Professional Documents
Culture Documents
~upreme Ql:ourt
:fflanila
SECOND DIVISION
PERLAS-BERNABE., J ,
Chairperson,
GESMUNDO,*
- versus - HERNANDO,
INTING, and
DELOS SANTOS JJ
Promulgated:
DECISION
HERNANDO, J.:
• Per February 19, 2020 Raffle vice Associate Justice Andres B. Reyes, Jr. who recused due to prior
participation in the Court of Appeals.
1
Rollo, pp. 2- 13; penned by Associate Justice Marlene Gonzales-Sison and concurred in by Associate
Justices Andres B. Reyes, Jr. (now a member of this Court) and Vicente S.E. Veloso.
2
Records, pp. 223-233; penned by Judge Reynaldo A. Alhambra.
--"
Decision 2 G.R. No. 191759
CONTRARY TO LAW.
3
Records, p. I.
4
Id. at 224, TSN, May 14, 2002, pp. 5-12.
5
TSN, September 10, 2002, pp. 4-20.
6
Records, pp. 11-16.
7
Id. at 224.
~
Decision 3 G.R. No. 191759
In the afternoon of the same day, the police received a call from Virgie
informing them that appellant, who fitted the description of the suspect, was
in the vicinity of his house. According to Virgie, she heard rumors that
appellant was responsible for the killing of Mijares. 8 Acting on Virgie's tip,
SPOl Olavario invited appellant to the police station for an interview
regarding the killing that transpired to which appellant acceded. 9 The police
officers then summoned Adelriza to the police station. Upon her arrival, she
positively identified appellant as the person who stabbed her husband. It was
only at this point that she learned of Moreno's name. 10
Appellant insisted that he never knew Mijares and he saw the victim for
the first time when he assisted in carrying him to the taxicab. During the time
of the incident, he was wearing a gray t-shirt and black pants contrary to
Adelriza's description of the clothes of her husband' s killer. However, he
could not impute any reason as to why Adelriza would ever testify against
him. 13
8
Id. at 18.
9
Id. at. 225.
10
Id. at. 224.
11
Id. at 225; TSN, September JO, 2002, pp. 4-20.
12
Id. at 227-228; TSN, December 2, 2003.
13 Id.
~v'\
Decision 4 G.R. No. 191759
SO ORDERED. 17
The trial court rejected appellant's defenses of alibi and denial; his
alleged lack of motive in committing the crime; his arguments that the
uncorroborated testimony of Adelriza was insufficient to convict him; and that
his identification outside a police line-up was irregular. Ultimately, the RTC
ratiocinated that the clear, positive and credible testimony of Adelriza that
appellant was the culprit sufficiently removed any reasonable doubt on his
guilt.
14
TSN, February I 0, 2004, April 20, 2004, October 4, 2004, January 11 , 2005, March 15, 2005 .
15
Records, pp. 46-47.
16
Id. at 223-233 .
17
Id. at 233.
18
Id. at 240.
19
Rollo, pp. 7-8.
20
Id. at 9.
... "'
Decision 5 G.R. No. 191759
inherently weak as he failed to prove that it was physically impossible for him
to have been present at the scene of the crime. The appellate court disregarded
the argument that he was illegally arrested because the objection was not
raised before arraignment and was deemed waived. In sum, the CA did not
depart from the trial court's ruling. The dispositive portion of the appellate
court's Decision stated:
SO ORDERED. 21
Aggrieved, appellant brought the case before Us, raising the same
arguments he had at the CA.
Issue
Appellant raised the sole error: The trial court has committed a serious
reversible error when it pronounced the guilt of the appellant on the
supposition that the quantum of proof constitutionally required to sustain a
conviction was proven. 22
Appellant claims that the trial court erred in ruling that the positive
testimony of the prosecution's witness prevailed over his defense of alibi. He
alleges that contrary to the conclusion of the trial court, his defense was not at
all an alibi to account his whereabouts, rather it was an attestation of his plain
denial of the crime charged. 23 He asserts that there were inconsistencies and
inaccuracies in the uncorroborated testimony of the eyewitness that tarnished
its veracity and diminished its probative value to prove his guilt. 24
21
Id. at 12.
22
Id. at 62.
23 Id.
24
Id. at 63-64.
-1
Decision 6 G.R. No. 191759
25
People v. Mat-an, G.R. No. 215720, February 2 I, 2018, 856 SC RA 282, 295.
26
People v. Pulgo, 81 3 Phil. 205, 2 19 (20 I 7), citing People v. Aquino, 724 Phil. 739, 755 (2014).
27 People v. Aquino, id. 754.
28
Records, pp. 227-228; TSN, December 2, 2003.
29
Rollo, p. I 0.
30
Records, pp. 228-229.
31 Id.
32
People v. Nelmida, 694 Phil. 529, 564-565 (20 12).
33
Rollo, pp. 65-68.
34
Id. at 67.
--lit
Decision 7 G.R. No. 191759
a testimony on the very material and significant point bearing on the very act
of the perpetrator. As long as the testimonies of the witnesses corroborate one
another on material points, minor inconsistencies therein cannot destroy their
credibility. Inconsistencies on minor details do not undermine the integrity of
a prosecution witness. 35 Here, it remains that Adelriza was able to
categorically identify the appellant as the very culprit of the crime.
