G.R. No. 188322 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. JOSEPH ASILAN Y TABORNAL, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE , premises considered, the Court finds the Prosecution to have failed to establish and prove beyond reasonable doubt the offense of direct assault. Where a complex crime is charged and the evidence fails to support the charge as to one of the component, the accused can be convicted of the other (People v. Roma, 374 SCRA 457). WHEREFORE, his guilt having been proven beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of murder with the qualifying circumstance of treachery, judgment is hereby rendered finding accused Joseph Asilan y Tabornal GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder and is hereby imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua. He is hereby ordered to pay the heirs of PO1 Randy Adovas y Pe-Caat the sum of P84,224.00 as actual damages, P25,000.00 for moral damages and P50,000.00 civil indemnity. [12] The RTC, in acquitting Asilan of Direct Assault, held that while it was confirmed that Adovas was in his police uniform at the time of his death, the prosecution failed to establish convincingly that he was in the performance of his duty when he was assaulted by Asilan. The RTC explained that there was no evidence to show that Adovas was arresting somebody at the time Asilan stabbed him. [13] The RTC added: What the framers of the law wanted was to know the reason of the assault upon a person in authority or his agents. The prosecution failed to show why the victim was pushing the man on the wall or why he poked his gun at the latter. That the victim was assaulted while in the performance of his duty or by reason thereof was not conclusively proven. [14] In convicting Asilan of Murder, the RTC held that his defense of denial could not be accorded more weight than the categorical assertions of the witnesses who positively identified him as the man who suddenly appeared from behind [Adovas] and stabbed the latter repeatedly. [15] Moreover, Asilan admitted that he was at the scene of the crime when he was arrested, that he could not give any reason for the witnesses to falsely testify against him, and that he did not know them. Anent the aggravating circumstances, the RTC found that the killing of Adovas was proven to be attended with treachery since Adovas was attacked from behind, depriving him of the opportunity to defend himself. [16] However, the RTC declared that the aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation could not be appreciated x x x absent evidence that [Asilan] planned or prepared to kill [Adovas] or of the time when the plot was conceived. [17] As to the damages, the RTC found the prosecutions evidence, which consisted of Adovass wifes testimony, and the receipts of the expenses she incurred in Adovass hospitalization, wake, and burial, sufficient to award moral and actual damages. On January 19, 2007, Asilan appealed [18] his conviction to the Court of Appeals, mainly on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. He subsequently filed a Motion to Litigate as a Pauper,