ChanRobles Virtual law Library

[G.R. No. 134802.June 25, 2002]

PEOPLE vs. DIZON

EN BANC

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated JUN 25 2002 .

G.R. No. 134802(People of the Philippines vs. Renato Z. Dizon.)

Before us is a motion seeking reconsideration of our decision dated October 26, 2001 which affirmed the judgment of conviction imposed upon accused-appellant.

Accused-appellant posits that (1) the alleged victim's testimony is incredible and unbelievable in itself; (2) the victim is not really familiar with the identity of her assailant; and (3) while it is true that denial could not stand against a positive identification, it presupposes that the testimony is credible in itself, otherwise, the denial of accused-appellant must be given the much needed weight in order to prove his innocence.

In addition, as already threshed out, there is no way that this Court could have ruled except to say that the testimony of the victim is reliable. She has no motive to testify against accused-appellant and her testimony is simple and straightforward, unshaken by rigid cross-examination and unflawed by any inconsistency or contradiction. As correctly pointed out by the Solicitor General, what is important is that it was the victim herself who provided the description of accused-appellant and who, without assistance, subsequently picked him out from the crowd as the person who had robbed and defiled her. The Court thus finds accused-appellant's denial to be without merit.

All told, the totality of all the evidence presented by the prosecution, amplified by the outright incredulity of the version of the defense, bolsters the judgment of conviction of accused-appellant beyond the shadow of a doubt.

WHEREFORE, the instant motion is hereby DENIED. This denial is FINAL.(Davide, Jr., C.J., Panganiban and Quisumbing, JJ., are abroad on official business.)

Very truly yours,

LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO

Clerk of Court

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Asst. Clerk of Court

Back to Home | Back to Main

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE