SECOND DIVISION

G.R. No. 187725 : January 19, 2011

BENJAMIN JESAVA, Petitioner, v. !EO!E O" #$E !$II!!INES, Respondent.
D E C I S I O N
NAC$%RA, J.:
Before this Court is a Petition for Review
1
cralaw on Certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Civil
Procedure, seeking the reversal of the Court of Appeals (CA !ecision
"
cralaw dated #cto$er 1%, "&&',
which affir(ed with (odification the decision
)
cralaw of the Regional *rial Court (R*C of +orsogon,
+orsogon, dated ,ove($er 1', 1--%, finding petitioner Ben.a(in /esalva alias Ben
+a$aw
4
cralaw (petitioner guilt0 $e0ond reasona$le dou$t of the cri(e of 1o(icide.
The Facts
#n +epte($er 11, 1--", the Chief of Police of +orsogon, +orsogon, filed a cri(inal co(plaint
5
cralaw for
2rustrated 3urder against petitioner. 2our da0s thereafter, or on +epte($er 15, 1--", the co(plaint
was a(ended, charging petitioner with the cri(e of 3urder, as the victi( 4eticia Alde(o
5
cralaw (4eticia
died on +epte($er 14, 1--".
%
cralaw After conducting a hearing on the $ail application of petitioner, the
3unicipal *rial Court (3*C of +orsogon, +orsogon, on !ece($er 1', 1--", granted hi( $ail.
'
cralaw #n
/anuar0 11, 1--), the 3*C reco((ended the filing of 3urder against petitioner, and then ordered
the trans(ittal of the records of the case to the Provincial Prosecutor of +orsogon.
-
cralawredlaw
*hus, petitioner was charged with the cri(e of 3urder in an 6nfor(ation
1&
cralaw dated /anuar0 "5, 1--),
which reads7 chanro$1esvirtwallawli$rar0
*hat on or a$out the -
th
da0 of +epte($er, 1--" in the 3unicipalit0 of +orsogon, Province of
+orsogon, Philippines, and within the .urisdiction of this 1onora$le Court, the a$ove8na(ed
accused, with intent to kill, taking advantage of superior strength, with treacher0 and evident
pre(editation with the use of (otor vehicle and during night ti(e, did then and there 9wilfull0:,
unlawfull0 and feloniousl0 attack, assault, (anhandle and use personal violence upon 94eticia:
Alde(o, inflicting upon the latter serious and (ortal wounds which directl0 caused her death shortl0
thereafter, to the da(age and pre.udice of her legal heirs.
C#,*RAR; *# 4A<.
<hen arraigned on 3arch 1, 1--), petitioner entered a plea of not guilt0 to the offense
charged.
11
cralaw*hereafter, trial on the (erits ensued. 6n the course of the trial, two var0ing versions
arose.
Version of the Prosecution
*he testi(onies of the prosecution witnesses are essentiall0 su((ari=ed $0 the #ffice of the
+olicitor >eneral (#+>, as follows7 chanro$1esvirtwallawli$rar0
6n the evening of +epte($er ', 1--", witness >loria 1a$oc, together with the victi( 4eticia Alde(o,
Ben.a(in /esalva (petitioner, ?log @$aldo,
1"
cralaw /o 3ontales and Ro(0 Paladin were at ,enaAs place
pla0ing (ah.ong. A certain 3rs. ?ncinas and Att0. Ali$anto were also there. At a$out 1& oAclock that
night, >loriaAs group left ,enaAs place and $oarded the 6su=u panel of petitioner. <ith the eBception
of /o 3ontales, the group proceeded to Bistro Christina to eat and drink. <hile >loria had softdrink,
4eticia drank two (" $ottles of $eer, and the rest consu(ed $eer and 92:undador until 117)& in the
evening.
After the0 ate and drank, the group, with the eBception of ?log @$aldo who flagged down a tric0cle,
once again $oarded petitionerAs 6su=u panel as it was usuall0 petitioner who drove the( ho(e. *he
victi( 4eticia Alde(o was seated at the front seat. Petitioner dropped Ro(0 Paladin at his house
first, followed $0 >loria, who resided so(e "& (eters awa0 fro( 4eticiaAs house. <hile at >loriaAs
house, petitioner wanted to drink so(e (ore $ut >loria told hi( to defer it until the neBt da0
$ecause the stores were alread0 closed. >loria then gave 4eticia three () sticks of $ar$ecue and
acco(panied her and petitioner at the gate. After petitioner and 4eticia $oarded the 6su=u 9panel:,
the for(er i((ediatel0 accelerated his car and went to the direction of 5
th
+treet instead of towards
%
th
+treet where 4eticiaAs house was situated.
At a$out 1"7"& earl0 (orning of +epte($er -, 1--", the group of +P#1 ?dgardo 3endo=a (+P#1
3endo=a of the +orsogon P,P 3o$ile Patrol +ection chanced upon petitionerAs 6su=u 9panel: in +t.
