G.R. No. 175784 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. JAIME AYOCHOK Y TAULI, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, the Court finds the accused Jaime Ayochok guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the offense of Murder, defined and penalized under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code as amended, qualified by treachery as charged in the Information and hereby sentences him to reclusion perpetua; to indemnify the heirs of the deceased SPO1 Claudio Caligtan the sum of P75,000.00 as civil indemnity for his death; P200,000.00 as moral damages; P378,956.50 as actual damages in connection with his death; P2,573,096.40 as unearned income, all indemnifications being without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency; and to pay the costs. The accused Jaime Ayochok being a detention prisoner is entitled to be credited 4/5 of his preventive imprisonment in the service of his sentence in accordance with Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code. [4] Ayochok was committed at the New Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa City on October 31, 2003. The case was directly elevated to us for automatic review and was docketed as G.R. No. 161469. However, pursuant to our decision in People v. Mateo [5] - which modified the pertinent provisions of the Revised Rules on Criminal Procedure on direct appeals from the RTC to the Supreme Court in cases where the penalty imposed is death, reclusion perpetua or life imprisonment - G.R. No. 161469 was transferred to the Court of Appeals, [6] where it was docketed as CA-G.R. CR No. 00949. In its Decision dated June 28, 2005, the Court of Appeals affirmed with modifications the RTC judgment, to wit: WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing premises, the Decision subject of this review is hereby AFFIRMED, save for several modifications in the civil aspect. Accordingly, the civil indemnity is reduced to P50,000.00; moral damages reduced to P50,000.00; actual damages reduced to P144,375.75 and unearned income reduced to P2,571,696.10. [7] Initially, Ayochok filed a Motion for Reconsideration [8] of the foregoing Decision of the Court of Appeals. Subsequently, however, Ayochok filed a Motion to Withdraw Motion for Reconsideration with Notice of Appeal [9] since he believed there was no chance that the appellate court would reverse itself, and prayed that the case already be forwarded to us instead. In a Resolution dated June 14, 2006, the Court of Appeals denied Ayochok's Motion to Withdraw Motion for Reconsideration with Notice of Appeal. In another Resolution dated August 11, 2006, the appellate court denied Ayochok's Motion for Reconsideration of the Decision dated June 28, 2005. Ayochok, through counsel, filed a Notice of Appeal with the Court of Appeals conveying his intention to appeal to us the Decision dated June 28, 2005 of said court. On December 29, 2006, the Judicial Records Division of the Court of Appeals elevated to us the original records of CA-G.R. CR No. 00949, [10] and Ayochok's appeal was docketed as G.R. No. 175784. On February 12, 2007, we required the parties in G.R. No. 175784 to file their supplemental briefs. [11] Ayochok filed h