Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence


Philippine Supreme Court Jurisprudence > Year 1995 > May 1995 Decisions > G.R. No. 113786 May 29, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NONY BACLAYO, ET AL.:




PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

THIRD DIVISION

[G.R. No. 113786. May 29, 1995.]

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. NONY BACLAYO (deceased), LUCITO ALVAREZ alias "BOY", DANILO MILLARE alias "DANNY" (Acquitted), BENJAMIN PADILLA alias "BENJIE", and certain alias "KING", Accused, LUCITO ALVAREZ and BENJAMIN PADILLA, Accused-Appellant.


SYLLABUS


1. REMEDIAL LAW; EVIDENCE; CREDIBILITY; FINDINGS OF FACTS OF TRIAL COURT GENERALLY ACCORDED RESPECT ON APPEAL. — It is a fundamental and settled rule that the findings of fact of trial courts are accorded great weight and respect by appellate courts and should not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of any clear showing that the trial court overlooked, misunderstood, or misapplied some facts of weight and significance, which if taken into consideration would have altered the result of the case (Donato v. Court of Appeals, 217 SCRA 196 [1993]; People v. dela Cruz, 217 SCRA 283 [1993].

2. ID.; ID.; ID.; ALIBI; CANNOT PREVAIL OVER POSITIVE IDENTIFICATION. — The defense of alibi set up by accused-appellant Padilla that he was at the mountains area of Mt. Diwalwal, Davao at the time of the commission of the crime must be rejected. Time-honored is the rule that alibi cannot prevail over the positive testimony of the witnesses (People v. Dominguez, 217 SCRA 170 [1993]; People v. Amador, 226 SCRA 241 [1993]). Accused-appellant Padilla was positively identified by prosecution witness Zorayda Sapilen and Patricio Jacobe as one of the perpetrators of the killing of Sgt. Suello. Both prosecution witnesses testified on the participation of accused-appellant Padilla in the commission of the crime; both testified that immediately before the shooting of Sgt. Suello by Baclayo and Alvarez, Padilla disarmed Sgt. Suello by grabbing the latter’s gun which was tucked at his waist. Padilla’s act of disarming Sgt. Suello was obviously intended to render Sgt. Suello defenseless to ensure the execution of the crime without risk to themselves from any defense Sgt. Suello.


D E C I S I O N


MELO, J.:


Nonoy Baclayo, Lucito Alvarez alias "Boy", Danilo Millare alias "Danny", Benjamin Padilla alias "Benjie" and a certain alias "King" were charged with murder in an Amended Information reading as follows:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

That on or about September 5, 1989, in the Municipality of Tagum, Province of Davao, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, Accused Lucito Alvarez, Danilo Millare and Benjamin Padilla, conspiring, confederating and mutually helping with Nonoy Baclayo and a certain alias "King", who are all at large, with treachery, cruelty and taking advantage of superior strength, with intent to kill, armed with high powered firearms, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and shoot one P/Sgt. Rolando Suello, thereby inflicting upon him wounds which caused his death, and further causing actual, moral and compensatory damages to the heirs of the victim.

The commission of the offense was, likewise, attended by the following aggravating circumstances of contempt to or with insult to the public authorities, and disregard of the respect due to the offended party on account of his rank.

(p. 5, Rollo.)

Nonoy Baclayo died before the Information was actually filed, while Lucito Alvarez, Benjamin Padilla, and Danilo Millare enters a plea of "not guilty." However, during the trial, upon motion of the prosecution, the trial court dismissed the case against Danilo Millare for insufficiency of evidence.

After trial, the trial court rendered a decision on July 29, 1991, disposing:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

WHEREFORE, finding both Lucito Alvarez and Benjamin Padilla guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code with the attendant aggravating circumstance of advantage taken by both accused of their superior strength and the additional aggravating circumstance that the crime was committed in contempt of or with insult to public authorities in the case of Benjamin Padilla which was not offset by any mitigating circumstance, both accused are hereby sentenced to serve the prison term of Reclusion Perpetua (instead of Death because of the constitutional ban) and to suffer the accessory penalties provided for by law.

