Cited Laws
TL;DR — Ruling
WHEREFORE, finding the accused Larry Cagas GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt as principal in the crime of murder, defined and penalized in Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659, and after considering in his favor the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, there being no aggravating circumstance to offset the same, this Court hereby imposes upon him the penalty of reclusion perpetua, together with accessory penalties, and to pay the costs.
WHEREFORE, finding the accused Larry Cagas GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt as principal in the crime of murder, defined and penalized in Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by R.A. No. 7659, and after considering in his favor the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, there being no aggravating circumstance to offset the same, this Court hereby imposes upon him the penalty of reclusion perpetua, together with accessory penalties, and to pay the costs. The accused is hereby ordered to indemnify the heirs of Venecio Elicano in the sum of Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) and to pay private complainant Luciano Elicano the sum of Twenty-Eight Thousand Pesos (P28,000.00) for actual damages and another Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) for moral damages. Four-fifths (4/5) of the preventive detention of the said accused shall be credited in his favor. In its decision, the trial court held that appellants plea of self-defense lacked probative value: In the case at bench, the testimony of the accused that he stabbed Venecio Elicano because the latter boxed him, has no probative value for being self-serving, the said testimony not being corroborated by any other witnesses for the defense. Defense witness Max Manliguis admitted, on direct examination, that he has no personal knowledge of the stabbing in question; defense witness Tanny Bayang did not say that it was Venecio Elicano who boxed the herein accused, although said witness declared that he saw the latter being boxed; and defense witness Pablo Placeros admitted, on direct examination, that he has not actually seen the accused stab Venecio Elicano and that when the said witness was in the public cemetery of Bacuag, Surigao del Norte, at 2:00 oclock in the afternoon of 2 November 1995, he saw Venecio Elicano there, doing nothing at all. Moreover, the assertion of the accused that it was Venecio Elicano who initiated the unlawful aggression in this case is rendered doubtful by the fact that no evidence whatsoever is adduced by the defense showing physical injuries sustained by the accused , in spite of his having been allegedly hit on his breast, right arm and left lower cheek by the fistic blows of Venecio Elicano. The explanation of the accused that he did not have himself examined by a doctor because he was afraid of a certain Besande, a policeman, and the latters two companions, who are relatives of Venecio Elicano, is more imaginary than real, if not flimsy. The accused after the incident in question, was placed under preventive detention in the Bacuag Municipal Jail for more than one week and he was not armed by Besande and his companions until now. Res ipsa lo[q]uitur (the thing speaks for itself). The contention of the accused that he was almost shot by Policeman Besande is untenable, otherwise said accused would have already filed criminal or administrative charges against the said policeman. This, the accused failed to do. [13] (Underscoring in the original; citatio
G.R. No. 118504 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. JOEL SOL, ACCUSED-.
G.R. No. 118504 -
CaseG.R. No. 132043 - THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. TEOFISTO COTAS Y LIMPIAHOY, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 132043 -
CaseG.R. No. 129695 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. EDUARDO TABONES @ "YAPE," MARIO CAILLO AND SAMUEL SERONA, ACCUSED. EDUARDO TABONES @ "YAPE,". D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library
G.R. No. 129695 -