people v. cayat

7/21/2019 People v. Cayat

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/people-v-cayat 1/12

Republic of the Philippines

Court of Appeals

Manila

ELEVENTH DIVISION

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

- versus -

ERLINDA CAAT ! CORDERO,

Accused-Appellant,

CA-G.R. CR NO. 36104

Me"be#s$

VILLON, S.E., Chairpersn

%ALAMEDA, R&'&, an( CORALES, P&)&, JJ.

Proul!ate"#

Octobe# *+, *-.

/0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0/

$ E C I S I O N

VILLON, %.#

)efo#e 1s is an appeal- f#o" the Decision (ate( 2une *-, *-+*

#en(e#e( b! the Re3ional T#ial Cou#t 4RTC5, )#anch **, I"us, Ca6ite,

fin(in3 accuse(0appellant E#lin(a Ca!at ! Co#(e#o 4o# 77appellant85

3uilt! be!on( #easonable (oubt of Homicide in C#i"inal Case No& -9:0

;, (isposin3 as follo<s$

77=HEREFORE, in 6ie< of the fo#e3oin3, the Cou#t fin(saccuse( ERLINDA CAAT ! CORDERO >1ILT be!on(

#easonable (oubt of the c#i"e of HOMICIDE an( is he#eb!

sentence( to a p#ison te#" of ten 4-5 !ea#s of prision mayor,

as minimum, to se6enteen 4-:5 !ea#s an( fou# 4;5 "onths of

reclusion temporal, as maximum. She is also o#(e#e( to pa! the

hei#s of ALFREDO L& )ANDOLA P.,& as (eath in(e"nit!&

SO ORDERED&77

Appellant <as in(icte( fo# Homicide (efine( an( penali?e( un(e#

Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended , in an Info#"ation

1 Records, p. 237

2 Rollo, pp. 63-71



CA-G.R. CR NO. 36104 2

DECISION

(ate( Feb#ua#! *@, *;+

, the accusato#! po#tion of <hich #ea(s$

77That on o# about the *th (a! of 2anua#! *;, in the

Municipalit! of Das"a#ias, P#o6ince of Ca6ite, a place <ithin the

Bu#is(iction of this Hono#able Cou#t, accuse( ERLINDA CAAT !

CORDERO conspi#in3, confe(e#atin3 an( "utuall! helpin3 <ith

anothe# <hose i(entit! an( <he#eabouts is still unno<n, then

a#"e( <ith a nife <ith intent to ill, (i( then an( the#e, <illfull!,

unla<full! an( feloniousl! attac an( stab ALFREDO )ANDOLA !

LOPE%, inflictin3 upon the latte# stab <oun(s <hich cause( his

(eath, to the (a"a3e an( p#eBu(ice of the 6icti"7s hei#s&

CONTRAR TO LA=&77

1pon a##ai3n"ent on Ap#il *@, *;, appellant plea(e( not 3uilt!

to the offense cha#3e(&; The p#e0t#ial <as con(ucte( an( te#"inate( on

2une +, *;&. Then, t#ial on the "e#its ensue(&

The p#osecution p#esente( the follo<in3 <itnesses$ 4-5 Barangay

anod Ro3elio Ca#(ines 4o# 77Ca#(ines775 4b5 Barangay anod Robe#to

Roue 4o# 77Roue775, E#lin(a )an(ola 4o# 77E#lin(a775 an( 4(5 D#& Ro! A&

Ca"a#illo 4o# 77D#& Ca"a#illo775&

Ca#(ines testifie( that at a#oun( $ in the e6enin3 of 2anua#! *,

*;, he <as on (ut! at the !arangay outpost of San An(#es I,

Das"a#ias Cit! he <as inst#ucte( b! Chief Tano( %osi" A(!a# to

asce#tain if Tano( Alf#e(o )an(ola, <ill #epo#t fo# <o# he left the

!arangay outpost to loo fo# the 6icti" <hile he <as app#oachin3 the

basetball cou#t, he hea#( people a#3uin3 he steppe( insi(e the

basetball cou#t an( sa< the 6icti", about fi6e 4.5 steps a<a! f#o" hi",bein3 #epeate(l! attace( <ith a nife b! a fe"ale pe#son, <ho late#

tu#ne( out to be he#ein appellant, an( anothe# uni(entifie( "ale

pe#son the 6icti" t#ie( to fi3ht bac b! hittin3 appellant on the hea(

<ith a ni3ht stic o# 7"!atuta77 he <as able to clea#l! i(entif! the faces of

the 6icti" an( his attace#s because the basetball cou#t <as <ell lit

he i""e(iatel! <ent to the !arangay outpost to see help f#o" his

fello< !arangay tanod <hen the! a##i6e( the#eat, the! sa< the 6icti"

