Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 28 views

    Case Name: People vs. Gueron GR No. L-29365 Date: 25 March 1983 By: Tangonan Topic: Exceptions To Hearsay Rule - Facts

    Uploaded by

    Julius Geoffrey Tangonan
    The Supreme Court ruled that the trial court did not err in admitting the affidavit of Dalmacio as evidence against Teodoro Gueron and Emilio Magno, who were found guilty of Dalmacio and Bonifacio's double murder. While no witnesses directly saw the assailants shoot the victims, Dalmacio's affidavit identifying Gueron and Magno as the shooters before he died was admissible under the exceptions to the hearsay rule for dying declarations and res gestae. The Court found that Dalmacio made the statement while the startling event was occurring and under consciousness of impending death, making it admissible under the exceptions.

    Copyright:

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

    Case Name: People vs. Gueron GR No. L-29365 Date: 25 March 1983 By: Tangonan Topic: Exceptions To Hearsay Rule - Facts

    Uploaded by

    Julius Geoffrey Tangonan
    28 views1 page
    The Supreme Court ruled that the trial court did not err in admitting the affidavit of Dalmacio as evidence against Teodoro Gueron and Emilio Magno, who were found guilty of Dalmacio and Bonifacio's double murder. While no witnesses directly saw the assailants shoot the victims, Dalmacio's affidavit identifying Gueron and Magno as the shooters before he died was admissible under the exceptions to the hearsay rule for dying declarations and res gestae. The Court found that Dalmacio made the statement while the startling event was occurring and under consciousness of impending death, making it admissible under the exceptions.

    Original Description:

    a

    Original Title

    127. People vs. Gueron

    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 Supreme Court ruled that the trial court did not err in admitting the affidavit of Dalmacio as evidence against Teodoro Gueron and Emilio Magno, who were found guilty of Dalmacio and Bonifacio's double murder. While no witnesses directly saw the assailants shoot the victims, Dalmacio's affidavit identifying Gueron and Magno as the shooters before he died was admissible under the exceptions to the hearsay rule for dying declarations and res gestae. The Court found that Dalmacio made the statement while the startling event was occurring and under consciousness of impending death, making it admissible under the exceptions.

    Copyright:

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

    Case Name: People vs. Gueron GR No. L-29365 Date: 25 March 1983 By: Tangonan Topic: Exceptions To Hearsay Rule - Facts

    Uploaded by

    Julius Geoffrey Tangonan
    The Supreme Court ruled that the trial court did not err in admitting the affidavit of Dalmacio as evidence against Teodoro Gueron and Emilio Magno, who were found guilty of Dalmacio and Bonifacio's double murder. While no witnesses directly saw the assailants shoot the victims, Dalmacio's affidavit identifying Gueron and Magno as the shooters before he died was admissible under the exceptions to the hearsay rule for dying declarations and res gestae. The Court found that Dalmacio made the statement while the startling event was occurring and under consciousness of impending death, making it admissible under the exceptions.

    Copyright:

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

    Case Name: People vs.

    Gueron By: Tangonan


    GR No. L-29365 Topic: Exceptions to Hearsay Rule
    Date: 25 March 1983 Dying Declarations
    FACTS:
    The CFI found Teodoro Gueron and Emilio Magno guilty for the double murder of Bonifacio Dayoc and Dalmacio
    Batica.
    While Bonifacio was in a cockfighting pit, he then met an Emilio, who already was planning to form a gang.
    Bonifacio retorted that Emilio was just a newcomer tp the place and hes already planning to stir trouble.
    Eventuallu, a fight broke out, which later became a bolo fight. However, Emilio went back to his house and that ended
    the same fight.
    Later on, one day Bonifacio went work but never came home to his house.
    The next day, Bonifacios lifeless body and along with that of Dalmacio, who was alive but heavily injured by a
    gunshot. A number of witnesses declared that theys aw wither Gueron or Magno or as holding a gun, not none of them
    actualy saw the assailants to shoot the guns at the victims.
    The only witness that saw the accused shoot the gums came from Dalmacio.

    ISSUE/S: W/N the TC erred in admitting the affidavit of Dalmacio as evidence.

    RULING: NO
    Although considered as hearsay, it was considered admissible in evidence for forming part of the res gesta and for being a dying
    declaration.

    Sec. 36, R. 130 of the Rules of Court states that statements made by a person, while a startling occurrence is taking place or
    immediately prior or subsequent thereto, with respect to the circumstances therein, may be given in evidence as part of the res
    gestae. Whereas, Sec. 31, R. 130 provides that a declaration of a dying declarant, under consciousness of an impending death,
    may be received in evidence in a criminal case where his death is the subject of inquiry, as evidence of the casue and
    surrounding circumstances of his death. Thus, since Dalmacios statement fall under both exceptions, the TC didnt err in
    admitting his affidavit as admissible.

    You might also like