For the civil liability, they are further condemned, jointly and severally, to indemnify the heirs of the victim, Rolando Suello, the following:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

1. P190,000.00 representing the loss of the victim’s expected income;

2. P100,000.00 as moral damages; and

3. P50,000.00 as actual damages; and to pay the costs.

(p. 24, Rollo)

From said decision, Benjamin Padilla and Lucito Alvarez have interposed the present appeal upon the following assignment of errors:chanrobles virtual lawlibrary

I. The trial court erred in holding accused Lucito Alvarez to be in conspiracy with Baclayo despite absence of clear and convincing proof that he acted in concert with the latter.

II. The trial court erred in holding Benjamin Padilla to be in conspiracy with Baclayo despite the physical absence at the scene of the crime.

III. The trial court erred in convicting the accused, Lucito Alvarez and Benjamin Padilla, despite failure of the prosecution to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

(pp. 37-38, Rollo)

The facts of the case, as briefly summarized by the Office of the Solicitor General and as borne out by the evidence, are as follows:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

About 4:00 in the afternoon of September 5, 1989, P/Sgt. Rolando Suello, the victim, went to the interior part of Roxas St., Tagum Davao, otherwise known as Misa District of the Municipality. Along the way, P/Sgt. Suello met Jacobe, Jr. with whom he had a conversation concerning police matters. While conversing, appellants Lucito Alvarez and Nonoy Baclayo, former members of the 64th Infantry Battalion, Philippine Army, passed them by. After a while, Alvarez and Baclayo returned and approached them. Baclayo asked Suello if he was a policeman. For unknown reasons, an altercation ensued between them. Thereafter, appellant Padilla, apparently coming from behind, disarmed Suello by grabbing his service pistol. After rendering him defenseless, Baclayo shot Suello at his stomach, using an armalite rifle, causing him to turn by shooting Suello on his head eventually causing his instantaneous death (TSN, July 11, 1990, pp. 39-43; exh. "G").

(pp. 75-76, Rollo.)

Accused-appellant Alvarez disparages the testimony of prosecution witnesses Zorayda Sapilen and Patricio Jacobe, Jr., as unworthy of belief, contending that their declarations consist only of general statements of his presence at the scene of the crime and are in details concerning the specific act done by him.

The evidence does not support accused-appellant’s contention. Prosecution witness Zorayda Sapilen positively and categorically testified that accused-appellant Alvarez shot the victim, Sgt. Suello, in the head.chanrobles virtualawlibrary chanrobles.com:chanrobles.com.ph

Q. Then what happened when he was already on the road lying?

A. He was again shot.

Q. This time, who shot him?

A. Alvarez did.

Q. What weapon did Alvarez use in shooting Roland Suello?

A. It was a long firearm.

Q. Where was the long firearm directed?

A. On the upper part of his body.

Q. What particular upper part of his body?

A. I think it was on the head.

(pp. 11-12, tsn, July 11, 1990)

Likewise, prosecution witness Patricio Jacobe, Jr., positively and categorically testified that accused-appellant Alvarez shot Sgt. Suello, to wit:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Q. And then what happened to him afterwards?

A. He was again shot on the head with M-14.

Q. Who shot him with the use of an M-14?

A. Alvarez.

Q. How many persons shot P/Sgt. Suello?

A. Two (2).

Q. Who was the first one who shot P/Sgt. Suello?

A. Baclayo.

Q. The second person who shot Sgt. Suello?

A. Alvarez.

Q. If Alvarez is present in court, please point at him.

INTERPRETER:chanrob1es virtual 1aw library

Witness pointed to the person who identified himself while ago as Lucito Alvarez.

(p. 42, tsn, July 11, 1990)

The foregoing unhedging statements of the prosecution witnesses clearly established the fact that the victim was shot by accused-appellant Alvarez. Zorayda Sapilen could not have mistaken the identity of Alvarez for she had known Alvarez for almost one year before the incident (p. 10, tsn, July 11, 1990). Likewise, witness Jacobe could not have committed a mistake in identifying the accused for he had known them at least five (5) months before the killing of Sgt. Suello (p. 43, tsn., July 11, 1990). Moreover, it is a fundamental and settled rule that the findings of fact of trial courts are accorded great weight and respect by appellate courts and should not be disturbed on appeal in the absence of any clear showing that the trial court overlooked, misunderstood, or misapplied some facts of weight and significance, which if taken into consideration would have altered the result of the case (Donato v. Court of Appeals, 217 SCRA 196 [1993]; People v. dela Cruz, 217 SCRA 283 [1993]. A search of the records fails to uncover any such facts of weight and significance. The findings of facts of the trial court must perforce be accepted.chanrobles law library : red

