Appellant and his co-accused Jeneto Serencio (Serencio) were charged
before the RTC of Lingayen, Pangasinan, Branch 39 with murder as follows:
That on or about
10:45 o'clock in the morning of December 16, 2007, in Poblacion East, Sual,
Pangasinan and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused, conspiring and confederating with each other with treachery and with
intent to kill, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously
attack, and shot Clarita Disu several times, inflicting upon her several
gunshot wounds which [caused] her instantaneous death, to the damage and
prejudice of her heirs.
Contrary to Article 248 of the
Revised Penal Code in relation to RA 7659 as amended.
The prosecution presented eyewitnesses Marbie S. Disu (Marbie) and
Loreto Inocencio (Loreto) , respectively the daughter and grandson of the
victim. Their testimonies established that in the morning of 16 December 2007,
the victim Clarita Disu and her daughter Marbie were tending their neighbourhood
variety store in Sual, Pangasinan with Loreto, when two (2) men on board a
motorcycle arrived. One dismounted the vehicle and bought a cigarette from
Marbie while the other stayed on the vehicle. The man who bought the cigarette
suddenly pulled a gun and pointed it to Clarita and shot her four (4) times.
Marbie shouted for help and ran to the fallen victim to help and embrace her.
The assailant, who had been wearing a yellow t-shirt, then boarded the
motorcycle and headed east. Marbie noted the motorcycle plate number as AR
3273.
During arraignment, appellant pleaded not guilty to the crime charged.
Serencio remains at large. Trial on the merits thereafter ensued.
1. What are the
elements of murder?
In the prosecution
of the crime of murder as defined in Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code
(RPC), the following elements must be established by the prosecution: (1) that
a person was killed; (2) that the accused killed that person; (3) that the
killing was attended by treachery; and (4) that the killing is not infanticide
or parricide.
2. The accused invoked
defenses of denial and alibi. Will the defense prosper?
The defenses of
denial and alibi as these cannot prevail over the eyewitnesses' positive
identification of him as the perpetrator of the crime. Denial, like alibi, if
not substantiated by clear and convincing evidence is negative and self-serving
evidence undeserving of weight in law.
3. Is the element of
treachery present in this case?
Yes.
The shooting of the
unsuspecting victim was sudden and unexpected which effectively deprived her of
the chance to defend herself or to repel the aggression, insuring the
commission of the crime without risk to the aggressor and without any
provocation on the part of the victim.
4. Discuss the weight
of the findings of the trial court on the credibility of witnesses?
Well-settled in our
jurisprudence is the rule that findings of the trial court on the credibility
of witnesses deserve great weight, as the trial judge is in the best position
to assess the credibility of the witnesses, and has the unique opportunity to
observe the witness first hand and note his demeanor, conduct and attitude
under gruelling examination.
5. Should the trial
judge who penned the Decision be the one to receive the evidence?
No.
The fact that the
trial judge who penned the Decision was different from the one who received the
evidence does not render the same erroneous. It is not necessary for a judgment
to be valid that the judge who penned the decision should actually hear the
case in its entirety, for he can merely rely on the transcribed stenographic
notes taken during the trial as the basis for his decision.
Absent any showing
that the trial court's findings of facts were tainted with arbitrariness or
that it overlooked or misapplied some facts or circumstances of significance
and value, or its calibration of credibility was flawed, the appellate court is
bound by its assessment.
Comments
Post a Comment