(#enche( in his o<n bloo( the! #ushe( hi" to D#& 2ose Ri?al Hospital,

but the 6icti" (ie( <hile #ecei6in3 "e(ical t#eat"ent&@

3 Records, p. 1

4 Records, p. 44

5 Records, p. 52-53

6 TSN d!ed "#l$ 11, 2006, pp. 4-14



CA-G.R. CR NO. 36104 3

DECISION

Roue (ecla#e( that at a#oun( $+ o7cloc in the e6enin3 of 2anua#! *, *;, <hile he <as at the !arangay outpost, he #ecei6e( a

#epo#t, 6ia a #a(io call, f#o" the 6icti" asin3 fo# help #e3a#(in3 a

stabbin3 inci(ent at the basetball cou#t he inst#ucte( his fello<

!arangay tanod Ra"on Espanol an( Sosin3 AbeBa# to 3o to the sai(

place to 6e#if! the #epo#t an( that <hen the! lea#ne( that it <as the

6icti" <ho <as stabbe(, the! b#ou3ht hi" to the hospital fo# "e(ical

assistance, but he <as late# p#onounce( (ea(&:

D#& Ca"a#illo, the "e(ico0le3al office# <ho con(ucte( the autops!on the 6icti", (ecla#e( that base( on his fin(in3s, the 6icti" (ie( f#o"

"ultiple stab <oun(s cause( b! the penet#ation of sha#p pointe( e(3e

inst#u"ent belie6e( to be a nife&9

The 6icti"7s <ife, E#lin(a, clai"e( that she ne< appellant fo# a

lon3 ti"e bein3 the (au3hte# of he# comadre# she <as a<aen b! he#

f#ien( <ho tol( he# about the stabbin3 inci(ent& She i""e(iatel! <ent

to the hospital but <as not able to see his husban( because he <as

al#ea(! insi(e the ope#atin3 #oo" he# husban( (ie( an hou# late# as

a #esult of he# husban(7s (eath, she incu##e( hospitali?ation an( fune#ale/penses&

Fo# the (efense, appellant an( D#& La"be#to Ca3in3in 4o# 77D#&

Ca3in3in775 testifie(&

Appellant (enie( the alle3ations a3ainst he#& She (enie( no<in3

the 6icti"& She fu#the# testifie( that at the ti"e of the inci(ent, she

<ent to the ba#an3a! hall to loo fo# he# si/teen 4-@5 !ea# ol( (au3hte#,

Au#a, <ho <as not !et ho"e she <ent to the basetball cou#t of Barangay San An(#es I an( II <he#e Au#a use( to han3 out <hen she

notice( that the fi#st 3ate of the basetball cou#t <as close(, she

p#ocee(e( to the othe# 3ate, about * "ete#s a<a! f#o" the fi#st 3ate

<hile insi(e the basetball cou#t, she sa< a silhouette of t<o 4*5

pe#sons <ho" she (i( not #eco3ni?e she hea#( the pe#sons a#3uin3

but coul( not un(e#stan( <hat <as it all about su((enl!, she <as

successi6el! hit at the hea( <ith a ni3ht stic o# 77batuta77 <hile bein3

beaten, she <as sc#ea"in3, ""Hu$ag po %u$ag po. &i po a'o 'ala!an.

Hina%anap 'o lang ang ana' 'o""# <hen the beatin3s stoppe(, the#e <asbloo( oo?in3 f#o" he# hea( she i""e(iatel! #an a<a! f#o" the a#ea,

felt (i??! an( she e6entuall! passe( out she #e3aine( consciousness

7 TSN d!ed "%#r$ 22, 200&, pp. 3-6

& TSN d!ed Apr'l 14, 200(, pp. 4 ) 6

( TSN d!ed Oc!o*er 4, 2004, pp. 3-&



CA-G.R. CR NO. 36104 4

DECISION

<hen she <as al#ea(! at D#& 2ose P& Ri?al Hospital late#, she <ent ho"eto tae a full #est at a#oun( 9$ o7cloc in the "o#nin3 of 2anua#! *-,

*;, !arangay officials ca"e to he# house an( in6ite( he# fo#

cla#ification about the stabbin3 inci(ent the othe# ni3ht an( that

appellant <as b#ou3ht (i#ectl! to the police station <he#e she <as

i""e(iatel! (etaine(&-

D#& Ca3in3in t#eate( appellant <ho suffe##e( f#o" se6e#al <oun(s

in the hea( cause( b! sha#p o# blunt obBects& His fin(in3s <e#e$

77ce#eb#al concussion ;G, contusion, lace#ate( <oun(, occipital a#eaan( left f#ontal a#ea&77--

Afte# (ue p#ocee(in3s, the RTC #en(e#e( the assaile( Decision&

Hence, this appeal ancho#e( on the follo<in3 assi3ne( e##o#s-*$

I. &'E &RIAL CO(R& ERRE$ IN )IN$ING &'E G(IL& O)

APPELLAN& *E+ON$ REASONA*LE $O(*& $ESPI&E &'E

LAC AN$OR INS())ICIEN& EVI$ENCE )OR &'E

PROSEC(&ION RELA&ING &O &'E EIS&ENCE O) -

A. CORP(S $ELIC&I C(/ POSI&IVE I$EN&I)ICA&ION

O) APPELLAN& AS &'E ALLEGE$ ASSAILAN&.

*. INCO/PE&EN&, CON%EC&(RAL SEL)-SERVING AN$

INCONSIS&EN& &ES&I/ONIES SIGNI)ICAN&L+

A))EC&ING CRE$I*ILI&+ O) PROSEC(&ION

I&NESSES.

II. &'E &RIAL CO(R& ERRE$ IN NO& APPRECIA&ING VIA*LE$ENIAL NO IN&EN& NOR /O&IVE OR REASON &O ILL &'E

$ECEASE$ &RANS)OR/ING &O A S&RONG AN$ VALI$

$E)ENSE )AVORA*LE &O APPELLAN&.

III. &'E &RIAL CO(R& ERRE$ IN NO& )ILING 2s5 &'A&

/IRAN$A RIG'&S O) &'E ACC(SE$-APPELLAN& ERE

VIOLA&E$ 'EN &'E LA&&ER AS (NLA)(LL+ $E&AINE$

A& &'E POLICE S&A&ION I&'O(& &'E LEAS& C(S&O$IAL

INVES&IGA&ION 'AVING *EEN CON$(C&E$.

The appeal is !ithut "erit#

10 TSN d!ed +rc 23, 2010, pp. 4-12

11 TSN d!ed Sep!e*er 20, 2011, pp. 4-7 +ed'co-/el Cer!''c!e, Records, p. 167

12 Rollo, p. 53



CA-G.R. CR NO. 36104 5

DECISION

Appellant atte"pts to #en(e# (oubtful, Ca#(ines7 i(entification of the 6icti"7s assailant& Acco#(in3 to appellant, the p#osecution faile( to

(esc#ibe the ph!sical att#ibutes of the uni(entifie( "ale pe#son <ho

<as alle3e(l! in the co"pan! of appellant th#ou3h ca#to3#aphic setch,

photo3#aph o# a (esc#ipti6e state"ent an( that (oubts about the

i(entit! of the assailant obtaine( si3nificance in #elation to the

conspi#ato#ial ho"ici(e, <hich "ust be p#o6en as the c#i"e itself&-+

Ca#(ines7 i(entification of appellant, as one of the pe#pet#ato#s, <as

positi6e an( #eliable, ha6in3 #eco3ni?e( he# (u#in3 the inci(ent& Hespotte( appellant an( he# "ale co"panion stabbin3 the 6icti" about

fi6e 4.5 steps a<a! f#o" hi" in a <ell0lit basetball cou#t&

Lie<ise, Ca#(ines (etaile( the acts (one b! appellant an( his "ale

co"panion (u#in3 the stabbin3 inci(ent, thus$

77$ =hat happene( ne/t <hen !ou hea#( the" a#3uin3

A$ =hen I hea#( that the#e <e#e people a#3uin3, I <ent to the

co6e#e( cou#t& An( <hen I <as the#e, I sa< E#lin(a <as attacin3

Alf#e(o&

$ Ho< fa# <e#e !ou <hen !ou fi#st sa< this E#lin(a attacin3

Alf#e(o

A$ Mo#e o# less fi6e steps a<a!&

$ =hen !ou sa< E#lin(a attacin3 Alf#e(o, <hat happene( ne/t

A$ I <as not able to (o an!thin3, <hat I (i( <as to #un to the

ba#an3a! outpost to as fo# help&

$ ou sai( that E#lin(a <as attacin3 Al#e(o, <hat e/actl! (i( she(o to attac Alf#e(o

