G.R. No. 215320 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. MANUEL CORPUZ, ACCUSED-.D E C I S I O N - Supreme Court E-Library

Ruling

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court finds accused MANUEL CORPUZ guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of MURDER and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA in each of the aforesaid cases and to pay each of the heirs of the victims P75,000.00 by way of civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages and P25,000.00 as exemplary damages to the heirs of the victims. [30] Aggrieved, Manuel appealed before the CA. [31] The CA Ruling In its appealed decision, the CA affirmed with modification the RTC decision. The appellate court ruled that Manuel offered no sufficient reason to disturb the trial court's evaluation of the prosecution eyewitness' credibility. The appellate court further ruled that treachery and abuse of superior strength attended the commission of the crimes thereby qualifying them to murder. The appellate court, however, modified the RTC decision with respect to the award of damages by increasing exemplary damages to P30,000.00 from P25,000.00, and additionally awarding P25,000.00 as temperate damages for each count of murder. The dispositive portion of the appealed decision provides: WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Appeal is DENIED. The Decision dated 25 March 2011 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 10, Abuyog, Leyte in Criminal Case Nos. 2389 and 2390 finding accused­ appellant Manuel Corpuz guilty beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of Murder is hereby AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION . He is sentenced to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua without eligibility for parole. He is further ordered to pay the heirs of Leonila Histo and Romana Arcular the following: Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (Php 75,000.00) as civil indeminity; Fifty Thousand Pesos (Php 50,000.00) as moral damages; Thirty Thousand Pesos (Php 30,000.00) as exemplary damages; and Twenty-Five Thousand Pesos (Php 25,000.00) as temperate damages. All monetary awards for damages shall earn interest at the legal rate of 6% per annum from date of finality of this Decision until fully paid. [32] Hence, this appeal. ISSUE WHETHER THE TRIAL AND APPELLATE COURTS ERRED IN CONVICTING ACCUSED-APPELLANT MANUEL CORPUZ FOR THE DEATHS OF ROMANA ARCULAR AND LEONILA HISTO DESPITE THE PROSECUTION's FAILURE TO PROVE HIS GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. [33] THE COURT'S RULING The appeal lacks merit. No reason to disturb factual findings by the trial court; prosecution eyewitness is credible. Manuel insists that the trial and appellate courts erred in ruling that the prosecution was able to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. He argues that his conviction was based mainly on the testimony of Leonilo who, however, is not a credible witness. He points out that the police blotter clearly contradicts Leonilo's testimony that he actually saw Manuel hack Leonila and Romana. Thus, there is reasonable doubt on Leonilo's identification of Manuel as the person responsible for the deaths of the two victims. The Court is not persuaded. Entries in the police blotter