Republic of the Philippines SUPREME COURT Manila FIRST DIVISION G.R. No. 177763
July 3, 2013
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. GARY ERGARA y ORIEL !"# JOSEPH INOCENCIO1 y PAULINO, Accuse-Appellants. Accuse-Appellants.
D!"ISION LEONAR$O%$E CASTRO, J.:
#efo$e this "ou$t is an appeal of the Ma$ch %&, '&&( Decision ' of the "ou$t of Appeals in "A-).R. "R.-*.". No. &'%+(% affi$in ith oification the Decebe$ '/, '&&0 Decision 1 of the Reional T$ial "ou$t 2RT"3, #$anch 004, Pasa5 "it5 in "$i. "ase No. &0-&'(6, entitle People of the Philippines v. )a$5 Ve$a$a 5 O$iel alias 7)a$57 an 8oseph Inocencio 5 Paulino alias 78oseph, 7 finin accuse-appellants )a$5 Ve$a$a 2Ve$a$a3 an 8oseph Inocencio 2Inocencio3 uilt5 be5on $easonable oubt of u$e$ as p$incipal an accoplice, $espectivel5. $espectivel5. On Feb$ua$5 0%, '&&0, an Info$ation fo$ the c$ie of u$e$ 9ualifie b5 t$eache$5 as file aainst accuseappellants. On Ma$ch 0', '&&0, upon a$$ainent, accuse-appellants accuse-appellants pleae not uilt5 to the c$ie cha$e. 6 T$ial on the e$its ensue. The p$osecution establishe that at a$oun iniht of Feb$ua$5 0&, '&&0, accuse-appellants e$e causin a $uc:us on ;ibe$ta-"ola5co St$eets, Pasa5 "it5 b5 th$oin ate$ bottles at passe$s-b5. At At a$oun '<&& a.., the victi, Miuelito Alfante, ho as seeinl5 $un:, al:e on the st$eet. Ve$a$a app$oache Alfante an tol hi< 7Pa$e, u:han hih na hih :a.7 Alfante $eto$te< 7Anon pa:iala o=7 At this >unctu$e, Ve$a$a th$e his a$ a$oun Alfante?s shoule$, $eceive a :nife f$o Inocencio, an suenl5 stabbe Alfante. Ve$a$a then sai 7Taa $ito a:o.7 The$eafte$, Ve$a$a an Inocencio $an f$o the scene but e$e pu$sue b5 seve$al itnesses. Alfante, eanhile, as b$ouht to the Pasa5 "it5 )ene$al *ospital he$e he ie. 4 The autops5 $epo$t conucte on the caave$ of the victi $eveale that Alfante sustaine eiht stab ouns< five locate on the chest a$ea an th$ee on the left fo$ea$. The victi sustaine to fatal ouns< one hich seve$e the left vent$icle of the hea$t an anothe$ oun punctu$in the loe$ lobe of the left lun. The Autops5 Repo$t N&0-060( sine b5 D$. Doinic Abua, eico-leal office$ office$ of the National #u$eau of Investiation ho conucte the autops5, state that< "A@S! OF D!AT*< D!AT*< M@;T M@ ;TIP;! IP;! STA# O@NDS, "*!ST, ;!FT ARM. The coon-la ife of the victi, )ina Alfante ,+ testifie that she incu$$e the folloin eBpenses in connection ith the eath an bu$ial of Alfante< a3 P0(,&&&.&& fo$ the coffin 1
b3 P%,&&&.&& fo$ the nicho c3 P'6&.&& fo$ the ass 3 P06,&&&.&& fo$ foo an $in:s fo$ the a:eC an e3 P04,&&&.&& fo$ the bu$ial lot. )ina fu$the$ testifie that Alfante ha been o$:in as a ason p$io$ to his eath ea$nin P6&&.