A$ She <as stabbin3 Alf#e(o because (u#in3 the ti"e she <as <ith

so"eone& Alf#e(o t#ie( to fi3ht he# that is <h! he <as able to hit

E#lin(a on the hea(&

$ Ho< "an! ti"es, if !ou can #ecall (i( this E#lin(a stab Alf#e(o

A$ She stabbe( hi" "an! ti"es&

$ Can !ou (esc#ibe <hat (i( this E#lin(a use to stab this Alf#e(o

A$ )! a nife&/ / / / /

$ Du#in3 that ti"e that this E#lin(a <as stabbin3 Alf#e(o, <hat

<as this "ale (o, if an!

13 Rollo, p. 55



CA-G.R. CR NO. 36104 6

DECISION

A$ He <as also stabbin3 Alf#e(o&-;

A cate3o#ical an( st#on3 #ecollection of the fatal e6ent <as a bette#

in(icato# of the #eliabilit! an( accu#ac! of the <itness7 #ecollection than

its con3#uence <ith the ph!sical e6i(ence a((uce( at the t#ial& -. The

#esult of the post0"o#te" e/a"ination sho<in3 that the 6icti"

sustaine( "ultiple stab <oun(s confi#"e( Ca#(ines7 testi"onial

(ecla#ations about the 6icti" ha6in3 been #epeate(l! stabbe(&-@

It is <o#th! to note that appellant faile( to p#esent e6i(ence

sho<in3 that the p#osecution <itnesses ha#bo#e( an! ill0feelin3 to<a#(s

he# that coul( ha6e i"pelle( the" to testif! falsel! a3ainst he#& =he#e

the#e is nothin3 to sho< that the <itnesses fo# the p#osecution <e#e

actuate( b! i"p#ope# "oti6e, thei# positi6e an( cate3o#ical (ecla#ations

on the <itness stan(, un(e# the sole"nit! of an oath, (ese#6e full faith

an( c#e(ence&-:

Appellant a("itte( he# p#esence in the c#i"e scene but all that

she offe#e( in this appeal is (enial of co"plicit! in the c#i"e cha#3e(&

She fu#the# clai"e( that befo#e she <as clobbe#e( b! a ni3ht stic, the#e<as neithe# p#o6ocation no# a33#ession on he# pa#t befo#e, (u#in3 o#

i""e(iatel! afte# the stabbin3 inci(ent&

Denial (oes not p#e6ail o6e# an affi#"ati6e asse#tion of the fact&

Thus, cou#ts ha6e 3ene#all! 6ie<e( the (efense of (enial in c#i"inal

cases <ith consi(e#able caution, if not <ith out#i3ht #eBection& Such

Bu(icial attitu(e co"es f#o" the #eco3nition that (enial is inhe#entl!

<ea an( un#eliable b! 6i#tue of its bein3 an e/cuse too eas! an( too

con6enient fo# the 3uilt! to "ae& To be <o#th! of consi(e#ation at all,(enial shoul( be substantiate( b! clea# an( con6incin3 e6i(ence& The

accuse( cannot solel! #el! on he# ne3ati6e an( self0se#6in3 ne3ations,

fo# (enial ca##ies no <ei3ht in la< an( has no 3#eate# e6i(entia#! 6alue

than the testi"on! of c#e(ible <itnesses <ho testif! on affi#"ati6e

"atte#s&-9

As aptl! put b! the OS>$

77& & & & It bea#s pointin3 that onl! appellant an( D#& La"be#to

Ca3in3in testifie( fof the (efense, the fo#"e# to (en! he#

14 TSN d!ed "#l$ 11, 200&, pp. &-1015 eople s Del Cs!'llo $ rs, 663 SCRA 226

16 A#!ops$ Repor!, Records, p. 143-146

17 Ardo%'o s eople, 365 SCRA 57(

1& eople . e%s', 3&( SCRA 1&2



CA-G.R. CR NO. 36104 7

DECISION

in6ol6e"ent in the c#i"e <hile the latte# testifie( onl! to establishthe fact that he t#eate( appellant #i3ht afte# the inci(ent on the (a!

