G.R. NO. 169869 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. PEDRO DELIMA, JR..D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, the appealed decision of the Regional Trial Court of Quezon City, Branch 81 convicting Pedro Delima, Jr. of the crime of Parricide under Article 246 of the Revised Penal Code is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION with respect to the penalty and the awarded damages. The accused-appellant is sentenced to suffer the supreme penalty of DEATH and to pay the amount of P50,000.00 as CIVIL INDEMNITY, MORAL DAMAGES in the amount of P50,000.00 and P15,000.00 as TEMPERATE DAMAGES. [5] The CA ruled that (1) the element of relationship between the appellant and the victim had been admitted by appellant and set forth in the stipulation of facts in the Pre-Trial Order [6] dated September 4, 2001; (2) six-year old Melissa, who categorically and positively identified appellant as the killer, is a credible witness; and (3) treachery attended this case and the same should be considered as an aggravating circumstance, calling for the imposition of the graver penalty of death. The case was elevated to this Court for automatic review pursuant to Section 13, Rule 124 of the Revised Rules of Criminal Procedure, as amended. On November 22, 2005, this Court required the parties to submit their respective Supplemental Briefs, but both parties manifested that they will no longer file such pleadings as they opt to replead and adopt the arguments submitted in their respective Briefs. Appellant assigned the following as errors of the trial court: I THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN CONVICTING THE ACCUSED-APPELLANT OF PARRICIDE DESPITE THE PROSECUTION'S FAILURE TO PROVE HIS GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. II THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED IN ORDERING THE ACCCUSED-APPELLANT TO PAY ACTUAL DAMAGES IN THE AMOUNT OF P25,000.00 IN SPITE OF THE ABSENCE OF EVIDENCE. [7] Mainly, appellant argues that there are inconsistencies in the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses which undermine their credibility, i.e. , (1) Melissa categorically stated that her uncle left when her aunt woke up after the hands of the latter were injured; then, she later stated that her uncle stabbed her aunt many times which resulted in the latter's death; [8] (2) Melissa could not remember issuing a statement to the authorities but her mother, Isabel, testified that she saw Melissa affix her thumbmark on the sworn statement given to authorities; [9] (3) Isabel was already suspicious of appellant before the incident happened because " tahimik siya at pailalim ang tingin ," but she also testified that before she left at 5:30 in the morning on the day the victim was killed, appellant was merely lying in bed; [10] and (4) Isabel first said that the only information given to her by her neighbors was that the body of her sister was brought to Camp Karingal, but later, she added that the neighbors also said it was appellant who killed her sister. [11] Appellant also pointed out that Melissa admitted that her mother, Isabel, had been talking to her about the case and what she would say in court. [12] The other