s&ll &$e +een !o""itted.

As s&o%n +o$e, t&e only e$iden!e of t&e tin# of t&e personl property oft&e $i!ti" is t&e e/tr-udi!il !onfession of t&e ppellnt. Lnder e!tion , Rule 1of t&e Rules of (ourt, Pn e/tr-udi!il !onfession "de +y n !!used s&ll not +esuffi!ient #round for !on$i!tion, unless !orro+orted +y e$iden!e of corpusdelicti.P-orpus delicti is t&e +ody @"teril su+stn!eB upon %&i!& !ri"e &s +een!o""itted, e.g.# t&e !orpse of "urdered "n or t&e !&rred re"ins of &ouse+urned do%n. n deri$ti$e sense, it "ens t&e su+stntil f!t t&t !ri"e %s


21/21

RULE 129

!o""itted. t is "de up of t%o ele"ents: @B t&t !ertin result &s +een pro$ed,for e/"ple, "n &s died or +uildin# &s +een +urned= nd @+B t&t so"e personis !ri"inlly responsi+le for t&e !t. e!tion , Rule 1 does not "en t&t e$eryele"ent of t&e !ri"e !&r#ed "ust +e !lerly est+lis&ed +y independent e$iden!eprt fro" t&e !onfession. t "ens "erely t&t t&ere s&ould +e so"e e$iden!e

tendin# to s&o% t&e !o""ission of t&e !ri"e prt fro" t&e !onfession. Ot&er%ise,utility of t&e !onfession s spe!ies of proof %ould $nis& if it %ere ne!essry, inddition to t&e !onfession, to ddu!e ot&er e$iden!e suffi!ient to -ustify !on$i!tionindependently of su!& !onfession. Ot&er%ise stted, t&e ot&er e$iden!e need not,independently of t&e !onfession, est+lis& t&e corpus delicti+eyond reson+ledou+t.

n"ones, t&e !on$i!tion of t&e four !!used for ro++ery %it& &o"i!ide issustin+le under t&e do!trine of interlo!in# !onfessions: Pe/tr*-udi!il!onfessions independently "de %it&out !ollusion %&i!& re identi!l %it& e!&ot&er in t&eir essentil detils nd re !orro+orted +y ot&er e$iden!e on re!ord re

d"issi+le, s !ir!u"stntil e$iden!e, #inst t&e person i"pli!ted to s&o% t&epro++ility of t&e ltterQs !tul prti!iption in t&e !o""ission of t&e!ri"e.P (lerly, t&e do!trine is inppli!+le &ere for %e only &$e t&e solitry!onfession of t&e ppellnt.

in!e t&e lle#ed ro++ery %s not !on!lusi$ely pro$ed in t&is !se, t&eppellnt !ould only +e !on$i!ted of &o"i!ide

Documents

Rule 129 Complete