Rafael +u$division in 9#ur 4ad0As Cillage: #4C, Pangpang, +orsogon. *he police patrol tea(
approached the vehicle and +P#1 3endo=a focused a flashlight at the front portion of the vehicle to
check what was going on. *here, +P#1 3endo=a saw petitioner who( he knew since childhood
seated in front of the wheel so he called out his na(e. 6nstead of heeding his call, however,
petitioner did not respond, i((ediatel0 started the engine and sped awa0 toward +orsogon town
proper which is directl0 opposite his place of residence which is *icol, +orsogon, +orsogon.
At a$out the sa(e ti(e that night, ,oel #l$es, a driver for the 3C+* +isters holding office at the
BishopAs Co(pound in +orsogon, +orsogon, was also in #4C Pangpang. <hile he was walking fro( a
certain 4eaAs house, he saw a wo(an naked fro( the waist down and l0ing on her $ell0 on the
highwa0. 1er .eans and 9pant0: were $eside her. Because it was raining, #l$es pitied her so he
carried her and her things to the shed so(e 1& (eters awa0. As he was doing so, a tric0cle $eing
driven $0 ?duardo !e Cera focused its headlight in his direction. !e Cera called out, D<hat is thatED
Because he received no response fro( ,oel #l$es, he decided to $ring his passenger ho(e first and
.ust co(e $ack to check the site later.
3eanwhile, upon reaching the shed, #l$es noticed that the wo(an was $leeding that he even got
stained with her $lood. Afraid that he (ight $e i(plicated, he hurriedl0 left the wo(an at
1a=elwood such that when !e Cera ca(e $ack, he no longer found #l$es. !e Cera then proceeded
to the police station to report the incident to 9+P#1: Balaoro.
!e Cera, +P#1 Balaoro and +P#1 +incua eventuall0 returned to co($ the area $ut to no avail. #n
their wa0 $ack at a$out 1715 oAclock (sic in the (orning, the0 (et 4t. Caguia talking with ,oel
#l$es. !e Cera lost no ti(e in identif0ing hi( to $e the (an he saw with the wo(an. At this point,
#l$es ad(itted the allegation $ut professed innocence. 1e ad(itted he left the wo(an in 1a=elwood
where the police found her.
?ventuall0, #l$es was investigated $0 the police and was not released until the neBt da0. 1owever,
$ecause the evidence pointed to petitioner as the last person seen with the victi(, a search for hi(
was conducted. 1e DsurrenderedD at one (1 oAclock in the afternoon acco(panied $0 2iscal /ose
/a0ona, his first cousin.
1)
cralawredlaw
*he prosecution highlighted that, per testi(on0 of >loria 1a$oc, 4eticia disclosed to her that
petitioner was courting 4eticia. 1owever, 4eticia told petitioner that the0 should .ust re(ain as
friends $ecause she was alread0 (arried, and that she loved her handso(e hus$and.
14
cralaw 3oreover,
the prosecution asseverated that, at around 1"7"& a.(. of +epte($er -, 1--", while conducting
patrol in +t. Rafael +u$division,
15
cralaw together with other police officers, +enior Police #fficer 1 ?dgardo
3endo=a (+P#1 3endo=a, $0 using his flashlight, saw petitioner on $oard his vehicle alone. @pon
sight, petitioner i((ediatel0 started his vehicle and drove toward the town proper of +orsogon,
which was directl0 opposite his residence in *icol, +orsogon, disregarding +P#1 3endo=aAs
calls.
15
cralaw 4astl0, at a$out 17&& p.(. of +epte($er -, 1--", petitioner, together with his first cousin
2iscal /ose /a0ona (2iscal /a0ona, went to the police station, wherein he voluntaril0 inti(ated to
+P#4 <illia( !esder (+P#4 !esder that 4eticia .u(ped out of his vehicle.
1%
cralaw At a$out 17"& p.(. of
+epte($er -, 1--", +P#" ?nriFue Renoria, together with other police officers, 2iscal /a0ona, and
petitioner inspected the place, which petitioner identified as the place where he and 4eticia sat.
*he0 found $loodstains thereat.
1'
cralawredlaw
After the prosecution presented twelve (1" witnesses, the defense (oved for leave of court to file
de(urrer to evidence. #n 2e$ruar0 "1, 1--4, the defense filed $efore the R*C, Branch 51, its
!e(urrer to ?vidence,
1-
cralaw which the R*C, Branch 51, denied in its #rder
"&
cralaw dated /ul0 ', 1--4. #n
August 11, 1--4, the defense filed a 3otion
"1
cralaw for Reconsideration of the #rder dated /ul0 ', 1--4
and 6nhi$ition of Presiding /udge, which the prosecution opposed. *he Presiding /udge of the R*C,
Branch 51, voluntaril0 inhi$ited hi(self fro( taking an0 further action in the caseG
""
cralaw hence, the
case was re8raffled to the R*C, Branch 5". Acting on the pending 3otion for Reconsideration of the
defense, the Presiding /udge of the R*C, Branch 5", denied the sa(e and set the reception of
evidence of the defense.
")
cralawredlaw
Version of the Defense
6n his relativel0 short stint on the witness stand, petitioner denied that he killed 4eticia. 1e testified
that he did not have an0 reason to kill her, and that he had (an0 reasons wh0 he should not kill
her.