Appellant also points out that his physical appearance varies from the
description given by Adelriza of her husband's assailant. He argues that such
contradictory observation proves the unreliability of Adelriza's testimony and
provides reasonable doubt on his guilt. 39
35
People v. Mat-an, supra note 25 at 295.
36
Peoplev. Alviz, 703 Phil. 58, 71-72 (20 13).
37
402 Phil. 547 (2001).
38
Id. at 565-566.
39
Rollo, pp. 64-66.
40
People v. Aquino, 385 Phil. 887, 904 (2000).
41
Rollo, p. 8.
-:,f\
Decision 8 G.R. No. 191759
42
Id. at 72-77.
43
Id. at 9.
44
319Phil. 128(1995).
45
Id. at 180.
-I\
Decision 9 G.R. No. 191759
-"
Decision 10 G.R. No. 191759
arising from the defense which the offended party might make. 52 In order for
the qualifying circumstance of treachery to be appreciated, the following
requisites must be shown: (1) the employment of means, method, or manner
of execution that would ensure the safety of the malefactor from the defensive
or retaliatory acts of the victim, and (2) the means, method, or manner of
execution was deliberately or consciously adopted by the offender. 53 The
essence of treachery is a deliberate and sudden attack, affording the hapless,
unarmed and unsuspecting victim no chance to resist or to escape. 54
Apropos to this is the case of People v. Go-od, where even the fact
that a victim was able to stab one of his assailants was held as not
negating the presence of treachery:
52
Revised Penal Code, Article 14(16).
53
People v. Amara, 748 Phil. 608, 621.(2014).
54
People v. Warriner, 736 Phil. 425, 436 (2014).
55
455 Phil. 320 (2003).
56
Id. at 333 .
-I\
Decision 11 G.R. No. 191759
In People v. Jugueta, 60 this Court held that for crimes like murder where
the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, the nature and amount of damages
that may be awarded are: P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral
damages, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages, among others.61
57
Records, p. 3 1.
58 Id. at 233 .
59
People v. Dadao, 725 Phil. 298, 3 15-316(2014).
60
783 Phil. 806 (2016).
61
Id. at 848.
62
Previous jurisprudence pegs the amount of P25,000.00 as temperate damages in murder cases. This
amount was increased to P50,000.00 in the prevailing case of People v. Jugueta (supra note 60).
63
People v. Racal, 817 Phil. 665, 685-686 (2017).
"'1\
Decision 12 G.R. No. 191759
In the present case, Mijares' heirs were able to prove, and were awarded,
actual damages in the amount of P31,500.00. 64 Since, prevailing
jurisprudence now fixes the amount of P50,000.00 as temperate damages in
cases where the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua, this Court finds it
proper to award temperate damages to Mijares' heirs, in lieu of actual damages.
Considering too that Mijares' heirs spent for attorney' s fees to prosecute
the case against the appellant, the award of PS0,000.00 is sustained. 65 Article
2208 of the Civil Code66 enumerates the legal grounds warranting the grant
of attorney's fees and expenses of litigation, and this case qualifies since
exemplary damages are awarded and the Court deems it just and equitable
that attorney's fees be recovered. 67
Here, it was sufficiently established that the victim, at the time of his
death, was 32 years old and was employed as a bookkeeper at the Philippine
Amusement and Gaming Corp. with a monthly basic salary of P7,182.00 or
P86,1 84.00 in a year.69 We thus apply the formula for loss of income capacity
in this wise:
64 Records, p. 232.
65 Id.
66
Art. 2208. In the absence of stipulation, attorney's fees and expenses of lit igation, other than j udicial costs,
cannot be recovered, except:
(I) When exemplary damages are awarded;
xxxx
( 11) In any other case where the court deems it j ust and equitable that attorney's fees and expenses of
litigat ion should be recovered.
In all cases, the attorney' s fees and expenses of litigation must be reasonable.
67
Lim v. Tan, 80 I Phil. 13, 25 (2016).
68
National Power Corp. v. Heirs ofNoble Casionan, 592 Phil. 451 , 465-467 (2008), cit ing Lambert v.
Heirs ofR ay Castillon, 492 Phil. 384, 392-393 (2005).
69
Folder of Exhibits, Exh. " R."
-~
Decision 13 G.R. No. 191759
Finally, all damages awarded shall earn six percent (6%) interest per
annum from the date of finality of this Decision until full payment.
All damages awarded shall then earn six percent (6%) interest per
annum from the date of finality of this Decision until full payment.
-t(
Decision 14 G.R. No. 191759
SO ORDERED.
-~ '
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
Ji O'l,; ~
ESTELA ivf.PERLAS-BERNABE
Senior Associate Justice
Chairperson
,,,----
HEN LB. INTING
~
EDGARDO L. DELOS SANTOS
Associate Justice
CERTIFICATION
u/J, 'lvvw/
ESTELA Mr FERLAS-BERNABE
Acting Chief Justice*