Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 73 views

    People vs. Quidato Jr.

    Uploaded by

    Tootsie Guzma
    The document summarizes a court case, People vs. Quidato, Jr. The prosecution charged the accused-appellant with parricide based on affidavits from two brothers, Eddie and Reynaldo Malita, who confessed but did not testify in court. The court ruled that the accused-appellant must be acquitted because the affidavits were inadmissible hearsay since the brothers did not testify to affirm their statements. As such, the prosecution failed to prove the accused-appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

    Copyright:

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

    People vs. Quidato Jr.

    Uploaded by

    Tootsie Guzma
    73 views1 page
    The document summarizes a court case, People vs. Quidato, Jr. The prosecution charged the accused-appellant with parricide based on affidavits from two brothers, Eddie and Reynaldo Malita, who confessed but did not testify in court. The court ruled that the accused-appellant must be acquitted because the affidavits were inadmissible hearsay since the brothers did not testify to affirm their statements. As such, the prosecution failed to prove the accused-appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

    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 document summarizes a court case, People vs. Quidato, Jr. The prosecution charged the accused-appellant with parricide based on affidavits from two brothers, Eddie and Reynaldo Malita, who confessed but did not testify in court. The court ruled that the accused-appellant must be acquitted because the affidavits were inadmissible hearsay since the brothers did not testify to affirm their statements. As such, the prosecution failed to prove the accused-appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    73 views1 page

    People vs. Quidato Jr.

    Uploaded by

    Tootsie Guzma
    The document summarizes a court case, People vs. Quidato, Jr. The prosecution charged the accused-appellant with parricide based on affidavits from two brothers, Eddie and Reynaldo Malita, who confessed but did not testify in court. The court ruled that the accused-appellant must be acquitted because the affidavits were inadmissible hearsay since the brothers did not testify to affirm their statements. As such, the prosecution failed to prove the accused-appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 1

    People vs. Quidato, Jr.

    G.R. No. 117401 October 1, 1998

    Doctrine: It is hornbook doctrine that unless the affiants themselves take the witness stand to affirm the
    averments in their affidavits, the affidavits must be excluded from the judicial proceeding, being
    inadmissible hearsay.

    Facts: accused-appellant was charged with the crime of parricide before the Regional Trial Court of
    Davao.

    The prosecution, in offering its version of the facts, presented as its witnesses accused-appellant’s
    brother Leo Quidato, appellant’s wife Gina Quidato, as well as Patrolman Lucrecio Mara. Likewise, the
    prosecution offered in evidence affidavits containing the extra-judicial confessions of Eddie Malita and
    Reynaldo Malita. The two brothers were, however, not presented by the prosecution on the witness
    stand. Instead, it presented Atty. Jonathan Jocom to prove that the two were assisted by counsel when
    they made their confessions. Similarly, the prosecution presented MTC Judge George Omelio who
    attested to the due and voluntary execution of the sworn statements by the Malita brothers.

    Issue: Whether or not the accused-appellant is guilty of the crime of parricide

    Ruling: Accused-appellant must be acquitted.

    In indicting accused-appellant, the prosecution relied heavily on the affidavits executed by Reynaldo and
    Eddie. The two brothers were, however, not presented on the witness stand to testify on their extra-
    judicial confessions. The failure to present the two gives these affidavits the character of hearsay. It is
    hornbook doctrine that unless the affiants themselves take the witness stand to affirm the averments in
    their affidavits, the affidavits must be excluded from the judicial proceeding, being inadmissible hearsay.
    The voluntary admissions of an accused made extrajudicially are not admissible in evidence against his
    co-accused when the latter had not been given an opportunity to hear him testify and cross-examine
    him.

    You might also like