SECOND DIVISION

[G.R. No. 103292. January 27, 1993.]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.

MODESTO CABUANG y FLORES, NARDO MATABANG y
SALVADOR, JOHN DOE and RICHARD DOE, defendants-
appellants.

The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.

Carlito M. Soriano for accused-appellant.

SYLLABUS

1. CRIMINAL LAW; CREDIBILITY OF WITNESS; FAILURE OF PROSECUTION

WITNESS TO IDENTIFY THE ACCUSED THE FIRST TIME SHE WAS QUESTIONED BY
THE POLICE DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT HER CREDIBILITY; DELAY IN
REVEALING TO THE POLICE AUTHORITY WHAT A WITNESS KNOWS ABOUT A
CRIME DOES NOT BY ITSELF RENDER THE TESTIMONY UNWORTHY OF BELIEF. —
Appellants principally urge that the trial court had erred in finding that
prosecution witness Evelyn de Vera had positively identified Modesto Cabuang
and Nardo Matabang as the assailants of Maria Victoria. Appellants point to the
entry in the Bayambang police blotter found on page 483, Entry No. 4436,
Volume IV, Series of 86 (Exhibit "I") which stated that the assailants were "still
unidentified" although the entry was made after prosecution witness Evelyn de
Vera was questioned by the police. Accused accordingly argue that Evelyn de
Vera had never identified the appellants as the assailants of Maria Victoria, who
in fact had later to identify them from a police line-up. We consider this
contention bereft or merit. Upon receiving the report that a dead body was
found in Barangay Buenlag I, members of the Bayambang Police Station
immediately proceeded to the reported crime scene on the morning of 15
October 1988. The police investigator, Pfc. Elegio Lopez, who initially
questioned witness De Vera that morning, noticed that she was in a state of
shock. He accordingly chose to defer further questioning until the afternoon of
the same day when Evelyn had calmed down sufficiently to be able to give a
sworn statement to the police. Thus, there was the initial report prepared and
recorded in the police blotter at around 11 o'clock in the morning, stating that
the assailants were still unidentified; there was, upon the other hand, Evelyn de
Vera's sworn statement made and completed in the afternoon of the same day,
where she revealed the identities of the men she had seen the night before and
who she believed were responsible for the rape and death of her cousin Maria
Victoria. The failure of Evelyn to specify the accused-appellants as the doers of
the horrific rape, killing and robbery of Maria Victoria the first time she was
questioned by the police, does not adversely affect her credibility. It is firmly
settled case law that the delay of a witness in revealing to the police authority
what he or she may know about a crime does not, by itself, render the witness'
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 testimony unworthy of belief.

2. RULINGS IN PEOPLE V. SAVELLANO AND PEOPLE V. DE GUZMAN APPLY

SQUARELY TO THE CASE AT BAR; REASONS. — The above rulings in People v.
Savellano and People v. de Guzman apply squarely to the case at bar. Evelyn de
Vera was clearly traumatized, in a state of shock, upon finding out that her
cousin who had been with her just the night before, was brutally raped and
killed. She could not then and there clearly and calmly recount the events she
had experienced and witnessed that dreadful night in a logical sequence. The
few hours delay which lapsed from the time the entry in the police blotter was
made, up to the time Evelyn gave her sworn statement on the afternoon of the
same day, did not have the effect of eroding the intrinsic credibility and
strength of that statement. It may be noted that significantly longer delays in
informing investigating officers of what witnesses had seen, have been held
understandable by this Court and as not, in themselves, destructive of the
otherwise credible character of such testimony, especially where the witnesses'
fear of possible retaliation from the accused could not be dismissed as merely
fanciful.
3. ENTRIES IN A POLICE BLOTTER ARE NOT CONCLUSIVE PROOF OF TRUTH
OF SUCH ENTRIES; THEY ARE ONLY PRIMA FACIE EVIDENCE OF THE FACTS SET
OUT THEREIN. — Entries in a police blotter though regularly done in the course
of performance of official duty, are not conclusive proof of the truth of such
entries, In People v. Santito, Jr., this Court held that entries in official records
like a police blotter are only prima facie evidence of the facts therein set out,
since the entries in the police blotter could well be incomplete or inaccurate.
Testimony given in open court during the trial is commonly much more lengthy
and detailed than the brief entries made in the police blotter and the trial court
cannot base its findings on a police report merely, but must necessarily
consider all other evidence gathered in the course of the police investigation
and presented in court. In the case at bar, we conclude that Prosecution
witness Evelyn de Vera did positively and clearly identify Modesto Cabuang and
Nardo Matabang as among those who had raped and killed and robbed the
hapless Maria Victoria Parana.

4. DEFENSE OF ALIBI CANNOT UNLESS THE ACCUSED IS ABLE TO PROVE

THAT HE WAS AT SOME OTHER PLACE DURING THE COMMISSION OF THE CRIME
AND THAT IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE FOR HIM TO HAVE BEEN AT THE SCENE OF THE
CRIME AT THE TIME OF ITS COMMISSION; POSITIVE IDENTIFICATION MUST
PREVAIL OVER SIMPLE DENIALS AND ALIBIS; IT IS PRESUMED THAT THE
PROSECUTION WITNESS IS NOT MOVED BY IMPROPER MOTIVES IN THE
ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE TO THE CONTRARY. — The firmly settled doctrine is
that the defense of alibi cannot prosper, unless the accused is able to prove
that he was at some other place during the commission of the crime and that it
was impossible for him to have been at the scene of the crime at the time of its
commission. Clearly, neither of the appellants was able to do so in the case at
bar. Modesto Cabuang was supposedly attending the wake held in the same
barangay where Maria Victoria was ravished and killed and robbed. Nardo
Matabang, upon the other hand, was allegedly at home in a town no more than
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 an hour or so by bus from Bayambang. It is equally settled doctrine that
positive identification must prevail over simple denials and unacceptable alibis.
Appellants have not even tried to suggest that Evelyn de Vera might have had
some ill motive to testify falsely against them. To the contrary, she had all the
reasons to speak the truth with respect to her cousin's ravishers and killers.
When there is no evidence to indicate that the principal witness for the
prosecution was moved by improper motives, the presumption is that such
witness was not so moved, and that her testimony is entitled to full faith and
credit.
5. CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE CAN BE SUFFICIENT TO SUPPORT A
CONVICTION OF GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. — The evidence
presented by the prosecution witness was circumstantial in nature. But
circumstantial evidence can be and often is entirely sufficient to support a
conviction, where he multiple circumstances are proven and are consistent with
the hypothesis that the accused is guilty and at the same time inconsistent with
the hypothesis that the accused is innocent, as well as incompatible with every
rational hypothesis except that of guilt on the part of the accused. In brief, the
circumstances must produce conviction of guilt beyond reasonable doubt. In
the case at bar, the circumstances forming an unbroken chain and leading to
the conviction beyond reasonable doubt that Cabuang and Matabang, among
others, were guilty of robbery with rape and homicide, were the following: 1.
While Evelyn de Vera and Maria Victoria Parana were walking home through an
uninhabited place at about 11 o'clock at night on 14 October 1988, accused
Cabuang and Matabang suddenly appeared from the surrounding rice fields,
Cabuang grabbed Maria Victoria and covered her mouth. Evelyn ran away
because she became terribly frightened and Matabang followed in pursuit.
Matabang lost sight of Evelyn along the road. 2. From her hiding place in the
front yard of a house along the road, Evelyn saw Maria Victoria pass by in a
tricycle with the accused Canuang, Matabang and two (2) other men and heard
Maria Victoria crying and pleading for help. Evelyn clearly recognized Cabuang
and Matabang, but not the other two (2). 3. Early the next morning, on 15
October 1988, the body of Maria Victoria was found in the barangay traversed
by the road on which Maria Victoria were walking the night before. 4. The
claims of alibi by Canuang and Matabang were not successfully established.
Cabuang acknowledged that he was in the same barangay where Maria Victoria
had been assaulted and killed, while Matabang asserted that he was in his
house in Dagupan City which was no more than an hour or so by bus from the
scene of the crime. Neither Cabuang nor Matabang offered and resented
independent and reliable corroboration of their presence far away from the
scene of the crime at the time of occurrence of the crime. The trial court found
the circumstances, considered together, as adequate to prove appellants' guilt
beyond reasonable doubt. This Court agrees, having been unable to find any
reason for overturning this conclusion of the trial court.

