G.R. No. 208758 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. JOVEN GERON Y YEMA, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, accused JUANCHO GERON and [J]ERRY GERON of Sariaya, Quezon, on the ground of reasonable doubt, are hereby ACQUITTED of the crime charged in both cases, and accused JOVEN GERON , also of Sariaya, Quezon is found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder, defined and punished under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, in Criminal Case No. 2004-947, and he is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA , and to pay the heirs of the victim P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages, P25,000.00 as exemplary damages, and P35,000.00 as actual damages. And in Criminal Case No. 2004-916, Joven Geron is hereby found GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Attempted Homicide, and he is sentenced, applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, to suffer the penalty of FOUR (4) MONTHS of arresto mayor as minimum, to FOUR (4) YEARS AND TWO (2) MONTHS of prision correccional as maximum, and to pay the victim the amount of P2,000.00 as actual damages and P3,000.00 as moral damages. Accused Juancho Geron and [J]erry Geron are ordered released from custody, unless they are being detained for any other lawful cause or causes. [9] The RTC found appellant guilty of murder and attempted homicide. The trial court gave credence to the testimony of Diomedes considering that it jived with the physical evidence presented by the prosecution. The trial court also found the presence of treachery to qualify the crime to murder. The trial court dismissed appellant's alibi as weak in view of Diomedes' positive identification. However, the trial court acquitted co-accused Juancho and Gerry for failure of the prosecution to prove that they conspired to commit the crime. Appellant elevated the case to the Court of Appeals. The appellate court affirmed in toto the ruling of the trial court. Aggrieved by the appellate court's ruling, appellant filed a Notice of Appeal. [10] Appellant argues that Diomedes is a biased witness because he is a brother of the victim. Appellant also challenges the testimony of Paderon to discredit his alibi. Appellant claims that the rebuttal witness only executed a statement the day before he testified in court. Appellant maintains his alibi and proffers that it was physically impossible for him to be in Mandaluyong City and Sariaya, Quezon at the same time if time and distance were to be taken into consideration. The appeal is bereft of merit. The elements of murder that the prosecution must establish are: (1) that a person was killed; (2) that the accused killed him or her; (3) that the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code; and (4) that the killing is not parricide or infanticide. [11] The prosecution was able to prove that it was appellant who shot and killed Willy. Diomedes, the lone eyewitness, gave a clear and categorical testimony in identifying appellant as the perpetrator, thus: Q: Now Mr. Witness, why did you file