The defense of alibi set up by accused-appellant Padilla that he was at the mountains area of Mt. Diwalwal, Davao at the time of the commission of the crime must be rejected. Time-honored is the rule that alibi cannot prevail over the positive testimony of the witnesses (People v. Dominguez, 217 SCRA 170 [1993]; People v. Amador, 226 SCRA 241 [1993]). Accused-appellant Padilla was positively identified by prosecution witness Zorayda Sapilen and Patricio Jacobe as one of the perpetrators of the killing of Sgt. Suello. Both prosecution witnesses testified on the participation of accused-appellant Padilla in the commission of the crime; both testified that immediately before the shooting of Sgt. Suello by Baclayo and Alvarez, Padilla disarmed Sgt. Suello by grabbing the latter’s gun which was tucked at his waist (pp. 13-14, tsn., July 11, 1990). Padilla’s act of disarming Sgt. Suello was obviously intended to render Sgt. Suello defenseless to ensure the execution of the crime without risk to themselves from any defense Sgt. Suello.

WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is hereby AFFIRMED, except for the decision of the award for moral damages due to lack of evidentiary support. The awards for unearned income and civil indemnity remain.chanrobles.com:cralaw:red

SO ORDERED.

Feliciano, Romero, Vitug and Francisco, JJ., concur.




Back to Home | Back to Main




















chanrobles.com





ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com






May-1995 Jurisprudence                 

  • G.R. Nos. 101801-03 May 2, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. EDUARDO "EDDIE" TAMI

  • G.R. No. 113739 May 2, 1995 : CLAUDIO M. ANONUEVO, ET AL. vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108886 May 5, 1995 : AQUILES U. REYES vs. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF ORIENTAL MINDORO, BRANCH XXXIX, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-95-1293 May 9, 1995 : GIL V. MANLAVI vs. EUSTAQUIO Z. GACOTT, JR.

  • G.R. No. 101444 May 9, 1995 : A.C. ENTERPRISES, INC. vs. CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY ARBITRATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 113287 May 9, 1995 : LOYOLA SECURITY AND DETECTIVE AGENCY, ET AL. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-93-842 May 10, 1995 : MYLA PAREDES, ET AL. vs. JACINTO A. MANALO

  • G.R. No. L-42108 May 10, 1995 : OSCAR D. RAMOS, ET AL. vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110590 May 10, 1995 : ZORAYDA AMELIA C. ALONZO vs. IGNACIO M. CAPULONG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 91756 May 11, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. RAUL G. ESCOTO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 117389 May 11, 1995 : ROMEO V. OBLEA, ET AL. vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Case No. 2468 May 12, 1995 : NILO L. MIRAFLOR vs. JUAN M. HAGAD, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-93-782 May 12, 1995 : YOLANDA CRUZ vs. FILOMENO S. PASCUAL

  • G.R. No. 100125 May 12, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. ROMEO B. MAGALONG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 113081 May 12, 1995 : WORLDWIDE PAPERMILLS, INC., ET AL. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95028 May 15, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. MARLO L. COMPIL

  • G.R. No. 100911 May 16, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. MAJID SAMSON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 105248 May 16, 1995 : BENJAMIN ROMUALDEZ vs. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106643 May 16, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. EDWIN M. MESAL

  • G.R. No. 112141 May 16, 1995 : PHOENIX IRON AND STEEL CORP. vs. SECRETARY OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 96372 May 22, 1995 : ANTONIO L. CASTELO, ET AL. vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 99846 May 22, 1995 : BELEN CRUZ, ET AL. vs. FE ESPERANZA LEABRES

  • G.R. No. 102485 May 22, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL vs. LUIS TAMPAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106483 May 22, 1995 : ERNESTO L. CALLADO vs. INTERNATIONAL RICE RESEARCH INSTITUTE

  • G.R. No. 107903 May 22, 1995 : MARILOU RIVERA vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109991 May 22, 1995 : ELIAS C. QUIBAL, ET AL. vs. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110658 May 22, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. DEBORAH WOOLCOCK, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 116506-07 May 22, 1995 : BILLY P. OBUGAN vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 119694 May 22, 1995 : PHILIPPINE PRESS INSTITUTE, INC. vs. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS - COMELEC