&& a a5./ In his efense, Ve$a$a enie the ve$sion of the p$osecution. *e testifie that on Feb$ua$5 0&, '&&0, at a$oun iniht, he an Inocencio ent to a convenience sto$e to bu5 salte es fo$ 7baon7 the folloin a5. hen the5 passe b5 ;ibe$ta co$ne$ "ola5co St$eets in Pasa5 "it5 to o to the (-00 convenience sto$e, the5 sa Alfante toethe$ ith nine othe$ pe$sons. "ont$a$5 to the testion5 of p$osecution itnesses, it as Alfante ho app$oache Ve$a$a, :nife in han an p$oceee to stab hi. *e as able to evae the attac: an $apple ith Alfante fo$ possession of the :nife an, in the cou$se of thei$ st$ule, Alfante sustaine his in>u$ies. Inocencio stoo b5 his sie fo$ the u$ation of the incient.0& The$eafte$, he fle the scene. *e ent to the nea$est police station an as subse9uentl5 b$ouht to the Ospital n Ma5nila fo$ t$eatent fo$ the in>u$5 on his $iht pal sustaine u$in the tussle.00 D$. Olive$ ;e5son, Meical Office$ III of the Ospital n Ma5nila, testifie to his eical eBaination an t$eatent of Ve$a$a?s in>u$5 cause b5 a blae eapon hich he sustaine on Feb$ua$5 00, '&&0. 0' Afte$ evaluatin the $espective evience of the contenin pa$ties, on Decebe$ '/, '&&0, the RT" foun accuseappellants uilt5 be5on $easonable oubt of the c$ie of u$e$ as efine une$ A$ticle '1+ of the Revise Penal "oe. The ec$etal po$tion of the Decision state< *!R!FOR!, in the liht of the fo$eoin p$eises an consie$ations, this "ou$t he$eb5 $ene$s >uent finin the accuse )AR V!R)ARA ORI!; alias )AR an 8OS!P* INO"!N"IO PA@;INO alias 8OS!P* both )@I;T as p$incipal an accoplice, $espectivel5, fo$ the c$ie of Mu$e$, as this felon5 is efine an penaliEe b5 A$ticle '1+ of the Revise Penal "oe, as aene b 5 R.A. (46/, an app$eciatin in favo$ of the accuse )a$5 Ve$a$a 5 O$iel alias )a$5 the itiatin ci$custance of volunta$5 su$$ene$ ithout an5 a$avatin ci$custance to offset the sae, the "ou$t he$eb5 sentences sai accuse )a$5 Ve$a$a 5 O$iel alias )a$5 to suffe$ the penalt5 of $eclusion pe$petua an the othe$ accuse 8oseph Inocencio 5 Paulino alias 8oseph to suffe$ an inete$inate penalt5 of ip$isonent $anin f$o !iht 2+3 ea$s an One 203 Da5 of P$ision Ma5o$, as iniu, to Fou$teen 2013 ea$s, !iht 2+3 Months an One 203 Da5 of Reclusion Tepo$al, as aBiu, an fo$ the to pa5, >ointl5 an seve$all5 the *ei$s of the ecease Miuelito Alfante the sus of Php60,'6&.&&, as actual aaes, Php0,&'&,&&&.&&, as inenit5 fo$ loss of ea$nins of the sae ecease, Php'6&,&&.&& as o$al aaes, plus costs 2sic3. 0% Accuse-appellants file thei$ notice of appeal on Feb$ua$5 6, '&&' to the Sup$ee "ou$t.01 The appeal as accepte b5 this "ou$t in its Resolution06 ate Septebe$ 1, '&&' but as subse9uentl5 t$ansfe$$e to the "ou$t of Appeals pu$suant to People v. Mateo.04 As in the "ou$t of Appeals, accuse-appellants challene the cou$t a 9uo?s finin of uilt be5on $easonable oubt. The5 ave$$e that the eleents of the c$ie of u$e$ e$e not p$oven. 0( On Ma$ch %&, '&&(, the "ou$t of Appeals affi$e ith oification as to the aa$ of aaes the Decision of the RT". The "ou$t of Appeals thus ispose of the appeal in the folloin anne$< 2