in uestion fo# hea( <oun(s& Hence, consi(e#in3 that D#&

Ca3in3in7s testi"on! "e#el! #efe##e( to (etails afte# the fact of the

stabbin3 an( (eath of the 6icti", <hich, inci(entall! co##obo#ate(

Ca#(ine7s sto#! that the 6icti" <as fi3htin3 bac usin3 a ni3htstic

thus the #eason fo# the <oun(s inflicte( on appellant7s hea( an(

bo(! (u#in3 the scuffle, <hat <as left fo# consi(e#ation of the t#ial

cou#t in te#"s of appellant7s pa#ticipation in the c#i"e co""itte(

<as the lone testi"on! of he#ein appellant <hich, as al#ea(!

state(, consists "e#el! of (enial e6en thou3h she ha( plainl!a("itte( to bein3 p#esent in the scene of the c#i"e at the ti"e the

stabbin3 of the 6icti" happene(&

77An( <hile appellant a6e##e( that she <as al#ea(! in the

place an( afte# she alle3e(l! hea#( t<o people ua##elin3 <ith one

of the" hittin3 he# hea( <ith an obBect that cause he# to lose

consciousness, appellant faile( to (isclose ho< she <as able to

#each the hospital (espite bein3 unconscious& Mo#e i"po#tantl!,

euall! bafflin3 in appellant7s 6e#sion of the sto#! <as the fact that

(espite suffe#in3 se#ious <oun(s in he# hea( an( s<ollen le3s an(a#"s f#o" the alle3e( beatin3, appellant (i( not file an! co"plaint

no# e6en "ae a #epo#t on the blotte# <ith the ba#an3a!

autho#ities o# the police station to #epo#t the #ep#ehensible acts

co""itte( a3ainst he# pe#son& To be su#e, if appellant t#ul!

belie6e( that she <as the 6icti" in this case, it is "o#e in eepin3

<ith the o#(ina#! an( no#"al cou#se of thin3s that an offen(e(

pe#son shoul( i""e(iatel! see Bustice b! #epo#tin3 to the

autho#ities the offense co""itte( a3ainst he# o# he# pe#son&

Appellant7s failu#e to (o so onl! "a3nifies the blatant fact that she

has so"ethin3 to hi(e f#o" the autho#ities an( that is he#un(eniable 3uilt fo# the illin3 of ba#an3a! tano( )an(ola&-

Assailin3 the Bu(3"ent of con6iction, appellant asse#te( that the

p#osecution <itnesses7 testi"onies a#e cha#acte#istic of hea#sa!, hence,

ina("issible as e6i(ence& 2u#isp#u(ence (ictates that <hen the

c#e(ibilit! of a <itness is in issue, the fin(in3s of fact of the t#ial cou#t,

its calib#ation of the testi"onies of the <itnesses an( its assess"ent of

the p#obati6e <ei3ht the#eof, as <ell as its conclusions ancho#e( on the

fin(in3s a#e acco#(e( hi3h #espect, if not conclusi6e effect&*

A3ain, <e fin( the OS>7s a#3u"ent to be <ell0taen, vi( $

1( Appellees r'e, Rollo, p. 106

20 Decs s Co#r! o Appels, 527 SCRA 267



CA-G.R. CR NO. 36104 &

DECISION

77Appellant7s a#3u"ents a#e pue#ile& 1nfo#tunatel!, cont#a#!to he# asse#tions, the inconsistencies, "entione( <e#e 6e#! "ino#

<hich, besi(es not bein3 ele"ents of the c#i"e, <oul( not affect

the cou#t7s fin(in3s that Ca#(ines pe#sonall! sa< the appellant

stabbin3 the 6icti" <ith a nife& The fact that afte# seein3 )an(ola

bein3 stabbe( b! he#ein appellant an( the latte#7s "ale co"panion

Ca#(ines i""e(iatel! tu#ne( bac to fin( help shoul( not be taen

a3ainst hi", fo# he "a! be co<a#(l! in not offe#in3 help to )an(ola

but this (oes not necessa#il! (ebun o# (isc#e(it his state"ents as

an e!e<itness to the c#i"e& Afte# all, his fleein3 the scene <as not

necessa#il! abno#"al o# out of the o#(ina#!, consi(e#in3 that the#e<e#e t<o assailants <ho <e#e both a#"e( <ith ni6es, <ho he

