G.R. No. 232380 - PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, VS. RONALD JAURIGUE @ "RON-RON" A.K.A. RONALDO VICENTE Y JAURIGUE, ACCUSED-.

Ruling

accordingly sentenced him to suffer the penalty of imprisonment of reclusion perpetua to death and ordered him to pay Charles' heirs the amounts of P6,466.00 [12] as actual and compensatory damages, P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, P30,000.00 as moral damages, and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, plus costs of suit. On the other hand, BJ was acquitted on the ground of reasonable doubt. [13] The trial court ruled that the prosecution sufficiently proved all the elements of the crime charged based on the testimonies of no less than three (3) witnesses who categorically stated that it was Ronald who shot Charles. It also held that the killing was qualified to Murder, considering that Charles was shot when he was trapped in his unit without any means of escape. On this note, the RTC found Ronald's defense of denial and alibi unavailing in light of such positive identification of him as the culprit. On the other hand, there was no showing that BJ assented to the killing, opining that he was merely present at the scene of the crime, there being no overt act on his part, thereby warranting his acquittal. [14] Aggrieved, Ronald appealed to the CA. [15] The CA Ruling In a Decision [16] dated November 23, 2016, the CA affirmed Ronald's conviction with the following modifications: ( a ) he is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua ; and ( b ) ordered to pay Charles' heirs the amounts of P100,000.00 as civil indemnity, P100,000.00 as moral damages, P100,000.00 as exemplary damages, and P50,000.00 as temperate damages, with legal interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum on all amounts from the finality of the decision until full payment. [17] It held that there was no reason to disturb the RTC's factual findings, and that Ronald's culpability was clear based on the positive identification of the witnesses. [18] Hence, this appeal. The Issue Before the Court The issue before the Court is whether or not the CA correctly affirmed accused-appellant's conviction for the crime of Murder. The Court's Ruling At the outset, it must be stressed that an appeal in criminal cases opens the entire case for review, and it is the duty of the reviewing tribunal to correct, cite, and appreciate errors in the appealed judgment, whether they are assigned or unassigned. [19] The appeal confers the appellate court full jurisdiction over the case and renders such court competent to examine the records, revise the judgment appealed from, increase the penalty, and cite the proper provision of the penal law. [20] Guided by the foregoing considerations, the Court modifies Ronald's conviction, as will be explained hereunder. Article 248 of the RPC reads: Article 248. Murder. Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall kill another, shall be guilty of murder and shall be punished by reclusion perpetua , to death if committed with any of the following attendant circumstances: 1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, wit