*!R!FOR!, p$eises consie$e the Decision ate Decebe$ '/, '&&0, of the Reional T$ial "ou$t 2RT"3, National "apital 8uicial Reion, #$anch 004, Pasa5 "it5 is AFFIRM!D ith MODIFI"ATION in that the accuse-appellants a$e >ointl5 an seve$all5 hel liable to pa5 the hei$s of the victi, to the eBclusion of his coon-la-ife, the folloin aount, to it< a. P6&,&&&.&& as civil inenificationC b. P6&,&&&.&& as o$al aaesC an c. P60,'6&.&& as actual aaes.0+ *ence, this appeal.0/ Accuse-appellants? confineent as confi$e b 5 the #u$eau of "o$$ections on Ap$il 00, '&&(.'& The appellee'0 anifeste that it oul not file a suppleental b$ief. On Ma5 0%, '&&+, accuse-appellant 8oseph P. Inocencio file a otion to ith$a his appeal statin that he is no lone$ inte$este to pu$sue an appeal.'' This "ou$t, in a Resolution ate 8une '6, '&&+, $ante the otion of appellant Inocencio an ecla$e the case te$inate as fa$ as he is conce$ne. '% Due to the failu$e of accuse-appellant Ve$a$a?s counsel to file a suppleental b$ief, the "ou$t, in a Resolution ate Novebe$ 0/, '&&+, $esolve to ispense ith its filin.'1 e affi$ the Ma$ch %&, '&&( ecision of the "ou$t of Appeals ith oification $espectin the aa$ of aaes. The pe$tinent p$ovision in this case is A$ticle '1+ of the Revise Penal "oe, to it< A$ticle '1+. Mu$e$. - An5 pe$son ho, not fallin ithin the p$ovisions of A$ticle '14, shall :ill anothe$, shall be uilt5 of u$e$ an shall be punishe b5 $eclusion pe$petua to eath if coitte ith an5 of the folloin attenant ci$custances< 03 ith t$eache$5, ta:in avantae of supe$io$ st$enth, ith the ai of a$e en, o$ eplo5in eans to ea:en the efense o$ of eans o$ pe$sons to insu$e o$ affo$ ipunit5. 2!phasis ae.3 8u$isp$uence is consistent in $eite$atin that the t$ial cou$t is in a bette$ position to a>ue the c$eibilit5 of itnesses especiall5 if it is affi$e b5 the "ou$t of Appeals. '6 People v. "lo$es '4 $eins us that< hen it coes to the atte$ of c$eibilit5 of a itness, settle a$e the uiin $ules soe of hich a$e that 203 the Appellate cou$t ill not istu$b the factual finins of the loe$ "ou$t, unless the$e is a shoin that it ha ove$loo:e, isune$stoo o$ isapplie soe fact o$ ci$custance of eiht an substance that oul have affecte the $esult of the case, hich shoin is absent he$einC 2'3 the finins of the T$ial "ou$t pe$tainin to the c$eibilit5 of a itness is entitle to $eat $espect since it ha the oppo$tunit5 to eBaine his eeano$ as he testifie on the itness stan, an, the$efo$e, can isce$n if such itness is tellin the t$uth o$ notC an 2%3 a itness ho testifies in a cateo$ical, st$aihtfo$a$, spontaneous an f$an: anne$ an $eains consistent on c$osseBaination is a c$eible itness. 2"itations oitte.3
3
The $ationale fo$ these uielines is that, havin hea$ the itnesses theselves an havin obse$ve fi$sthan thei$ epo$tent an anne$ of testif5in une$ $uelin eBaination, the t$ial cou$ts a$e in a bette$ position to ecie the 9uestion of c$eibilit5.'( On the othe$ han, this "ou$t is fa$ etache f$o the etails an $aa u$in t$ial an $elies onl5 on the $eco$s of the case in its $evie. On the atte$ of c$eence an c$eibilit5 of itnesses, the$efo$e, this "ou$t aits to its liitations an ac:nolees the avantae of the t$ial cou$t hose finins e ive ue efe$ence. e see no nee to epa$t f$o the afo$estate $ules. A ca$eful $evie of the $eco$s $eveals that a ccuse-appellant Ve$a$a faile to neate the finins of the t$ial cou$t ith conc$ete evience that it ha ove$loo:e, isconst$ue o$ isapplie soe fact o$ ci$custance of eiht an substance that oul have affecte the $esult of the case. e a$ee ith the "ou$t of Appeals hen it state that< The eath of the victi, Miuelito Alfante, is i$ectl5 cause b5 the stab ouns inflicte b5 appellant Ve$a$aG hen he place his left a$ on the shoule$ of the victi an stabbe hi $epeatel5 in his chest an left fo$ea$ ith a :nife hane to hi b5 appellant InocencioG. This is an ove$helin evience, an in sta$: cont$ast, all appellant Ve$a$aG coul offe$ a$e enial an self-efense. Denial is an int$insicall5 ea: efense, hich the accuse ust butt$ess ith st$on evience of non-culpabilit5 to e$it c$eibilit5. *avin faile to satisf5, the enial ust necessa$il5 fail. '+ 2"itation oitte.3 Anent accuse-appellant Ve$a$a?s clai of self-efense, the folloin essential eleents ha to be p$ove< 203 unlaful a$ession on the pa$t of the victiC 2'3 $easonable necessit5 of the eans eplo5e to p$event o$ $epel such a$essionC an 2%3 lac: of sufficient p$ovocation on the pa$t of the pe$son $eso$tin to self-efense.'/ A pe$son ho invo:es self-efense has the bu$en of p$oof. *e ust p$ove all the eleents of self-efense. *oeve$, the ost ipo$tant of all the eleents is unlaful a$ession on the pa$t of the victi. @nlaful a$ession ust be p$ove fi$st in o$e$ fo$ self-efense to be successfull5 pleae, hethe$ coplete o$ incoplete.%& @nlaful a$ession is an actual ph5sical assault, o$ at least a th$eat to inflict $eal iinent in>u$5, upon a pe$son. In case of th$eat, it ust be offensive an st$on, positivel5 shoin the $onful intent to cause in>u$5. It 7p$esupposes actual, suen, uneBpecte o$ iinent ane$ - not e$el5 th$eatenin an intiiatin action.7 It is p$esent 7onl5 hen the one attac:e faces $eal an ieiate th$eat to one?s life.7%0 In the p$esent case, the eleent of unlaful a$ession is absent. #5 the testionies of all the itnesses, the victi?s actuations i not constitute unlaful a$ession to a$$ant the use of fo$ce eplo5e b5 accuse-appellant Ve$a$a. The $eco$s $eveal that the victi ha been al:in hoe albeit $un: hen he passe b5 accuse-appellants. *oeve$, the$e is no inication of an5 untoa$ action f$o hi to a$$ant the t$eatent that he ha b5 accuseappellant Ve$a$a?s hans. As succinctl5 state b5 the RT"< The victi as >ust al:in, he as neithe$ utte$in invectives o$s no$ p$ovo:in the appellants into a fiht. Appellant Ve$a$a as the unlaful a$esso$. *e as the one ho put the life of the victi in actual pe$il. This can be infe$$e f$o the ouns sustaine b5 the victi.7%' It is thus clea$ that the$e bein no unlaful a$ession on the pa$t of the victi, the act of accuse-appellant Ve$a$a of ta:in a :nife an stabbin the victi as not ae in laful self-efense. e also a$ee ith the RT" an the "ou$t of Appeals that the acts of accuse-appellant Ve$a$a constitute t$eache$5 9ualif5in the c$ie coitte to u$e$. As e have p$eviousl5 $ule upon, t$eache$5 is p$esent hen the offene$ coits an5 of the c$ies aainst pe$sons, eplo5in eans, ethos, o$ fo$s in the eBecution,