<oul( en( up facin3& Thus, it is un(e#stan(able <h! Ca#cines <ent

to fin( help instea( of Boinin3 the f#a! <he#e he <oul( #is inBu#!,

o# e6en loss of his o<n life& )esi(es, appellant a("itte( that she

has no ua##el <ith the e!e<itness Ca#(ines, hence, ill "oti6e

coul( not be i"pute( o# sho<n a3ainst this <itness to e/plain <h!

he <oul( falsel! testif! a3ainst appellant& In this #e3a#(, it is

settle( that absent an! e6i(ence sho<in3 #eason o# "oti6e fo# the

p#osecution <itnesses to pe#Bu#e thei# testi"onies, the lo3ical

conclusion is that no i"p#ope# "oti6e e/ists #en(e#in3 thei#testi"onies <o#th! of full faith an( c#e(it&

77As to the alle3e( i"p#obabilities #e3a#(in3 <h! the tano(s

alle3e(l! faile( to (#a< f#o" the 6icti" the (etails of the attac,

the sa"e is t#i6ial "atte# that shoul( be (is#e3a#(e( 3i6en the fact

that the inci(ent <as a shocin3 e6ent that coul( cause e6en

"atu#e "en lie ba#an3a! tano(s to be shoce( an( unable to

thin clea#l! so that the! co"pletel! fo#3ot to e/act info#"ation

#e3a#(in3 the (etails of the c#i"e f#o" thei# fallen co"#a(e& =hat

is #ele6ant a#e the testi"onies that the 6icti" )an(ola <as(isco6e#e( b! his fello< tano(s l!in3 bloo(ie( on the floo# of the

ba#an3a! hall an( that befo#e that ti"e, Ca#(ines pe#sonall! sa<

sai( 6icti" bein3 stabbe( <ith a nife b! the appellant to3ethe#

<ith the latte#7s uni(entifie( "ale co"panion& To be su#e, the

affi#"ati6e testi"on! of the e!<itness Ca#(ines is <o#th! of full

faith an( c#e(it pa#ticula#l! since sai( <itness testifie( in a can(i(

an( st#ai3htfo#<a#( "anne# an( <as cate3o#ical that it <as

appellant, to3ethe# <ith anothe# "ale pe#son, <ho" he sa<

hol(in3 a nife an( stabbin3 the 6icti" <ith it&77

Appellant conten(s that the p#osecution e6i(ence is insufficient fo#

his con6iction since the nife use( in the stabbin3 of the 6icti" <as not

p#esente(& Appellant fu#the# alle3e( that the p#osecution faile( to

e/plain <h! the <itnesses (i( not bothe# to #et#ie6e f#o" he# the nife

alle3e(l! use( in stabbin3 the 6icti" consi(e#in3 that she ha( al#ea(!



CA-G.R. CR NO. 36104 (

DECISION

lost consciousness afte# bein3 hit b! a ni3ht stic&

It is settle( that the non0i(entification an( non0p#esentation of the

<eapon actuall! use( in the illin3 (oes not (i"inish the "e#it of the

con6iction p#i"a#il! because othe# co"petent e6i(ence an( the

testi"onies of <itnesses ha( (i#ectl! an( positi6el! i(entifie( an(

inc#i"inate( appellant as the 6icti"7s assailant&*- In this case, the corpus

delicti <as establishe( b! the e6i(ence on #eco#(& The p#osecution

e!e<itnesses testifie( that appellant an( an uni(entifie( "ale

co"panion stabbe( the 6icti" <ith a nife& Thei# testi"onies on thee/istence an( use of <eapon in co""ittin3 the offense <as suppo#te(

b! the "e(ical fin(in3s of D#& Ca"a#illo <ho con(ucte( the post0

"o#te" e/a"ination& D#& Ca"a#illo foun( that the 6icti" sustaine(

se6e#al stab <oun(s cause( b! the penet#ation of sha#p pointe( e(3e

inst#u"ent belie6e( to be a nife& The#efo#e, the failu#e to p#esent the

<eapon use( in illin3 the 6icti" <as not fatal to the cause of the

p#osecution& Since the corpus delicti is the fact of the co""ission of the

c#i"e, e6en a sin3le <itness7 unco##obo#ate( testi"on!, if c#e(ible "a!