"4
cralaw*he prosecution (anifested that it would not conduct a cross8eBa(ination on the person of
petitioner as his testi(on0 was tanta(ount to pure denial.
"5
cralaw *o prove that there was a $roken chain
of circu(stantial evidence, the defense presented, as witness, ?duardo de Cera. *he CA
narrated7 chanro$1esvirtwallawli$rar0
1". E&uar&o &' V'ra declared that on +epte($er -, 1--" at a$out 1"7)& a.(., he was driving his
tric0cle en route to #4C, Pangpang, +orsogonG upon reaching the .unction of the national road or
highwa0, he saw a (an and a wo(an three (eters fro( the edge of the roadG he stopped his
tric0cle and focused the headlight of his tric0cle towards the twoG he saw the wo(an leaning on the
left ar( of the (an while the (an was on a sFuatting positionG he asked the( Dwhat is thatED and
did not get an0 responseG that the (an was hiding his face and saw little $lood on the clothes of the
wo(anG he saw the wo(an with clothes, a polo shirt and pantsG he decided to $ring ho(e his
passenger ho(e (sic first and then returned to the scene $ut found no one thereG he reported the
(atter to 9+P#1: Balaoro, who i((ediatel0 acco(panied hi( to the placeG the0 searched for the
(an and wo(an $ut the0 could not find the(G the0 checked the +orsogon Provincial 1ospital $ut
no$od0 had $een $rought thereG then the0 proceeded $ack to the .unction and later to the +orsogon
town properG upon reaching Baranga0 *ugos, the0 saw 94t.: Caguia talking with a (an, who( he
(!e Cera recogni=ed as the (an with the wo(anG 94t.: Caguia directed the (an to go to Police
+u$8+tation 1G at the police +u$8+tation 1, he ca(e to know the na(e of the (an 8 ,oel #l$esG he
saw $loodstains on #l$esA ar(s, hands, face and noseG the police interrogated hi( a$out it and he
replied that he .ust helped the wo(an.
#n cross8eBa(ination, he ad(itted that he has known 9petitioner: for a longti(eG and he has good
relationship with hi(G 9petitioner: was his $onds(an in Cri(inal Case ,o. -58)-'- for illegal
possession of firear(s and $ecause of this, he is inde$ted to hi( and he thus wants to repa0 his
gratitude to 9petitioner:G 9petitioner: reFuested hi( to $e a witness in the case.
"5
cralawredlaw
Relative to the su$seFuent events, the CA su((ari=ed the testi(onies of +P#1 ?duardo Balaoro
and ,oel #l$es (#l$es, as follows7 chanro$1esvirtwallawli$rar0
5. S!O1 E&uar&o Ba(aoro essa0ed that at around 17&& a.(. of +epte($er -, 1--", ?duardo !e
Cera reported to hi( at the Police +u$8+tation 1 that he saw a (an, who was in sFuatting position,
and a wo(an, who had $lood on the upper right $reast of her clothes, lean9ing: against the (an
and that after !e Cera $rought his tric0cle passenger ho(e, he returned to the site $ut he could not
find the two an0(oreG upon receiving the report, he (+P#1 Balaoro, together with +P#1 +incua
and !e Cera, proceeded to the diversion road, at the .unction going to the hospital and Pangpang,
+orsogon, +orsogon to investigateG the0 searched the place and went to the hospital $ut found
nothingG on their wa0 $ack, at around 1715 9a.(.: the0 saw ,oel #l$es talking with 4t. Caguia at
Baranga0 *ugosG !e Cera pointed to #l$es as the (an he saw with the wo(an at the crossing so
the0 $rought hi( to Police +u$8+tation 1 for investigationG #l$es told the( that he saw the wo(an
l0ing on the side of the road so he tried to lift her up $ut when he saw the tric0cle (!e CeraAs he
$eca(e afraid as he (ight $e i(plicated in the cri(e so he $rought her to 1a=elwood, which is five
(eters awa0 fro( the highwa0G at "7"5 a.(. the patrol tea( found 4eticia Alde(o, who( the0
found naked fro( the waist downG at the garage of 1a=elwoodG the0 found the long pants of the
victi( l0ing $eside her and noted that her pant0 was still on one of her kneesG the victi(As $od0
appeared to have $een laid downG the0 did not find an0 $lood in the garage eBcept where the
victi(As $od0 was found outside the garage, the0 saw the other pair of shoes of a wo(an and thick
$loodstainsG he (+P#1 Balaoro $rought #l$es to Balogo station and entrusted hi( to their
investigator.