4
hich ten i$ectl5 an speciall5 to insu$e its eBecution, ithout $is: to the offene$ a$isin f$o the efense hich the offene pa$t5 iht a:e.%% *e$e, accuse-appellant Ve$a$a afte$ eBchanin o$s ith the victi, th$e his a$ a$oun the victi?s shoule$ an p$oceee to stab hi. The victi as totall5 unaa$e of the evil that oul befall hi. The nube$ an seve$it5 of the ouns $eceive b5 the victi inicate that he as $ene$e iobile an ithout an5 $eal oppo$tunit5 to efen hiself othe$ than feebl5 $aisin his a$ to a$ off the attac:. e, thus, sustain the t$ial cou$t an the "ou$t of Appeals in finin that the 9ualif5in ci$custance of t$eache$5 is p$esent in the coission of the c$ie. A$ticle '1+ of the Revise Penal "oe, as aene b5 Republic Act No. (46/, p$ovies fo$ the penalt5 of $eclusion pe$petua to eath fo$ the c$ie of u$e$. Thouh the$e as an app$eciation of volunta$5 su$$ene$ as a itiatin ci$custance, folloin the Inete$inate Sentence ;a, the RT", as affi$e b5 the "ou$t of Appeals, p$ope$l5 ipose the penalt5 of $eclusion pe$petua, pu$suant to A$ticle 4%, pa$a$aph ', of the Revise Penal "oe.%1 *oeve$, to confo$ to eBistin >u$isp$uence the "ou$t ust oif5 the aount of inenit5 fo$ eath an eBepla$5 aaes aa$e b5 the cou$ts a 9uo. Anent the aa$ of aaes, hen eath occu$s ue to a c$ie, the folloin a5 be $ecove$e< 203 civil inenit5 eB elicto fo$ the eath of the victiC 2'3 actual o$ copensato$5 aaesC 2%3 o$al aaesC 213 eBepla$5 aaesC 263 atto$ne5?s fees an eBpenses of litiationC an 243 inte$est, in p$ope$ cases. %6 e a$ee ith the "ou$t of Appeals that the hei$s of the victi as able to p$ove befo$e the t$ial cou$t, actual aaes in the aount of P60,'6&.&& base on the $eceipts%4 the5 subitte to the t$ial cou$t. 1âwphi1 e also a$ee ith the "ou$t of Appeals hen it $eove the RT"?s aa$ $espectin the inenit5 fo$ the loss of ea$nin capacit5. As e have al$ea5 p$eviousl5 $ule that< Daaes fo$ loss of ea$nin capacit5 is in the natu$e of actual aaes, hich as a $ule ust be ul5 p$oven b5 ocuenta$5 evience, not e$el5 b5 the self-se$vin testion5 of the io. #5 a5 of eBception, aaes fo$ loss of ea$nin capacit5 a5 be aa$e espite the absence of ocuenta$5 evience hen 203 the ecease is self-eplo5e ea$nin less than the iniu ae une$ cu$$ent labo$ las, an >uicial notice a5 be ta:en of the fact that in the ecease?s line of o$: no ocuenta$5 evience is availableC o$ 2'3 the ecease is eplo5e as a ail5 ae o$:e$ ea$nin less than the iniu ae une$ cu$$ent labo$ las.