You are on page 1of 1

Adzuara v. CA (G.R. No.

125134, January 22, 1999)


Petitioner Adzuara, then a law student with his friends were cruising along the Quezon Avenue at 40kwh
when they collided with the vehicle driven by Gregorio Martinez, who's had his daughter Sahlee with
him on the passenger's seat. The collision caused both vehicles to be thrown 20 meters away from the
point of impact, damaging the vehicles and sustaining injuries to Sahlee who who was confined to the
hospital. Both claimed that their lanes had green traffic light.
Petitioner was found guilty by RTC.The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court. Hence
this appeal.


Whether or not the court erred in convicting the petitioner absent factual circumstances warranting

Whether the medical certificate by itself and unsubstantiated by the doctor's testimony creates doubt
as to the existence of the injuries complained of thus be admitted as evidence


No, the Court finds that he defense version cannot prevail against the prosecution version satisfactorily
demonstrating that the subject accident occurred because of Xerxes' reckless imprudence consisting in
his paying no heed to the red light. Gregorio Martinez testified that when the traffic light for his light
was green while it was red for the lane of the Pertitioner's. This is the same basic version as he gave to
the police on the day of the incident. Certainly, the clear consistency of Gregorio's posture respecting
such crucial, nay decisive, material circumstance attending the subject accident underscores the veracity
of the prosecution version, even as it tends to indicate the scant measure of faith and credence that can
be safely reposed on the defense version. Other than his testimony was corroborated by Sahlee, these
declarations were confirmed by physical evidence: the resulting damage on Gregorio's car as shown by
exhibits A, A-1 and A-2. The dent on the main frame of Gregorio's car attests to the strong impact
caused by appellant's car. Such impact proves that appellant must have been running at high speed and
was negligent when upon seeing Martinez car, Petitioner did not stop, as it had the last clear chance to
avoid the accident which he ignored.

No, the fact that there were no actual testimony of the physician who issued the medical certificate can
still be presented as having probative value insofar as the physical injuries are concerned. The fact of the
injury resulting from the collision may be proved in other ways such as the testimony of the injured
person. In the case at bar, Sahlee Martinez testified that her injuries as described in the medical
certificate were caused by the vehicular accident of 17 December 1990, this was further corroborated
by Gregorio, thus, no less is convincing proof.