suffice to p#o6e it an( <a##ant a con6iction the#efo#& Corpus delicti "a!

e6en be establishe( b! ci#cu"stantial e6i(ence&**

Assailin3 the le3alit! of he# <a##antless a##est, appellant clai"s

that she <as i""e(iatel! (etaine( <ithout info#"in3 he# of he#

constitutional #i3hts an( <ithout necessa#! in6esti3ation an( that such

6iolation of he# #i3ht to (ue p#ocess #en(e#e( he# <a##antless a##est

an( subseuent inca#ce#ation unla<ful&

$e are nt cnvinced# An! obBection to the p#oce(u#e follo<e( in

the "atte# of the acuisition b! a cou#t of Bu#is(iction o6e# the pe#son of the accuse( "ust be oppo#tunel! #aise( befo#e he ente#s his plea

othe#<ise, the obBection is (ee"e( <ai6e(&*+ Appellant ne6e# obBecte(

to o# uestione( the le3alit! of he# <a##antless a##est o# the acuisition

of Bu#is(iction b! the t#ial cou#t o6e# he# pe#son befo#e she ente#e( he#

plea to the cha#3e& Instea(, she full! an( acti6el! pa#ticipate( in the t#ial

of the case& Conseuentl!, appellant <as (ee"e( to ha6e <ai6e( an!

obBection to he# <a##antless a##est& Appellant7s 6olunta#! sub"ission to

the Bu#is(iction of the t#ial cou#t the#eb! cu#e( <hate6e# (efects that

"i3ht ha6e atten(e( he# a##est& It bea#s st#essin3 that the le3alit! of thea##est affects onl! the Bu#is(iction of the cou#t o6e# he# pe#son& He#

21 eople s er%%de8, 3&5 SCRA 3&

22 'llr'% s eople, 656 SCRA 500

23 S$ s eople, 655 SCRA 3(5



CA-G.R. CR NO. 36104 10

DECISION

<a##antless a##est cannot, b! itself, be the bases of he# acuittal&*;

Theille3alit! of the <a##antless a##est cannot (ep#i6e the State of its #i3ht to

p#osecute appellant <hen all othe# facts on #eco#( point to he#

culpabilit!& In(ee(, the ille3al a##est of an accuse( is not a sufficient

cause fo# settin3 asi(e a 6ali( Bu(3"ent #en(e#e( upon a sufficient

co"plaint afte# a t#ial f#ee f#o" e##o#& *.

As a last0(itch effo#t to e/culpate he#self f#o" c#i"inal liabilit!,

appellant i"plo#es the in(ul3ence of this Cou#t to a("it an( 3i6e

consi(e#ation to the 2u(icial Affi(a6it e/ecute( b! one Ri?al(! 1!Castillo*@ as the latte#7s (ecla#ation the#ein is ain to a ne<l! (isco6e#e(

e6i(ence&*:

The cou#ts <ill consi(e# as e6i(ence that <hich has been fo#"all!

offe#e(*9 as it is the (ut! of the t#ial cou#t to base its fin(in3s of fact an(

its Bu(3"ent onl! an( st#ictl! on the e6i(ence offe#e( b! the pa#ties& A

piece of (ocu"ent <ill #e"ain a sc#ap of pape# <ithout p#obati6e 6alue

unless an( until a("itte( b! the cou#t in e6i(ence fo# the pu#pose o#

pu#poses fo# <hich it is offe#e(&* The fo#"al offe# of e6i(ence allo<s

the pa#ties the chance to obBect to the p#esentation of an e6i(ence <hich"a! not be a("issible fo# the pu#pose it is bein3 offe#e(&