%( 2"itations an ephasis oitte.3 In this case, e a$e const$aine to uphol the $ulin of the "ou$t of Appeals since no ocuenta$5 evience as p$esente to butt$ess the clai fo$ the loss of ea$nin capacit5 of the victi as claie b5 his coon-la ife. Neithe$ as it shon that the victi as cove$e b5 the eBceptions entione in the above-9uote case. The "ou$t of Appeals state< Settle is the $ule that actual aaes, inclusive of eBpecte ea$nins lost cause b 5 the c$ie, ust be p$ove ith a $easonable e$ee of ce$taint5 an on the best evience to p$ove obtainable b5 the in>u$e pa$t5. The p$osecution faile to eet this c$ite$ia, no itness as p$esente to suppo$t the contention of the coon-la-ife of the victi that the latte$ is a self-eplo5e ason ea$nin P6&&.&& a a5. *ence, this "ou$t cannot $el5 on the unco$$obo$ate testion5 of the coon-la-ife of the victi hich lac:s specific etails o$ pa$ticula$s on the claie loss ea$nins.%+ 2"itation oitte.3 5
Mo$eove$, e ee it p$ope$ that an aa$ fo$ eBepla$5 aaes be ae. e have $ule as follos< @nli:e the c$iinal liabilit5 hich is basicall5 a State conce$n, the aa$ of aaes, hoeve$, is li:eise, if not p$ia$il5, intene fo$ the offene pa$t5 ho suffe$s the$eb5. It oul a:e little sense fo$ an aa$ of eBepla$5 aaes to be ue the p$ivate offene pa$t5 hen the a$avatin ci$custance is o$ina$5 but to be ithhel hen it is 9ualif5in. ithal, the o$ina$5 o$ 9ualif5in natu$e of an a$avatin ci$custance is a istinction that shoul onl5 be of conse9uence to the c$iinal, $athe$ than to the civil, liabilit5 of the offene$. In fine, $elative to the civil aspect of the case, an a$avatin ci$custance, hethe$ o$ina$5 o$ 9ualif5in, shoul entitle the offene pa$t5 to an aa$ of eBepla$5 aaes ithin the unb$ile eanin of A$ticle ''%& of the "ivil "oe. %/ 2!phasis oitte.3 e, thus, aa$ eBepla$5 aaes in the aount of P%&,&&&.&& to confo$ to eBistin >u$isp$uence.1& e inc$ease the aa$ fo$ anato$5 civil inenit5 to P(6,&&&.&& to confo$ to $ecent >u$isp$uence.10 ;astl5, e sustain the RT"?s aa$ fo$ o$al aaes in the aount of P6&,&&&.&& even in the absence of p$oof of ental an eotional suffe$in of the victi?s hei$s. 1' As bo$ne out b5 huan natu$e an eBpe$ience, a violent eath inva$iabl5 an necessa$il5 b$ins about eotional pain an anuish on the pa$t of the victi?s fail5.1% hile no aount of aaes a5 totall5 copensate the suen an t$aic loss of a love one it is nonetheless aa$e to the hei$s of the ecease to at least assuae the. In aition, an in confo$it5 ith cu$$ent polic5, e also ipose on all the oneta$5 aa$s fo$ aaes inte$est at the leal $ate of 4H pe$ annu f$o ate of finalit5 of this Decision until full5 pai.11 *!R!FOR!, the Ma$ch %&, '&&( Decision of the "ou$t of Appeals in "A-).R. "R.-*.". No. &'%+( is AFFIRM!D ith MODIFI"ATION. Appellant )a$5 Ve$a$a 5 O$iel alias 7)a$57 is foun )@I;T be5on $easonable oubt of u$e$, an is sentence to suffe$ the penalt5 of $eclusion pe$petua. Appellant is fu$the$ o$e$e to pa5 the hei$s of Miuelito Alfante the aounts of P60 ,'6&.&& as actual aaes, P(6,&&&.&& as civil inenit5, P6&,&&&.&& as o$al aaes, an P%&,&&&.&& as eBepla$5 aaes. All oneta$5 aa$s fo$ aaes shall ea$n inte$est at the leal $ate of 4oo pe$ annu f$o ate of finalit5 of this Decision until full5 pai. No p$onounceent as to costs. SO ORD!R!D. TERESITA J. LEONAR$O%$E CASTRO Associate 8ustice
! "ON"@R<
6