DECISION

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com

 FELICIANO, J : p

Accused Modesto Cabuang and Nardo Matabang appeal from the judgment of
the Regional Trial Court, Branch 57 of San Carlos City, Pangasinan finding them
guilty of robbery with rape and homicide, and imposing upon each of them a
prison term of reclusion perpetua. They were also ordered to pay, jointly and
severally, to the mother of the victim an indemnity of P50,000.00; the sum of
P400.00 as the amount of P10,000.00 as moral damages; the sum of
P46,495.00 as funeral expenses; and the costs of the suit.

The facts as found by the trial court may be summarized as follows:

On 14 October 1988, at around 11 o'clock at night, Evelyn De Vera and her

cousin Maria Victoria Parana, both 19 years of age, having come from a house
of a common friend, one Mia Colisao, were walking home along an uninhabited
place in Barangay Buenlag I of Bayambang, Pangasinan. Suddenly, from out of
the rice paddies along the road, Modesto Cabuang emerged with a flashlight
and asked them where they were going. Evelyn became very anxious and
started walking faster. Upon the other hand, Maria Victoria started talking to
Modesto. When Evelyn was about ten (10) feet ahead of the two, she looked
back and saw Modesto turn and shift his flashlight to the rear, illuminating the
figure of Nardo Matabang, who had also suddenly appeared behind them from
the rice fields alongside the road. Modesto then put off and pocketed his
flashlight, grabbed Maria Victoria and covered her mouth. Nardo Matabang in
turn pursued Evelyn, who had started to run away. She ran and ran until she
entered the yard of a house along the road and hid in the shadows of the plants
and shrubs inside the yard where she could not be seen by Nardo, but from
where she could see him. After some time, having lost sight of Evelyn, Nardo
went back and rejoined Modesto.

Sometime later, Evelyn from her hiding place saw a tricycle pass by with her
cousin Maria Victoria, and Modesto Cabuang, Nardo Matabang, the tricycle
driver and another person who was seated at the back of the tricycle. Evelyn
heard her cousin crying and pleading for help. After the tricycle had passed by,
Evelyn emerged from her hiding place and proceeded to the house of her
sister. There she was scolded by her sister for coming home late. Evelyn,
confused by the scolding and frightened by what she had just seen and
experienced, was not able to tell her sister what had just occurred. She stayed
in the sala and there tried to go to sleep, without success.

The following morning, Maria Victoria was found dead along the road, naked,
with stab wounds in different parts of her body including the pubic area. In the
course of their investigation, the police interrogated Evelyn de Vera. Evelyn
executed a sworn statement where she identified two (2) of the suspects as
Modesto Cabuang and Nardo Matabang. She stated that she could readily
identify them because the latter were her barangay mates and hence knew
them well. Moreover, when Modesto Cabuang suddenly emerged from the rice
paddies, he was only about two (2) meters away from her. Nardo Matabang was
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 clearly seen by Evelyn from behind the plants in the yard where she crouched
in concealment, there being lights illuminating the road in front of the yard. 1
Later, Evelyn was again able positively to identify and point out Cabuang and
Matabang from a police line-up. However, the two (2) other suspects, i.e., the
tricycle driver and the person who rode at the rear of the tricycle remained
unknown and at large. cdphil

On 17 October 1988, the third day after the tragic night, the police found a
book ("Laboratory Manual in Organic Chemistry") and some articles of feminine
underwear and other personal belongings of a woman scattered some 50 to
100 meters away from where they had first found Maria Victoria's body. Evelyn
viewed these belongings and identified them as owned by her cousin Maria
Victoria who was a student at the Philippine Women's University (PWU).
Examination of the personal belongings so found also showed that cash in the
amount of P400.00, in Maria Victoria's possession the night before, was
missing.
Dr. Nario Ferrer, a physician resident in Bayambang, Pangasinan, conducted an
autopsy on the body of the victim. He rendered an autopsy report which show
the following findings:
"'Incised wound, 4.0 cm superficial, anterolateral aspect neck (R);
'Contusion hematoma, 1 x 1 cm. mid clavicular area (L);
'Stab wound, 1.5 cm. 5th ICS, parasternal line (L), penetrating,
perforating the heart at the ventricular level, lacerating the lingular
part of the (L) lung;
'Hematoma, mediastinum;