Co#olla#! the#eto, issues not #aise( in the cou#t a )uo cannot be

#aise( fo# the fi#st ti"e on appeal+ 0 fo# bein3 offensi6e to the basic

#ules of fai# pla!, Bustice an( (ue p#ocess&+- Points of la<, theo#ies, issues,

an( a#3u"ents not b#ou3ht to the attention of the t#ial cou#t ou3ht not

to be consi(e#e( b! a #e6ie<in3 cou#t, as these cannot be #aise( fo# the

fi#st ti"e on appeal& +*

In this #e3a#(, the p#esentation of the 2u(icial Affi(a6it of Ri?al(e

1! Castillo on appeal <ill not help appellant7s cause at all, since it <as

not offe#e( (u#in3 the t#ial an( this Cou#t has no <a! of asce#tainin3 the

e6i(ence consi(e#e( b! the t#ial cou#t&++

=e note that the RTC (i( not a<a#( actual an( "o#al (a"a3es&

24 eople s 9#, GR No. 20&170, A##s! 2(, 2014

25 eople s +%l#l#, 231 SCRA 701

26 Rollo, pp. 72-7327 Appell%!s r'e, Rollo, p.61

2& R#le 132, Sec!'o% 34 o !e R#les o E'de%ce

2( :es!o%! I%es!e%! Corpor!'o% . Aos . r%c', "r., e! l., 661 SCRA 7&730 S.C. +e;orld Co%s!r#c!'o% %d Deelope%! Corpor!'o% s rd, 705 SCRA 5&4

31 I%' s +e!ropol'!% %< ) Tr#s! Cop%$, 635 SCRA 357

32 Ros . 'l'pp'%e N!'o%l %<, 662 SCRA 47(

33 +ll'l'% s "esol'%, GR No. 1(271&, e*r#r$ 1&, 2015



CA-G.R. CR NO. 36104 11

DECISION

Mo#al (a"a3es also in the a"ount of P

.,& shoul( be a<a#(e( tothe hei#s of the 6icti"& Mo#al (a"a3es an( (eath in(e"nit! a#e al<a!s

3#ante( in ho"ici(e, it bein3 assu"e( b! the la< that the loss of hu"an

life absolutel! b#in3s "o#al an( spi#itual losses as <ell as a (efinite

loss&+;

Actual o# co"pensato#! (a"a3es a#e those a<a#(e( in

satisfaction of, o# in #eco"pense fo#, loss o# inBu#! sustaine(& +. The

#ei"bu#se"ent of actual (a"a3es in the total a"ount of P

++,+:9& fo#

hospital an( fune#al e/penses in this case is p#ope# as it is full!suppo#te( b! e6i(ence on #eco#(&+@

In confo#"it! <ith e/istin3 Bu#isp#u(ence, all (a"a3es a<a#(e(

shall ea#n inte#est at the #ate of @J pe# annu" f#o" the (ate of finalit!

of this Bu(3"ent until full! pai(&+:

'ERE)ORE, p#e"ises consi(e#(, the instant appeal is $ENIE$

fo# lac of "e#it& The assaile( Decision (ate( 2une *-, *-+ #en(e#e( b!

the Re3ional T#ial Cou#t )#anch **, I"us, Ca6ite in C#i"inal Case No&

-9:0; is A))IR/E$ <ith /O$I)ICA&ION.

Appellant is he#eb! fu#the# o#(e#e( to pa! the hei#s of the 6icti"

the a"ount of P++,+:9&, as actual (a"a3es an( P.,&, as "o#al

(a"a3es& The total a"ount of (a"a3es a<a#(e( shall ea#n inte#est at

the le3al #ate of @J pe# annu" co""encin3 f#o" the (ate of finalit! of

Bu(3"ent until full! pai(&

In all othe# #espects, the appeale( (ecision is he#eb! A))IR/E$&

SO OR$ERE$.

SESINAN$O E. VILLON

Associate 2ustice

34 eople s Os'%s, 567 SCRA 31(

35 +e%do8 s Spo#ses Goe8, GR No. 160110, "#%e 1&, 2014

36 E=s. !o I, Records, pp. 65-6&

37 eople s +%l'l', 704 SCRA 305



CA-G.R. CR NO. 36104 12

DECISION

E CONC(R#

RO$IL V. ALA/E$A PE$RO *. CORALES

Associate 2ustice Associate 2ustice

C E R & I ) I C A & I O N

Pu#suant to A#ticle 'III, Section -+ of the Constitution, it is he#eb!

ce#tifie( that the conclusions in the abo6e (ecision <e#e #eache( in

consultation befo#e the case <as assi3ne( to the <#ite# of the opinion of

the Cou#t&

SESINAN$O E. VILLON

Associate 2ustice Chai#pe#son, Ele6enth Di6ision

people v. cayat

Documents