%. No'( O()'* testified that he is a driver for the 3C+* +isters who are holding office at the
BishopAs Co(pound in +orsogon, +orsogonG that on +epte($er ', 1--%, he went out with his
friends !ann0, #ca and ?l0 in Al(endras to drink a $ottle of ginG at around 57)& p.(. he went to
downtown +orsogon and roa(ed around until 1&7)& p.(.G then he went to Baha0 Hainan and at
a$out 117&& or 117)& p.(., he went to Pena 2ast 2ood and took a $ottle of $eerG upon the invitation
of 4ea, he went inside Pena and drank another $ottle of $eerG he $rought 4ea to her ho(e at #4C,
Pangpang, +orsogon, +orsogonG fro( 4eaAs house, he walked and upon reaching the .unction of
#4C, he saw a wo(an l0ing on her $ell0 naked fro( the waist downG the wo(an was .ust uttering
guttural soundG her .eans and pant0 were .ust l0ing $eside herG taking pit0 on the wo(an and since
it was raining that night, he carried the wo(an to a near$0 shed in order that she would not $e run
over $0 (otor vehiclesG he also took the pant0 and the .eans to the shedG he noticed that a tric0cle
stopped for a while and focused its headlight on the( and proceeded on its wa0G when he laid down
the wo(an in the shed, he noticed that she was $leeding and he was stained with her $loodG after
seeing the $lood, he got scared and leftG he walked towards the +orsogon town proper and after
a$out fort08five (inutes, two police(9e:n apprehended hi( and $rought hi( to the police station
for investigationG while $eing investigated, he was not apprised of his constitutional rights and (ade
to sign the police $lotterG he was detained as he was a suspect for the in.uries of the victi(G after %
or ' hours, he was releasedG and he eBecuted a +worn +tate(ent and affir(ed its contents.
"%
cralawredlaw
!r. Antonio !ioneda, /r.
"'
cralaw and !r. <ilhel(ino A$rantes (!r. A$rantes testified on the in.uries
suffered $0 4eticia, which eventuall0 caused her death7 chanro$1esvirtwallawli$rar0
-. Dr. An+on,o D,on'&a* testified that he encountered on +epte($er -, 1--" a patient $0 the
na(e of 4eticia Alde(o, who was in co(atose stateG she sustained the following in.uries (1 severe
cere$ral contusionG (" ".5 c( punctured wound, occipital area () .5 c( punctured wound, parietal
left area9G: (4 (ultiple contusion he(ato(a antero lateral aspect deltoid left area9G: (5 contusion
he(ato(a )
rd
upper left ar(G (5 contusion he(ato(a left el$ow9G: (% a$rasion left el$ow9G: ('
he(ato(a, )
rd
left thigh9G: (- a$rasion right knee9G: (1& (ultiple confluent a$rasion right foot9G:
(11 contusion he(ato(a right hand9G: (1" a$rasion right el$ow9G: (1) contusion he(ato(a right
el$ow9G: and (14 skull8seg(ented fracture parietal $one with separation.
1e eBplained that the punctured wound in the occipital area (lower $ack of the skull was caused $0
a pe$$le which the0 recovered fro( said areaG the punctured wound on the parietal left area was
caused $0 a sharp o$.ect and (a0 have $een secondar0 to a fall on a rough surfaceG the first three
findings could also have $een caused $0 the punch (ade $0 the perpetratorG the fourth finding
could have $een caused $0 a $lunt instru(ent or a punch or a strong gripG the fifth and the siBth
findings could have $een caused also $0 so(e of the a$ove8(entioned (eansG the eighth finding
could have $een caused $0 a fall or ru$$ing on a hard o$.ectG the ninth finding could have $een
caused $0 a $lunt instru(ent or a fist $low while the tenth finding could have $een caused $0 a fall
on a rough o$.ect and the knee ru$$ing on a rough o$.ectG the eleventh finding could have $een
due to a fall or $0 $eing draggedG the twelfth finding could $e caused $0 a $lunt instru(ent or $0 a
fall or $0 fist $low and the thirteenth finding could also $e caused $0 a fall or fist $low.
1e stated 9that: the victi( died despite the operation he perfor(ed on her.
B B B
14. Dr. -,(.'(/,no A)ran+'* 8 1e eBplained the different kinds of in.uries sustained $0 the victi(.
6n addition, he stated that since there were wounds sustained $0 the victi( in the dorsu( part of
the foot and sustained in.uries on $oth knees, upper portion of the $ack of the hand, the victi(
could have $een thrown off while unconscious.
"-
cralawredlaw
The RTC's Ruling
#n ,ove($er 1', 1--%, the R*C ruled in favor of the prosecution, finding petitioner guilt0 $e0ond
reasona$le dou$t $ased on circu(stantial evidence, not of the cri(e of 3urder, $ut of 1o(icide.
*he R*C ratiocinated that, in the a$sence of an0 direct evidence or testi(onies of e0ewitnesses,
treacher0 was not esta$lished, and that evident pre(editation and a$use of superior strength were
not dul0 proven. *hus, the R*C disposed of the case in this wise7 chanro$1esvirtwallawli$rar0
-$ERE"ORE, pre(ises considered, the Court finds the accused Ben.a(in /esalva alias Ben +a$aw
guilt0 $e0ond reasona$le dou$t of the cri(e of 1o(icide penali=ed under Art. "4- of the Revised
Penal Code and considering that there was no aggravating nor (itigating circu(stances attendant
thereto and taking into consideration the 6ndeter(inate +entence 4aw, the court here$0 sentences
the accused to suffer the indeter(inate penalt0 of eight (' 0ears and one (1 da0 of prision (a0or
as (ini(u( to twelve (1" 0ears and one (1 da0 of reclusion te(poral as (aBi(u( and to pa0
death inde(nit0 of the su( of P 5&,&&&.&& to the legal heirs of the victi(, plus P 4",%55.45 for
co(pensator0 da(ages plus P 5&,&&&.&& $0 wa0 of (oral da(ages and P 1&,&&&.&& as attorne0As
fees (People v. Aguilu=, 3arch 11, 1--".