'Hemopericardium, 300 cc;

'Hemothorax (L) - 2 liters;

'Stab wound, 1.5 cm. 7th ICS, para-vertebral line (R), penetrating and
lacerating the posterior basal part of (R) lung;

'Hemothorax (R) 1 liter;

'Incised wound, 3.0 cm. 2 points, parallel to each other, mons pubis;
'Incised wound, 3.0 cm. posterior fourchet of the vagina, transecting
the perineum down to the anal canal;
'Vagina with blood clots with fecaloid material;

'Hymen — carunculated.'"

The report also noted the stab wounds in the pubic region including the area
between the vagina and the anal canal, as well as the presence of
lacerations and spermatozoa in the victim's vagina, indicating that Maria
Victoria had been raped and mutilated. Dr. Ferrer identified four (4) of the
wounds as mortal in character, which wounds were produced by a sharp
edge and a pointed object. The cause of the death was listed as
"hypovolemic shock" resulting from severe decrease in the volume of blood
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 supply, producing death about six (6) hours before the autopsy. 2

On the basis of the foregoing evidence, and primarily on Evelyn de Vera's sworn
statement which she later repeated in substantially identical terms before the
trial court, Modesto Cabuang and Nardo Matabang were convicted of the crime
of robbery with rape and homicide.
In the present appeal, appellants principally urge that the trial court had erred
in finding that prosecution witness Evelyn de Vera had positively identified
Modesto Cabuang and Nardo Matabang as the assailants of Maria Victoria.
Appellants point to the entry in the Bayambang police blotter found on page
483, Entry No. 4436, Volume IV, Series of 86 (Exhibit "I") which stated that the
assailants were "still unidentified" although the entry was made after
prosecution witness Evelyn de Vera was questioned by the police. Accused
accordingly argue that Evelyn de Vera had never identified the appellants as
the assailants of Maria Victoria, who in fact had later to identify them from a
police line-up.
We consider this contention bereft or merit. Upon receiving the report that a
dead body was found in Barangay Buenlag I, members of the Bayambang Police
Station immediately proceeded to the reported crime scene on the morning of
15 October 1988. The police investigator, Pfc. Elegio Lopez, who initially
questioned witness De Vera that morning, noticed that she was in a state of
shock. 3 He accordingly chose to defer further questioning until the afternoon of
the same day when Evelyn had calmed down sufficiently to be able to give a
sworn statement to the police. Thus, there was the initial report prepared and
recorded in the police blotter 4 at around 11 o'clock in the morning, stating that
the assailants were still unidentified; there was, upon the other hand, Evelyn de
Vera's sworn statement 5 made and completed in the afternoon of the same
day, where she revealed the identities of the men she had seen the night
before and who she believed were responsible for the rape and death of her
cousin Maria Victoria.

The failure of Evelyn to specify the accused-appellants as the doers of the

horrific rape, killing and robbery of Maria Victoria the first time she was
questioned by the police, does not adversely affect her credibility. It is firmly
settled case law that the delay of a witness in revealing to the police authority
what he or she may know about a crime does not, by itself, render the witness'
testimony unworthy of belief. 6
In People v. Savellano, 7 appellant Savellano argued that since the complaining
witness had reported to the police authorities the matter of her husband's
death and identified the Savellanos'' as her husband's killers only after the
lapse of two (2) days, rather than immediately when she had the very first
opportunity to do so while the police was conducting an "on the spot"
investigation, the credibility of her testimony was greatly weakened. This Court
rejected this argument stating that: cdphil

"It is quite understandable when the witnesses do not immediately

report the identity of the offender after a startling occurrence more
especially when they are related to the victim as they just had a
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 traumatic experience . . . [A] delay of about a few hours before the
identification of the offender by the prosecution witnesses does not
thereby affect their credibility." 8

