G.R. No. 239032 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. GILBERT FLORESTA Y SELENCIO, ACCUSED-. D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

accordingly, sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay the heirs of Jay Lourd the amounts of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity and P50,000.00 as moral damages. [10] It rejected Gilbert's claim that the declaration made by Jay Lourd to Jennifer was a mere afterthought, as the same was considered part of the res gestae . It explained that when Jay Lourd asked Jennifer about the presence of Gilbert right after he was shot, he simply relayed to her what he saw and observed. Likewise, his statement was reliable as part of the res gestae for being spontaneously uttered in reaction to a startling occurrence, i.e. , the shooting of Jay Lourd. [11] Moreover, the RTC found the killing to have been attended by treachery, as the prosecution was able to establish that: ( a ) at the time of the incident, Jay Lourd was drinking with his friends and had no inkling that anyone would shoot him; 'and ( b ) the shooting took place in which he could not properly defend himself. [12] On the other hand, it discredited Gilbert's defense of alibi, since he failed to show that it was physically impossible for him to be at the vicinity of the crime. [13] Aggrieved, Gilbert appealed [14] to the CA. The CA Ruling In a Decision [15] dated April 21, 2017, the CA affirmed Gilbert's conviction with modifications, increasing the awards of civil indemnity and moral damages to P75,000.00 each; awarding P75,000.00 as exemplary damages and P50,000.00 as temperate damages; and imposing on all monetary awards interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of its decision until fully paid. [16] Ultimately, it ruled that the prosecution was able to prove all the elements of the crime of Murder in light of the res gestae declaration of Jay Lourd who positively identified Gilbert as his assailant. [17] Hence, the instant appeal. The Issue Before the Court The issue for the Court's resolution is whether or not Gilbert's conviction should be upheld. The Court's Ruling The appeal is meritorious. At the outset, it must be stressed that an appeal in criminal cases opens the entire case for review, and thus, it is the duty of the reviewing tribunal to correct, cite, and appreciate errors in the appealed judgment whether they are assigned or unassigned. [18] "The appeal confers the appellate court full jurisdiction over the case and renders such court competent to examine records, revise the judgment appealed from, increase the penalty, and cite the proper provision of the penal law." [19] To successfully prosecute the crime of Murder, the following elements must be established: ( a ) that a person was killed; ( b ) the accused killed him or her; ( c ) the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 248 of the RPC; and ( d ) the killing is not parricide or infanticide. [20] Proceeding from the foregoing considerations, the Court rules that the prosecution failed to establish with proof beyond reasonable doub