SO ORDERED.
)&
cralawredlaw
Aggrieved, petitioner appealed to the CA.
)1
cralawredlaw
The CA's Ruling
#n #cto$er 1%, "&&', the CA pertinentl0 held, a(ong others, that petitioner could not point to
#l$es as the culprit $ecause, when ?duardo de Cera saw the for(er holding on to 4eticia in a
sFuatting position, #l$es was in the act of lifting her in order to $ring her to the near$0 shed. *he
CA opined that, if an0 (isdeed or o(ission could $e attri$uted to #l$es, it was his failure to $ring
4eticia to a near$0 hospital, $ecause his fear of $eing i(plicated in the cri(e clouded his $etter
.udg(ent. *hus7 chanro$1esvirtwallawli$rar0
All told, <e find that the prosecutionAs evidence suffice to sustain the accused8appellantAs conviction
for ho(icide.
As to the award of attorne0As fees, <e find the award of P 1&,&&&.&& $0 the trial court (eritorious,
the records reveal that services of private prosecutor was engaged.
@nder Article "4- of the Revised Penal Code, ho(icide is punisha$le $0 reclusion temporal. <ith the
attendant (itigating circu(stance of voluntar0 surrender of accused8appellant, the
penalt0 reclusion temporal is i(posed in its (ini(u( period. Accordingl0, accused8appellant
Ben.a(in /. /esalva should suffer the indeter(inate penalt0 of *<?4C? (1" ;?AR+ and #,? (1
!A; of reclusion temporal as (aBi(u( and +6I (5 ;?AR+ and #,? (1 !A; of prision mayor as
(ini(u(.
-$ERE"ORE, pre(ises considered, the !ecision of the Regional *rial Court of +orsogon, +orsogon,
Branch 5" dated ,ove($er 1', 1--% in Cri(inal Case ,o. )"4)
is A""IRMEDwith MODI"ICA#ION as to the penalt0.
Accused8appellant Ben.a(in /. /esalva is sentenced to serve the indeter(inate penalt0 of +6I (5
;?AR+ and #,? (1 !A; of prision mayor, as (ini(u(, to *<?4C? (1" ;?AR+ and #,? (1 !A;
of reclusion temporal, as (aBi(u(.
SO ORDERED.
)"
cralawredlaw
@ndaunted, petitioner filed a 3otion for Reconsideration,
))
cralaw which the CA, however, denied in its
Resolution
)4
cralaw dated April %, "&&- for lack of (erit.
1ence, this Petition $ased on the following grounds7 chanro$1esvirtwallawli$rar0
A *1? C#@R* #2 APP?A4+ A,! R*C !?C6+6#,+ C#,C6C*6,> P?*6*6#,?R #2 *1? CR63? #2
1#36C6!? BA+?! #, P@R?4; C6RC@3+*A,*6A4 ?C6!?,C? <?R? B#*1 ,#* 6, ACC#R! <6*1
?+*AB46+1?! /@R6+PR@!?,C? R?J@6R6,> *1A* +@C1 B? AC*?! <6*1 CA@*6#, A,! *1A* A44
*1? ?++?,*6A4 2AC*+ 3@+* B? C#,+6+*?,* <6*1 *1? 1;P#*1?+6+ #2 >@64*G A,!
B *1? C#@R* #2 APP?A4+, A+ <?44 A+ *1? *R6A4 C#@R*, +?R6#@+4; ?RR?! 6, R@46,> *1A*
+*A*?3?,*+ 3A!? B; P?*6*6#,?R 6, *1? P#46C? +*A*6#, <?R? A!36++6B4? A+ 1? <A+ *1?,
,#* @,!?R C@+*#!6A4 6,C?+*6>A*6#, !?+P6*? +@226C6?,* ?C6!?,C? #, R?C#R! *1A* 1?
<#@4! 1AC? B??, !?*A6,?! B; *1? P#46C? 1A! 16+ 26+CA48C#3PA,6#, ,#* 9*AH?,: 163
@,!?R 16+ C@+*#!;.
)5
cralawredlaw
Petitioner argues that no evidence was ever introduced as to how, when, and where 4eticia
sustained her in.uries. ,o witness ever testified as to who was responsi$le for her in.uries. 1e
refutes the prosecutionAs contention that, even if he took the 5
th
+treet, the sa(e could still lead to
the %
th
+treet, where 4eticiaAs house is located. Petitioner stresses that #l$es should have $een
considered as a suspect in this case, considering that he was the last person seen with 4eticia when
she was still alive. 1e avers that the state(ents he (ade at the police station are not ad(issi$le in
evidence, considering that he was, technicall0, under custodial investigation, and that there was no
waiver of his right to re(ain silent.
