CASE DIGEST-WPS Office

CASE DIGEST
DENNIS F. FUERTE
BS Criminology 4-A
Nacional v. PEOPLE,
GR No. 218466,
2017-01-23
FACTS OF THE CASE
The prosecution alleged that between 9:00 to 10:00 o'clock in the
evening of January 20, 2002, eyewitness Reynaldo Necesito (Reynaldo) was
walking towards the store of Leonida Fabrigas when he chanced upon ac-
cused-appellants having an altercation with the victim, Rolando Necesito
(Rolando). From his vantage point, Reynaldo heard Ramos yell, "Okinam
patayan ka!" (Son of a bitch! I will kill you!) and saw accused-appellants
chase and eventually surround Rolando at an area around seven (7) meters
away from where Reynaldo was hiding. Reynaldo then heard four (4) suc-
cessive gunshots, making him hide under the trunk of the duhat tree for
fear of being hit. It was on the sound of the fourth shot when Reynaldo wit-
nessed Rolando fall face down on the ground. To ensure Rolando's demise,
Ramos approached Rolando and shot him again. Thereafter, accused-appel-
lants fled the scene.
FACTS OF THE CASE
The next day, Rolando's body was found near the duhat tree, prompting police
officers to conduct an investigation from which were gathered the following
evidence and information: (a) a piece of bamboo was recovered three (3) me-
ters away from Rolando's corpse; (b) Rolando purportedly had a previous mis-
understanding with Ramos sometime in 1997, yet the same was settled be-
fore the barangay; and (c) Rolando allegedly had a drinking spree with his
friends at the time of the incident. An autopsy was likewise conducted on
Rolando's body, revealing that there were four (4) incised wounds on his left
hand, a stab wound on his left chest, and five (5) gunshot wounds on his body;
that based on the nature and sizes of his wounds, it was possible that the
firearm used was of the same caliber; and that his injuries could not have
been inflicted by a single person
FACTS OF THE CASE
For their respective parts, accused-appellants similarly invoked the defenses
of denial and alibi. Essentially, they insisted that they were somewhere else
when the incident occurred. In addition, Ramos maintained that the declara-
tions of Reynaldo against him were motivated by a personal grudge, while Na-
cional claimed that the corpus delicti was not proven with exact certainty
since the cadaver that was exhumed and examined was already in an ad-
vanced stage of decomposition, having been interred for more than a
month.the RTC found accused-appellants guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
the crime charged, and accordingly, sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclu-
sion perpetua without the benefit of parole,... the RTC gave credence to the
direct, straightforward, and categorical eyewitness testimony of Reynaldo pos-
itively identifying each of the accused-appellants as co-perpetrators of the
crime, further noting that Reynaldo had no ill-motive to falsely testify against
them.
FACTS OF THE CASE
On the other hand, it found the defense testimonies to be untenable, as they
were riddled with various inconsistencies and contradictions. Further, the
RTC found the presence of the circumstance of abuse of superior strength
which qualified the killing to Murder, considering that the accused-appellants
took advantage of their combined strength and their several weapons to
overcome their unarmed victim and assure the success of their felonious de-
sign. In view of the foregoing, the RTC concluded that accused-appellants
"are equally guilty of the crime of Murder aggravated with the use of unlin-
censed firearm, there having been proven the existence of implied conspir-
acy between them."... the CA affirmed accusedappellants' conviction for the
crime of Murder with the Use of an Unlicensed Firearm with modification,
increasing the awards of civil indemnity and moral damages
ISSUES
The issue raised for the Court's resolution is whether or

not the CA correctly upheld accused-appellants' con-
viction for the crime of Murder with the Use of an Unli-
censed Firearm.
RULINGS
As will be explained hereunder, the accused-appellants should only be held liable for sim-
ple Murder, and not Murder with the Use of an Unlicensed Firearm
In the instant case, the prosecution, through the testimony of eyewitness Reynaldo, had
established beyond reasonable doubt that: the accused-appellants chased, ganged up, and
eventually, killed Rolando, and likewise, it was shown that they deliberately used weapons
(i.e., gun and bamboo stick), which rendered Rolando defenseless from their fatal attacks.
Thus, such killing was attended with the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior
strength,[23] which perforce warrants accused-appellants' conviction for Murder
RULINGS
Under Section 1 of RA 8294, "[i]f homicide or murder is committed with the use of an
unlicensed firearm, such use of an unlicensed firearm shall be considered as an aggra-
vating circumstance." There are two (2) requisites to establish such circumstance,
namely: (a) the existence of the subject firearm; and (b) the fact that the accused who
owned or possessed the gun did not have the corresponding license or permit to carry
it outside his residence. The onus probandi of establishing these elements as alleged in
the Information lies with the prosecution... n this case, while it is undisputed that
Rolando sustained five (5) gunshot wounds which led to his demise, it is unclear from
the records: (a) whether or not the police officers were able to recover the firearm used
as a murder weapon; and (b) assuming arguendo that such firearm was recovered,
whether or not such firearm was licensed.
RULINGS
The Court notes that the disquisitions of the courts a quo were silent regard-
ing this matter Having failed in this respect, the Court cannot simply appre-
ciate the use of an unlicensed firearm as an aggravating circumstance.
WHEREFORE, the consolidated appeals are DENIED. The Decision dated April
28, 2015 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 05095 is hereby AF-
FIRMED with MODIFICATIONS as follows: accused-appellants Manny Ramos,
Roberto Salonga, and Servillano Nacional are found GUILTY beyond reason-
able doubt of the crime of Murder
THANK YOU...

CASE DIGEST-WPS Office

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASE DIGEST-WPS Office

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASE DIGEST-WPS Office

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

CASE DIGEST

The issue raised for the Court's resolution is whether or

You might also like