Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
FIRST DIVISION
G.R. No. 172974 July 28, 2008
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee,
vs.
CESAR ARENAS, Appellant.
R E S O L U T I O N
CORONA, J.:
This is an appeal from the March 30, 2006 decision1 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 00671 affirming with modification the decision of the trial court which found appellant Cesar Arenas guilty of the crime of murder.
Appellant was prosecuted in the Regional Trial Court of Caloocan City, Branch 129 under the following information:2
That on or about the 1st day of June, 1997 in Kalookan City, Metro-Manila, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, without any justifiable cause, with treachery and evident premeditation and with deliberate intent to kill, did then and there, wil[l]fully, unlawfully and feloniously attack and shoot with a firearm on the head one NOLI PEÑAFIEL Y BIGCAS, thereby inflicting upon the latter serious physical injuries which injuries caused his instantaneous death.
Contrary to law.3
During arraignment, appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge. After pre-trial, trial followed.
The prosecution established through eyewitness accounts that, at around 10:00 a.m. of June 1, 1997, Noli Peñafiel was standing along the sidewalk of Gen. Luis Street, Caloocan City. He was talking to his friend, a certain Dr. Dalida, while waiting for his niece. Appellant suddenly came from behind Peñafiel and fired two shots at the latter’s head. The victim fell down and died shortly thereafter as a result of the fatal injuries inflicted on him.
Appellant’s defenses were denial and alibi. He disavowed any participation in the killing of Peñafiel. He and his witnesses essentially tried to prove that he was in Dasmariñas, Cavite at the time of the incident. He allegedly spent the whole morning of June 1, 1997 helping his fellow pahinante4 and their truck driver unload their delivery of Rebisco biscuits in the company’s warehouse in Dasmariñas, Cavite.1avvphi1
After evaluating the evidence of the parties, the trial court ruled that appellant’s denial was sufficiently refuted by the positive testimony of the prosecution’s witnesses. It also found that the positive identification of appellant as the killer destroyed his alibi:5
WHEREFORE, premises considered, this Court finds the accused CESAR ARENAS guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime charged, as defined and penalized under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 6 of Rep. Act No. 7659. Accordingly, he shall serve the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua with all the necessary penalties under the law, and shall pay the costs.
Pursuant to Section 7, Rule 117 of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure, the accused shall be credited with the period of his preventive detention.
By way of civil liabilities, the accused shall pay the following amounts to the victim’s heirs, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency.
P50,000.00 - as death indemnity; and
P20,000.00 - as reimbursement of funeral expenses.
The Branch Clerk of this Court shall now issue the corresponding Commitment Order for the City Jail Warden of Caloocan City to transfer the accused to the Bureau of Corrections, Muntinlupa City.
SO ORDERED.6
After appellant filed his notice of appeal, the trial court forwarded the records of the case to this Court. Pursuant to People v. Mateo,7 however, the case was referred to the Court of Appeals for review.8
The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the trial court with modification.9 It awarded the heirs of the victim ₱50,000 moral damages, ₱25,000 exemplary damages and ₱1,943,868 for loss of earning capacity. The dispositive portion of the decision read:
WHEREFORE, the instant appeal is DENIED. The assailed Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Caloocan City, Branch 129 in Criminal Case No. C-52731, convicting accused-appellant of Murder, is hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that accused-appellant is further ordered to pay the heirs of the victim P50,000.00 in moral damages, ₱25,000 as exemplary damages, and ₱1,943,868.00 for loss of earning capacity.
SO ORDERED.10
Hence, this appeal.
Appellant essentially claims that the trial and appellate courts erred in giving credence to the prosecution’s evidence, not his evidence.
The appeal lacks merit.
Both the trial and appellate courts ruled that appellant’s denial and alibi were not worthy of belief. Instead, both courts gave credence to the testimony of the eyewitnesses of the prosecution. They categorically pointed to appellant as the one who shot the victim in the head. They testified that the shooting was carried out treacherously (that is, from behind the victim), thus affording him no opportunity to defend himself. For this reason, both the trial and appellate courts found that appellant’s guilt for the crime of murder was sufficiently established beyond reasonable doubt. This Court finds no compelling reason to rule otherwise.
Pursuant to Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Section 6 of Republic Act (RA) 7659, appellant was correctly sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to suffer all its accessory penalties. It must be stressed that pursuant to RA 9346, appellant is not eligible for parole.11
The heirs of Peñafiel were able to sufficiently prove their entitlement to the grant of ₱50,000 civil indemnity, ₱50,000 moral damages, ₱25,000 exemplary damages, ₱20,000 as reimbursement of funeral expenses and ₱1,943,868 for loss of earning capacity. Moreover, the said awards were in accordance with existing law and jurisprudence. There is therefore no reason to disturb them.
WHEREFORE, the appeal is hereby DENIED. The March 30, 2006 decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 00671 finding appellant Cesar Arenas guilty of the crime of murder and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole and all its accessory penalties and to pay the heirs of Noli Peñafiel ₱50,000 civil indemnity, ₱50,000 moral damages, ₱25,000 exemplary damages, ₱20,000 as reimbursement of funeral expenses and ₱1,943,868 for loss of earning capacity, is AFFIRMED.
Costs against appellant.
SO ORDERED.
RENATO C. CORONA
Associate Justice
WE CONCUR:
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice
Chairperson
ANTONIO T. CARPIO
Associate Justice |
ADOLFO S. AZCUNA
Associate Justice |
TERESITA J. LEONARDO-DE CASTRO
Associate Justice
C E R T I F I C A T I O N
Pursuant to Section 13, Article VIII of the Constitution, I certify that the conclusions in the above resolution had been reached in consultation before the case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court’s Division.
REYNATO S. PUNO
Chief Justice
Footnotes
1 Penned by Associate Justice Noel G. Tijam and concurred in by Associate Justices Elvi John S. Asuncion (dismissed from the service) and Mariflor P. Punzalan Castillo of the Sixteenth Division of the Court of Appeals. Rollo, pp. 3-23.
2 Court of Appeals Records, p. 2.
3 Id.
4 Truck helper.
5 Decision dated September 28, 2000, penned by Judge Bayani S. Rivera. Court of Appeals Records, pp. 16-25.
6 Id.
7 G.R. Nos. 147678-87, 04 July 2004, 433 SCRA 658.
8 Resolution dated September 8, 2004 in G.R. No. 145232. Rollo, p. 2.
9 Supra note 1.
10 Id.
11 See Section 3, RA 9346.
The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation
