New trial is a remedy that seeks to “temper the
severity of a judgment or prevent the failure of justice.” Thus, the Rules
allows the courts to grant a new trial when there are errors of law or
irregularities prejudicial to the substantial rights of the accused committed
during the trial, or when there exists newly discovered evidence. The grant
or denial of a new trial is, generally speaking, addressed to the sound
discretion of the court which cannot be interfered with unless a clear abuse
thereof is shown. This Court has repeatedly held that before a new trial may be
granted on the ground of newly
discovered evidence, it must be
shown (1) that the evidence was discovered after trial; (2) that such
evidence could not have been discovered and produced at the trial even with the
exercise of reasonable diligence; (3) that it is material, not merely
cumulative, corroborative, or impeaching; and (4) the evidence is of such
weight that it would probably change the judgment if admitted. If the alleged
newly discovered evidence could have been very well presented during the trial
with the exercise of reasonable diligence, the same cannot be considered newly
discovered (MANUEL YBIERNAS ET AL. VS. ESTER TANCO GABALDON ET AL., G.R. NO.178925, JUNE
1, 2011, NACHURA, J.).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.