G.R. NO. 171017 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. ZOSIMO AGUILA Y ATIENZA, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

ACCORDINGLY, the Court finds the accused, ZOSIMO AGUILA y ATIENZA, guilty beyond per adventure of doubt, as principal by direct participation, of the crime of Murder, as defined and penalized under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, without any modifying circumstance, and sentences him to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA , to pay to the heirs of Conrado Enriquez the sums of P50,000.00, as indemnification for his death, P39,690.00, as actual damages and P50,000.00 as moral damages. With costs against accused. Affronted, appellant filed a Notice of Appeal with the RTC on 20 August 2002. [23] Subsequently, on 23 October 2002, appellant filed his Appellant's Brief directly with this Court assailing the Decision of the RTC dated 22 July 2002. Pursuant to our ruling in the case of People of the Philippines v. Efren Mateo y Garcia , we issued a Resolution dated 30 March 2005 transferring the instant case to the Court of Appeals for disposition. [24] On 18 July 2005, the Court of Appeals promulgated its Decision denying the appeal of appellant and affirming in toto the assailed RTC Decision. [25] The dispositive portion thereof reads: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the instant case is DENIED and the assailed Decision dated 22 July 2002, promulgated on 12 August 2002, of the Regional Trial Court of Lipa City, Branch 12 in Crim. Case No. 0451-2000 finding the appellant ZOSIMO AGUILA y ATIENZA guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended, and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua , and ordering him to pay to the heirs of the victim Conrado Enriquez the amounts of Php39,690.00 as actual damages; Php50,000.00 as death indemnity; and Php 50,000.00 as moral damages, is hereby AFFIRMED. On automatic review, appellant raised the following issues: I. THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT FOR THE CRIME OF MURDER. II. THE TRIAL COURT GRAVELY ERRED IN GIVING FULL WEIGHT AND CREDENCE TO THE PROSECUTION'S EVIDENCE. Apropos the first issue, appellant contends that the testimony of Ronilo does not deserve any credit as the same was filled with inconsistencies and contradictions. Ronilo testified during the trial that appellant stabbed Conrado with a stainless knife, and, that after the same knife got broken, appellant hit Conrado with a piece of wood four times. This, according to appellant, runs counter to the testimony of Dr. Sabile who declared that Conrado's death was caused by multiple cranium cerebral injuries, and, that she never mentioned finding any stab wounds on Conrado's body. Appellant also noted that the alleged stabbing of Conrado was not stated in Ronilo's Sinumpaang Salaysay , whereas, in his court testimony, Ronilo testified that after stabbing Conrado, appellant also clubbed Conrado with a piece of wood. There is no merit in appellant's contention. Witnesses cannot be expected to give a flawless testimony all the time. This is