)5
cralaw 3oreover, petitioner alleges that the fatal in.uries sustained $0
4eticia, per the testi(on0 of !r. A$rantes, are consistent with a fall, there$0 suggesting petitionerAs
innocence. Petitioner clai(s that the evidence shows that there was (ore $lood in 1a=elwood than
in the place where #l$es spotted 4eticia, there$0 suggesting that so(ething worse than her
.u(ping out of the vehicle (ight have happened.
)%
cralawredlaw
#n the other hand, respondent People of the Philippines, through the #+>, argues that onl0
Fuestions of law (a0 $e entertained $0 this Court, and that we accord great respect to factual
findings of the trial court especiall0 when affir(ed $0 the CA. *he #+> insists that the CA, affir(ing
the R*CAs ruling, did not err in convicting petitioner on the $asis of circu(stantial evidence, $ecause
the particular circu(stances enu(erated $0 $oth the R*C and the CA satisfactoril0 (eet the
reFuire(ents of the rules and of .urisprudence for conviction. 3oreover, the #+> clai(s that the
state(ents (ade $0 petitioner $efore +P#4 !esder, in the presence of 2iscal /a0ona, were
voluntaril0 given and were not elicited on custodial investigation. 4astl0, the #+> counters that
petitioner was not deprived of his rights since he was never held for Fuestioning $0 an0 police
officer upon arriving at the police station and, $esides, he was acco(panied $0 his first cousin,
2iscal /a0ona.
)'
cralawredlaw
Our Ruling
*he Petition is $ereft of (erit.
Custodial investigation refers to Dan0 Fuestioning initiated $0 law enforce(ent officers after a
person has $een taken into custod0 or otherwise deprived of his freedo( of action in an0 significant
wa0.D *his presupposes that he is suspected of having co((itted a cri(e and that the investigator
is tr0ing to elicit infor(ation or a confession fro( hi(.
)-
cralaw *he rule $egins to operate at once, as
soon as the investigation ceases to $e a general inFuir0 into an unsolved cri(e, and direction is
ai(ed upon a particular suspect who has $een taken into custod0 and to who( the police would
then direct interrogator0 Fuestions which tend to elicit incri(inating state(ents.
4&
cralaw *he assailed
state(ents herein were spontaneousl0 (ade $0 petitioner and were not at all elicited through
Fuestioning. 6t was esta$lished that petitioner, together with his cousin 2iscal /a0ona, personall0
went to the police station and voluntaril0 (ade the state(ent that 4eticia .u(ped out of his vehicle
at around 1"7)& a.(. of +epte($er -, 1--".
41
cralaw *he R*C and the CA did not, therefore, err in
holding that the constitutional procedure for custodial investigation is not applica$le in the instant
case.
Be that as it (a0, even without these state(ents, petitioner could still $e convicted of the cri(e of
1o(icide. *he prosecution esta$lished his co(plicit0 in the cri(e through circu(stantial evidence,
which were credi$le and sufficient, and which led to the inescapa$le conclusion that petitioner
co((itted the said cri(e. 6ndeed, when considered in their totalit0, the circu(stances point to
petitioner as the culprit.
!irect evidence of the co((ission of the cri(e charged is not the onl0 (atriB wherefro( a court
(a0 draw its conclusions and findings of guilt. *here are instances when, although a witness (a0
not have actuall0 witnessed the co((ission of a cri(e, he (a0 still $e a$le to positivel0 identif0 a
suspect or accused as the perpetrator of a cri(e as when, for instance, the latter is the person last
seen with the victi( i((ediatel0 $efore and right after the co((ission of the cri(e. *his is the
t0pe of positive identification, which for(s part of circu(stantial evidence. 6n the a$sence of direct
evidence, the prosecution (a0 resort to adducing circu(stantial evidence to discharge its $urden.
Cri(es are usuall0 co((itted in secret and under condition where conceal(ent is highl0 pro$a$le.
6f direct evidence is insisted upon under all circu(stances, the guilt of vicious felons who co((itted
heinous cri(es in secret or in secluded places will $e hard, if not well8nigh i(possi$le, to prove.
4"
cralawredlaw
*hus, there can $e a verdict of conviction $ased on circu(stantial evidence when the circu(stances
proved for( an un$roken chain which leads to a fair and reasona$le conclusion pinpointing the
accused, to the eBclusion of all the others, as the perpetrator of the cri(e. 1owever, in order that
circu(stantial evidence (a0 $e sufficient to convict, the sa(e (ust co(pl0 with these essential
reFuisites, viz.7 (a there is (ore than one circu(stanceG ($ the facts fro( which the inferences
are derived are provenG and (c the co($ination of all the circu(stances is such as to produce a
conviction $e0ond reasona$le dou$t.
4)
cralawredlaw
<e accord respect to the following findings of the CA, affir(ing those of the R*C7 chanro$1esvirtwallawli$rar0
After a thorough review of the records of the case, <e find that the circu(stantial evidence proved
$0 the prosecution, when viewed in its entiret0, points unerringl0 to 9petitioner: Ben.a(in /esalva as
the person responsi$le for the death of the victi( 4eticia Alde(o. *rul0, the following co($ination of
the circu(stances which co(prised such evidence for(s an un$roken chain that points to
9petitioner: and no other, as the perpetrator of the cri(e, to wit7 chanro$1esvirtwallawli$rar0
1. 9Petitioner: Ben.a(in /esalva (who was previously courting the victim Leticia Aldemo, and whom
the latter advised to stop as she was already married) together with >loria 1a$oc, and siB other
individuals left ,ena A$lesA house at 1& p.(. of +epte($er ', 1--" after pla0ing (ah.ong thereat.
*he0 rode in 9petitionerAs: red panel.
". Ben.a(in /esalva, 4eticia Alde(o, >loria 1a$oc and two others proceeded to Bistro Christina.
9Petitioner:, together with other two (ale co(panions, consu(ed one $ottle of 2undador, in
addition to the three $ottles of $eer. At 117)& p.(., the group left the place.
). After dropping one (ale co(panion at his house, Ben.a(in /esalva, together with 4eticia Alde(o,
proceeded to $ring >loria 1a$oc to her ho(e, which was onl0 twent0 (eters awa0 fro( 4eticiaAs
residence.
4. After sta0ing at >loria 1a$ocAs house for five (inutes, and denied another drink, Ben.a(in
/esalva i((ediatel0 accelerated his vehicle en route to 5
th
+treet instead of the shorter and direct
route, the %
th
street, where 4eticia Alde(oAs house is locatedG chanro$lesvirtualawli$rar0
5. 4eticia Alde(o never reached ho(e as testified $0 her hus$and ?fren Alde(oG chanro$lesvirtualawli$rar0
5. At around 1"7"& a.(. of +epte($er -, 1--", the police patrolling the +t. Ra9f:ael +u$division
saw the red panel thereat and when the0 approached and $ea(ed a flashlight, the0 saw Ben.a(in
/esalva $ehind the wheel, who suddenl0 drove awa0 in the direction of +orsogon town proper,
opposite to where he lives. +P#1 ?duardo 3endo=a told Ben.a(in /esalva (whom he had known
since his teenage years to stop $ut the latter did not respond or heed his callG chanro$lesvirtualawli$rar0
%. At 1"7)& oAclock (sic of even date, ,oel #l$es saw the $od0 of 4eticia Alde(o sprawled on her
$ell0 at the crossingK.unction of #4C, Pangpang +orsogon, +orsogon, naked fro( the waist down. 1e
lifted her up and $rought the $od0 at 1a=elwood, which is a$out 1& (eters awa0 fro( the highwa0.
'. *he police found the $od0 of the victi( at 1a=elwood at around "715 a.(. of the sa(e da0, and
$rought her to the +orsogon Provincial 1ospital in co(atose condition.
-. *he police proceeded to infor( the victi(As sister, who in turn infor(ed the victi(As hus$and of
the incident.
1&. 6n the (orning of +epte($er -, 1--", the police looked for Ben.a(in /esalva to invite hi( at
the police station $ut was not a$le to find hi(.
11. At around 17&& oAclock p.(. of +epte($er -, 1--", Ben.a(in /esalva, together with his first
cousin, Asst. Prosecutor /ose /a0ona, presented hi(self at the P,P +orsogon, +orsogon
headFuarters, where he voluntaril0 stated that the victi( 4eticia Alde(o was his passenger in his
vehicle at a$out 1"7)& in the earl0 (orning of +epte($er -, 1--" at +t. Rafael +u$division $ut
upon reaching the crossing of #4C, Pangpang, +orsogon, +orsogon near the Provincial 1ospital, she
.u(ped out of his vehicle. *hese declarations were recorded in the police $lotter $0 P#1 ?nriFue
9Renoria: upon the instruction of +P#4 <illia( !esder, the P,P +orsogon Chief 6nvestigator.
1". At a$out 17)& p.(. of the sa(e da0, a police tea(, together with 9petitioner: and Asst.
Prosecutor /a0ona, went to +t. Ra9f:ael +u$division to conduct an ocular inspection. 9Petitioner:
pointed to the police the place where he and the victi( spent their ti(e. *he police photographed
what appear9ed: to $e $loodstains .ust two (eters awa0 fro( the place pointed $0 9petitioner:.
1). Dr. An+on,o D,on'&a testified that the punctured wound in the occipital area was caused $0 a
pe$$le which he recovered fro( said areaG the punctured wound in the parietal left area was caused
$0 a sharp o$.ect and (a0 have $een secondar0 to a fall on a rough surface, the cere$ral contusion,
the punctured wound in the occipital and in the parietal area could also $e caused $0 a punch $0 the
perpetrator. As to the (ultiple contusion he(ato(a anterior lateral aspect of the deltoid left area
was caused $0 a $lunt instru(ent or a punch or a strong gripG the contusion he(ato(a on the
upper left ar( and left el$ow could as well $e si(ilarl0 caused $0 a $lunt instru(ent or a punch or a
strong grip. As to the a$rasion on the right knee, the sa(e could have $een caused $0 a $lunt
instru(ent or a fist $low. *he (ultiple confluent a$rasion9s: on the right foot could have $een
caused $0 a fall on a rough o$.ect. *he a$rasions on the right el$ow could have $een caused $0 a
$lunt instru(ent or $0 a fall or $0 a fist $low. *he sa(e is true with the contusion he(ato(a found
on the victi(As right el$ow.
44
cralawredlaw
PetitionerAs (ere denial cannot outweigh the circu(stantial evidence clearl0 esta$lishing his
culpa$ilit0 in the cri(e charged. 6t is well8settled that the positive declarations of a prosecution
witness prevail over the $are denials of an accused. *he evidence for the prosecution was found $0
$oth the R*C and the CA to $e sufficient and credi$le, while petitionerAs defense of denial was weak,
self8serving, speculative, and uncorro$orated. PetitionerAs silence as to the (atters that occurred
during the ti(e he was alone with 4eticia is deafening. An accused can onl0 $e eBonerated if the
prosecution fails to (eet the Fuantu( of proof reFuired to overco(e the constitutional presu(ption
of innocence. <e find that the prosecution has (et this Fuantu( of proof in this case.
45
cralawredlaw
All told, we find no reversi$le error in the assailed CA decision which would warrant the (odification
(uch less the reversal thereof.
-$ERE"ORE, the petition is DENIED, and the Court of Appeals !ecision dated #cto$er 1%, "&&'
in CA8>.R. CR ,o. ""1"5, affir(ing with (odification the decision of the Regional *rial Court, Branch
5", +orsogon, +orsogon, in Cri(inal Case ,o. )"4), is here$0 A""IRMED. Costs against petitioner.
SO ORDERED.
AN#ONIO ED%ARDO B. NAC$%RA
Associate !ustice
-E CONC%R:
CAR!IO, J., Chairperson, !ERA#A, ABAD, an& MENDO0A, JJ.
cralaw Endnotes
1
cralaw Rollo, pp. -8"5.
"
cralaw Penned $0 Associate /ustice Regalado ?. 3aa($ong, with Associate /ustices 3onina Arevalo8Lenarosa and
Ra(on 3. Bato, /r., concurringG id. at "-854.
)
cralaw CA rollo, pp. 1&4811-.
4
cralaw Also referred to as Ben /esalva in so(e pleadings and docu(ents.
5
cralaw Records, p. 1.
5
cralaw Also referred to as 4etecia Alde(o and 4ett0 Alde(o in so(e pleadings and docu(ents.
%
cralaw Records, p. 1".
'
cralaw 6d. at 1&181&-.
-
cralaw 6d. at 1""81").
1&
cralaw 6d. at 1"5.
11
cralaw 6d. at 141.
1"
cralaw Also referred to as 6log @$aldo in so(e pleadings and docu(ents.
1)
cralaw Rollo, pp. %%8'&.
14
cralaw *+,, 3arch "&, 1--5, pp. "%8"'.
15
cralaw Also referred to as +t. Raphael +u$division in so(e pleadings and docu(ents.
15
cralaw *+,, /anuar0 "4, 1--5, pp. 1"8"-.
1%
cralaw *+,, 3a0 "", 1--5, pp. 1'8"& and *+,, August "", 1--5, p. )'.
1'
cralaw *+,, August ', 1--5, pp. "58"-.
1-
cralaw Records, pp. 1''8"1'.
"&
cralaw 6d. at ""-8")1.
"1
cralaw 6d. at ")"8")4.
""
cralaw 6d. at "44.
")
cralaw 6d. at "5"8"5).
"4
cralaw *+,, August "), 1--%, p. %.
"5
cralaw 6d. at '8-.
"5
cralaw +upra note ", at 4584'.
"%
cralaw 6d. at 4&84).
"'
cralaw Also referred to as !r. Antonio !ioneda and !r. Antonio !ionedas in other pleadings and docu(ents.
"-
cralaw +upra note ", at 4484'.
)&
cralaw +upra note ), at 11-.
)1
cralaw Records, p. 41&.
)"
cralaw +upra note ", at 5"85).
))
cralaw CA rollo, pp. 1%-81'5.
)4
cralaw 6d. at ""18""".
)5
cralaw +upra note 1, at 15.
)5
cralaw +upra note 1.
)%
cralaw Rollo, pp. 1&&81&".
)'
cralaw 6d. at %48-'.
)-
cralaw People v. Canton, 44" Phil. %4), %51 ("&&".
4&
cralaw People v. "e la Cruz, )44 Phil. 55), 55&8551 (1--%.
41
cralaw +upra note 1%.
4"
cralaw People v. #analo, >.R. ,o. 1%)&54, !ece($er 5, "&&5, 51& +CRA 554, 5%&.
4)
cralaw People v. #atignas, 4"' Phil. ')4, '5-8'%& ("&&".
44
cralaw +upra note ", at 5)85'.
45
cralaw People v. #aca$are, >.R. ,o. 1%--41, August "5, "&&-, 5-% +CRA 11-, 1)".