  • G.R. No. 95367 May 23, 1995 : JOSE T. ALMONTE, ET AL. vs. CONRADO M. VASQUEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115278 May 23, 1995 : FORTUNE INSURANCE AND SURETY CO., INC. vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116650 May 23, 1995 : TOYOTA SHAW, INC. vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 68252 May 26, 1995 : COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE vs. TOKYO SHIPPING CO. LTD., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 100354 May 26, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. DIONISIO M. TADEPA

  • G.R. No. 109560 May 26, 1995 : NESTOR ILANO vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109776 May 26, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL vs. ROQUE CABRESOS

  • G.R. No. 110776 May 26, 1995 : MARANAW HOTEL & RESORT CORPORATION vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112015 May 26, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. RENATO DAEN, JR.

  • G.R. No. 114870 May 26, 1995 : MIGUELA R. VILLANUEVA, ET AL. vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115814 May 26, 1995 : PEDRO P. PECSON vs. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 94033 May 29, 1995 : FELICIANO RAMOS vs. FRANCISCO C. RODRIGUEZ

  • G.R. No. 97936 May 29, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. ALEJANDRO C. LUCERO

  • G.R. No. 105208 May 29, 1995 : COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE vs. PHILIPPINE AMERICAN LIFE INSURANCE CO., ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 106385-88 May 29, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. ALEJANDRO MANDAP

  • G.R. No. 108123 May 29, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. ARNEL M. SOBERANO

  • G.R. No. 109142 May 29, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. IRENEO SILVESTRE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112045 May 29, 1995 : DANILO F.C. RIMONTE vs. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 113057-58 May 29, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. JUAN F. REMOTO

  • G.R. No. 113786 May 29, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. NONY BACLAYO, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. P-93-976 May 31, 1995 : MENCHIE PUNSALAN-SANTOS vs. NAPOLEON I. ARQUIZA

  • G.R. No. 73974 May 31, 1995 : REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. vs. REGISTER OF DEEDS OF QUEZON

  • G.R. No. 100915 May 31, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. JOSEPH SUPREMO

  • G.R. No. 106639 May 31, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. SATURNINO J. SOLON

  • G.R. No. 108544 May 31, 1995 : REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. vs. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110808 May 31, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. ALFONSO QUINEVISTA, JR.

  • G.R. No. 110954 May 31, 1995 : DELFIN N. DIVINAGRACIA, JR., ET AL. vs. PATRICIA A. STO. TOMAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 111812 May 31, 1995 : DIONISIO M. RABOR vs. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. 114268 May 31, 1995 : PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. vs. FELICIANO HILARIO

  • G.R. No. 115942 May 31, 1995 : RUBLE RUBENECIA vs. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

  • G.R. Nos. 101801-03 May 2, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDUARDO "EDDIE" TAMI

  • G.R. No. 113739 May 2, 1995 - CLAUDIO M. ANONUEVO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 108886 May 5, 1995 - AQUILES U. REYES v. REGIONAL TRIAL COURT OF ORIENTAL MINDORO, BRANCH XXXIX, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. RTJ-95-1293 May 9, 1995 - GIL V. MANLAVI v. EUSTAQUIO Z. GACOTT, JR.

  • G.R. No. 101444 May 9, 1995 - A.C. ENTERPRISES, INC. v. CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY ARBITRATION COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 113287 May 9, 1995 - LOYOLA SECURITY AND DETECTIVE AGENCY, ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-93-842 May 10, 1995 - MYLA PAREDES, ET AL. v. JACINTO A. MANALO

  • G.R. No. L-42108 May 10, 1995 - OSCAR D. RAMOS, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110590 May 10, 1995 - ZORAYDA AMELIA C. ALONZO v. IGNACIO M. CAPULONG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 91756 May 11, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RAUL G. ESCOTO, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 117389 May 11, 1995 - ROMEO V. OBLEA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • Adm. Case No. 2468 May 12, 1995 - NILO L. MIRAFLOR v. JUAN M. HAGAD, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. MTJ-93-782 May 12, 1995 - YOLANDA CRUZ v. FILOMENO S. PASCUAL