In People v. de Guzman, 9 the accused-appellant sought to capitalize upon the

fact that the prosecution witness did not volunteer the information covered by
her testimony to the policeman who had investigated the crime immediately
after the murder was committed. Disposing of this contention, this Court ruled
that:
"The initial reluctance of witnesses to volunteer information about a
criminal case and unwillingness to be involved in criminal
investigations due to fear of reprisal [are] common occurrence[s] and
[have] been judicially declared as not affecting their credibility, . . .
xxx xxx xxx
The testimony of Gloria should be given full weight and credit. Her
failure to give a sworn statement to the police should not be taken
against her. There is no law which requires that the testimony of a
prospective witness should first be reduced into writing in order that
her declaration in Court at a later date may be believed by the Judge."
10

The above rulings apply squarely to the case at bar. Evelyn de Vera was clearly
traumatized, in a state of shock, upon finding out that her cousin who had been
with her just the night before, was brutally raped and killed. She could not then
and there clearly and calmly recount the events she had experienced and
witnessed that dreadful night in a logical sequence. The few hours delay which
lapsed from the time the entry in the police blotter was made, up to the time
Evelyn gave her sworn statement on the afternoon of the same day, did not
have the effect of eroding the intrinsic credibility and strength of that
statement. It may be noted that significantly longer delays in informing
investigating officers of what witnesses had seen, have been held
understandable by this Court and as not, in themselves, destructive of the
otherwise credible character of such testimony, especially where the witnesses'
fear of possible retaliation from the accused could not be dismissed as merely
fanciful. 11
It remains only to note that entries in a police blotter though regularly done in
the course of performance of official duty, are not conclusive proof of the truth
of such entries, In People v. Santito, Jr., 12 this Court held that entries in official
records like a police blotter are only prima facie evidence of the facts therein
set out, since the entries in the police blotter could well be incomplete or
inaccurate. Testimony given in open court during the trial is commonly much
more lengthy and detailed than the brief entries made in the police blotter and
the trial court cannot base its findings on a police report merely, but must
necessarily consider all other evidence gathered in the course of the police
investigation and presented in court. 13 In the case at bar, we conclude that
Prosecution witness Evelyn de Vera did positively and clearly identify Modesto
Cabuang and Nardo Matabang as among those who had raped and killed and
robbed the hapless Maria Victoria Parana.
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 Appellants also set up the defenses of denial and alibi. Cabuang denied having
and anything to do with the rape and killing of Maria Victoria. He said that he
was at the wake of the daughter of one Ben Juinio of Barangay Buenlag I, the
whole night of 14 October 1988 and until 6:30 in the morning of the following
day. Cabuang was, however, unable to offer any details in elaboration or
corroboration of his claim of alibi. Matabang, for his part, testified that on 14
October 1988, he was in his house in Karanglaan, Dagupan City, with his wife,
his sister-in-law, and his child and had never left his house. He testified further
that he left his home for Bayambang only on the next day, 15 October 1988.
His testimony was, however, found by the trial court to be flawed by
discrepancies and inconsistencies and by lack of sufficient corroboration. LLpr

The firmly settled doctrine is that the defense of alibi cannot prosper, unless
the accused is able to prove that he was at some other place during the
commission of the crime and that it was impossible for him to have been at the
scene of the crime at the time of its commission. 14 Clearly, neither of the
appellants was able to do so in the case at bar. Modesto Cabuang was
supposedly attending the wake held in the same barangay where Maria Victoria
was ravished and killed and robbed. Nardo Matabang, upon the other hand,
was allegedly at home in a town no more than an hour or so by bus from
Bayambang.
It is equally settled doctrine that positive identification must prevail over simple
denials and unacceptable alibis. Appellants have not even tried to suggest that
Evelyn de Vera might have had some ill motive to testify falsely against them.
To the contrary, she had all the reasons to speak the truth with respect to her
cousin's ravishers and killers. When there is no evidence to indicate that the
principal witness for the prosecution was moved by improper motives, the
presumption is that such witness was not so moved, and that her testimony is
entitled to full faith and credit. 15
It is, of course, true that Evelyn de Vera did not witness the actual sexual
assault and slaying of Maria Victoria nor the taking of the P400.00 missing from
Maria Victoria's belongings. The evidence presented by the prosecution witness
was circumstantial in nature. But circumstantial evidence can be and often is
entirely sufficient to support a conviction, where he multiple circumstances are
proven and are consistent with the hypothesis that the accused is guilty and at
the same time inconsistent with the hypothesis that the accused is innocent, as
well as incompatible with every rational hypothesis except that of guilt on the
part of the accused. 16 In brief, the circumstances must produce conviction of
guilt beyond reasonable doubt. 17

In the case at bar, the circumstances forming an unbroken chain and leading to
the conviction beyond reasonable doubt that Cabuang and Matabang, among
others, were guilty of robbery with rape and homicide, were the following:
1. While Evelyn de Vera and Maria Victoria Parana were walking
home through an uninhabited place at about 11 o'clock at night on 14
October 1988, accused Cabuang and Matabang suddenly appeared
CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com
 from the surrounding rice fields, Cabuang grabbed Maria Victoria and
covered her mouth. Evelyn ran away because she became terribly
frightened and Matabang followed in pursuit. Matabang lost sight of
Evelyn along the road.
2. From her hiding place in the front yard of a house along the road,
Evelyn saw Maria Victoria pass by in a tricycle with the accused
Canuang, Matabang and two (2) other men and heard Maria Victoria
crying and pleading for help. Evelyn clearly recognized Cabuang and
Matabang, but not the other two (2).
3. Early the next morning, on 15 October 1988, the body of Maria
Victoria was found in the barangay traversed by the road on which
Maria Victoria were walking the night before.
4. The claims of alibi by Canuang and Matabang were not
successfully established. Cabuang acknowledged that he was in the
same barangay where Maria Victoria had been assaulted and killed,
while Matabang asserted that he was in his house in Dagupan City
which was no more than an hour or so by bus from the scene of the
crime. Neither Cabuang nor Matabang offered and resented
independent and reliable corroboration of their presence far away from
the scene of the crime at the time of occurrence of the crime.prLL

The trial court found the circumstances, considered together, as adequate to

prove appellants' guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This Court agrees, having
been unable to find any reason for overturning this conclusion of the trial court.
WHEREFORE, the decision of the trial court finding the accused-appellants
Modesto Cabuang and Nardo Matabang guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
robbery with rape and homicide and sentencing the accused to reclusion
perpetua is hereby AFFIRMED in toto except that the indemnity is hereby
INCREASED from P50,000.00 to P100,000.00 considering that Maria Victoria
Parana was not only raped but also brutally mutilated and killed by the
accused. Costs against appellants.
SO ORDERED.

Narvasa, C .J ., Regalado, Nocon and Campos, Jr., JJ ., concur.

Footnotes

1. TSN, September 6, 1989, p. 8.

2. Exhibit "F," ,"H," "I" and "J " Record, pp. 355-357.
3. TSN, 22 February 1991, pp. 6-9.

4. Records, p. 306.
5. Id., p. 3.

6.. People v. Mandapat, 196 SCRA 157 (1991); People v. Basilan, 174 SCRA 115
(1989).
7. 198 SCRA 196 (1991).

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com

 8. 198 SCRA at 207, citing People v. Gamboa, 194 SCRA 372 (1991).
9. 194 SCRA 626 (1991).
10. 194 SCRA at 626-627.
11. In People v. Valdez, 159 SCRA 157 (1988), the victim's mother gave her
sworn statement ten (10) days after the crime while the victim's brother gave
his statement 13 days after the crime. This Court nonetheless upheld the
ruling of the trial court that their testimonies were positive, credible and
reliable.

12. 201 SCRA 87 (1991).

13. Ford v. Court of Appeals, 186 SCRA 21 (1990); People v. Roca, 162 SCRA
696 (1988).

14. e.g., People v. Pugal, et al., G.R. No. 90637, October 29, 1992; People v.
Muñoz, 163 SCRA 730 (1988).

15. People v. Belibet, 199 SCRA 587 (1991); People v. Doctolero, 193 SCRA 632
(1991).

16. People v. Alabaso, 204 SCRA 458; People v. Maravilla, 167-SCRA 645
(1988).
17. Rule 133, Section 2, Revised Rules of Court.

CD Technologies Asia, Inc. © 2021 cdasiaonline.com