  • G.R. No. 100125 May 12, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ROMEO B. MAGALONG, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 113081 May 12, 1995 - WORLDWIDE PAPERMILLS, INC., ET AL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 95028 May 15, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MARLO L. COMPIL

  • G.R. No. 100911 May 16, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. MAJID SAMSON, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 105248 May 16, 1995 - BENJAMIN ROMUALDEZ v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106643 May 16, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. EDWIN M. MESAL

  • G.R. No. 112141 May 16, 1995 - PHOENIX IRON AND STEEL CORP. v. SECRETARY OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 96372 May 22, 1995 - ANTONIO L. CASTELO, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 99846 May 22, 1995 - BELEN CRUZ, ET AL. v. FE ESPERANZA LEABRES

  • G.R. No. 102485 May 22, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. LUIS TAMPAL, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 106483 May 22, 1995 - ERNESTO L. CALLADO v. INTERNATIONAL RICE RESEARCH INSTITUTE

  • G.R. No. 107903 May 22, 1995 - MARILOU RIVERA v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109991 May 22, 1995 - ELIAS C. QUIBAL, ET AL. v. SANDIGANBAYAN, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110658 May 22, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DEBORAH WOOLCOCK, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 116506-07 May 22, 1995 - BILLY P. OBUGAN v. PEOPLE OF THE PHIL., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 119694 May 22, 1995 - PHILIPPINE PRESS INSTITUTE, INC. v. COMMISSION ON ELECTIONS

  • G.R. No. 95367 May 23, 1995 - JOSE T. ALMONTE, ET AL. v. CONRADO M. VASQUEZ, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115278 May 23, 1995 - FORTUNE INSURANCE AND SURETY CO., INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 116650 May 23, 1995 - TOYOTA SHAW, INC. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 68252 May 26, 1995 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. TOKYO SHIPPING CO. LTD., ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 100354 May 26, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. DIONISIO M. TADEPA

  • G.R. No. 109560 May 26, 1995 - NESTOR ILANO v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 109776 May 26, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL v. ROQUE CABRESOS

  • G.R. No. 110776 May 26, 1995 - MARANAW HOTEL & RESORT CORPORATION v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112015 May 26, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. RENATO DAEN, JR.

  • G.R. No. 114870 May 26, 1995 - MIGUELA R. VILLANUEVA, ET AL. v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 115814 May 26, 1995 - PEDRO P. PECSON v. COURT OF APPEALS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 94033 May 29, 1995 - FELICIANO RAMOS v. FRANCISCO C. RODRIGUEZ

  • G.R. No. 97936 May 29, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEJANDRO C. LUCERO

  • G.R. No. 105208 May 29, 1995 - COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE v. PHILIPPINE AMERICAN LIFE INSURANCE CO., ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 106385-88 May 29, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALEJANDRO MANDAP

  • G.R. No. 108123 May 29, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ARNEL M. SOBERANO

  • G.R. No. 109142 May 29, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. IRENEO SILVESTRE, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 112045 May 29, 1995 - DANILO F.C. RIMONTE v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. Nos. 113057-58 May 29, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JUAN F. REMOTO

  • G.R. No. 113786 May 29, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. NONY BACLAYO, ET AL.

  • Adm. Matter No. P-93-976 May 31, 1995 - MENCHIE PUNSALAN-SANTOS v. NAPOLEON I. ARQUIZA

  • G.R. No. 73974 May 31, 1995 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. REGISTER OF DEEDS OF QUEZON

  • G.R. No. 100915 May 31, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. JOSEPH SUPREMO

  • G.R. No. 106639 May 31, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. SATURNINO J. SOLON

  • G.R. No. 108544 May 31, 1995 - REPUBLIC OF THE PHIL. v. NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS COMMISSION, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 110808 May 31, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. ALFONSO QUINEVISTA, JR.

  • G.R. No. 110954 May 31, 1995 - DELFIN N. DIVINAGRACIA, JR., ET AL. v. PATRICIA A. STO. TOMAS, ET AL.

  • G.R. No. 111812 May 31, 1995 - DIONISIO M. RABOR v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION

  • G.R. No. 114268 May 31, 1995 - PEOPLE OF THE PHIL. v. FELICIANO HILARIO

  • G.R. No. 115942 May 31, 1995 - RUBLE RUBENECIA v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION