SECOND DIVISION
G.R. No. 224289, August 14, 2019
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, v. DANG ANGELES Y GUARIN, JAMES SANTOS @ "CHITA," DENNIS RAMOS, AND SONNY BAYNOSA @ "JONG," ACCUSED, DANG ANGELES Y GUARIN, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
D E C I S I O N
LAZARO-JAVIER, J.:
Criminal Case No. L-8886
The undersigned hereby accuses DANG ANGELES y GUARIN, JAMES SANTOS @, "Chita", DENNIS RAMOS and JOHN DOE @, "JHONG" of the crime of MURDER committed as follows:"That on or about 11:45 o'clock in the evening of April 27, 2010 in Brgy. Gayaman, Binmaley, Pangasinan and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring, confederating, and mutually helping one another, with treachery, abuse of superior strength and evident premeditation, with intent to kill, did, then and there, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and stab ABELARDO Q. EVANGELISTA, with the use of a (sic) bladed weapons inflicting upon him injuries as shown in the autopsy report which caused his instantaneous death, to the damage and prejudice of his heirs. "
Contrary to Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code.4x x x x x x x x x
Criminal Case No. L-8887
The undersigned hereby accuses DANG ANGELES y GUARIN, JAMES SANTOS @, "Chita", DENNIS RAMOS, and SONNY BAYNOSA @ "Jong" of the crime of FRUSTRATED MURDER committed as follows:"That on or about 11:45 o'clock in the evening of April 27, 2010 at Brgy. Gayaman, Binmaley, Pangasinan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, armed with knives, conspiring, confederating and mutually helping one another, with intent to kill, with treachery and taking advantage of their superior strength, did then and there, (willfully), unlawfully and feloniously attack, stab and hit ERIC Q. EVANGELISTA, inflicting upon him "lacerated wound 1 cm back scapula area", secondary to stabbing, the accused having thus performed all the acts of execution which would have produced the crime of Murder but which did not produce it by reason of cause/s independent of the will of the accused, that is due to the timely medical assistance rendered to ERIC Q. EVANGELISTA to his damage and prejudice."
CONTRARY to Article 248 in relation to Art. 6 of the Revised Penal Code.5x x x x x x x x x
Criminal Case No. L-8888
The undersigned hereby accuses DANG ANGELES y GUARIN, JAMES SANTOS @, "Chita", DENNIS RAMOS, and SONNY BAYNOSA @, "Jong" of the crime of FRUSTRATED MURDER committed as follows:"That on or about 11:45 o'clock in the evening of April 27, 2010 in Brgy. Gayaman, Binmaley, Pangasinan, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, armed with knives, conspiring, confederating and mutually helping one another, with intent to kill, with treachery and taking advantage of their superior strength, did then and there, (willfully), unlawfully and feloniously attack, stab and hit MARK RYAN Q. EVANGELISTA, inflicting upon him "Grade II Liver injury R. lobe Hmoritorcum secondary to stab wound R lumbar posterior aspect, the accused having thus performed all the acts of execution which would have produced the crime of Murder but which did not produce it by reason of cause/s independent of the will of the accused, that is due to the timely medical assistance rendered to MARK RYAN Q. EVANGELISTA, to his damage and prejudice."
CONTRARY to Article 248 in relation to Art. 6 of the Revised Penal Code.6
"A" to "A-2" : Joint Affidavit of Arrest executed by PO1 de Vera and PO1 Fernandez"B" to "B-1" : Domingo Evangelista's Sworn Statement and Supplemental Affidavit"C" to "C-1" : Rolando Quinto's Affidavit"D" to "D-1" : Eric Evangelista's Sworn Statement"E" to "E-1" : Mark Ryan Evangelista's Sworn Statement"F" to "F-1" : Certification of Police Blotter (Entry Nos. 01936, 01941-42)"G" to "G-1" : Certification of Police Blotter (Entry No. 01943)"H" : Two knives"I" to "1-2" Abelardo Evangelista's Death Certificate"J" to "J-1" Post Mortem Examination"K" to "K-3" Photos showing Abelardo's body and the wounds he sustained"L" to "L-3" : Medical Certificate issued to Eric Evangelista"M" to "M-7” : Receipts showing the expenses for treatment of Eric's injury" N" to "N-5" : Medical Certificate issued to Mark Ryan Evangelista“O” to "O-19” : Receipts showing the expenses for treatment of Mark Ryan
WHEREFORE, in Criminal Case No. 8886, the Court finds accused Dang Angeles y Guarin GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of MURDER as defined and penalized under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. He is further ordered to pay the heirs of Abelardo Evangelista P50,000.00 as civil indemnity ex delicto, P80,650.00 as actual damages, P50,000.00 as moral damages, and P30,000.00 as exemplary damages.
In Criminal Case No. 8887, the Court finds accused Dang Angeles y Guarin GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of ATTEMPTED MURDER, and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of two (2) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of prision correctional, as minimum, to eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as maximum, with all the accessory penalties imposed by law. He is further ordered to pay Eric Evangelista the amounts of P7,032.00. (sic) as actual damages, P40,000.00 as moral damages, and P20,000.00 as exemplary damages.
In Criminal Case No. 8888, the Court finds accused Dang Angeles y Guarin GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of FRUSTRATED MURDER, and is sentenced to suffer an indeterminate penalty from 6 years and 1 day of prision mayor as minimum, to 14 years, 8 months and 1 day of reclusion temporal as maximum. In addition, he is ordered to pay the victim Mark Ryan Evangelista the amount of P40,000.00 as moral damages, P68,712.00 as actual damages, and P25,000.00 as exemplary damages.
Let the records of these cases be sent to (the) archives insofar as accused James Santos, Dennis Ramos and Sonny Baynosa are concerned, to be revived upon their arrest.
SO ORDERED.28
WHEREFORE, the appeal is DENIED. The decision of the Regional Trial Court of Lingayen, Pangasinan, Branch 38 (RTC) is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION as follows:
In Criminal Case No. L-8886, accused-appellant Dang Angeles y Guarin is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder and is sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. Accused-appellant is ordered to pay the heirs of Abelardo Q. Evangelista the amounts of Seventy-Five Thousand Pesos (P75,000.00) for civil indemnity, Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00) for moral damages, Thirty Thousand Pesos (P30,000.00) for exemplary damages and Eighty Thousand Six Hundred Fifty Pesos (P80,650.00) for actual damages as well as interest on all these damages assessed at the legal rate of 6% from date of finality of this decision until fully paid.
In Criminal Case No. L-8887, accused-appellant Dang Angeles y Guarin is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of attempted murder and is sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of two (2) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of prision correccional, as minimum to eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as maximum. Accused-appellant is ordered to pay Eric Q. Evangelista the amounts of Forty Thousand Pesos (P40,000.00) for moral damages, Twenty Thousand Pesos (P20,000.00) for exemplary damages and Twenty-Five Thousand Pesos (P25,000.00) for temperate damages as well as interest on all these damages assessed at the legal rate of 6% from date of finality of this decision until fully paid.
In Criminal Case No. L-8888, accused-appellant Dang Angeles y Guarin is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of frustrated murder and is sentenced to suffer the indeterminate penalty of eight (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as minimum, to fourteen (14) years, eight (8) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum. Accused-appellant is ordered to pay Mark Ryan Q. Evangelista the amounts of Forty Thousand Pesos (P40,000.00) for moral damages, Twenty Thousand Pesos (P20,000.00) for exemplary damages and Sixty-Eight Thousand Seven Hundred Twelve Pesos (P68,712.00) for actual damages as well as interest on all these damages assessed at the legal rate of 6% from date of finality of this decision until fully paid.
SO ORDERED.45
Jimmy and Ernesto were shown to have acted in conspiracy when they assaulted Wilfredo. Although their agreement concerning the commission of the felony, and their decision to commit it were not established by direct evidence, the records contained clear and firm showing of their having acted in concert to achieve a common design – that of assaulting Wilfredo. Direct proof of the agreement concerning the commission of a felony, and of the decision to commit it is not always accessible, but that should not be a hindrance to rendering a finding of implied conspiracy. (Emphasis supplied)
x x x x The presence of conspiracy in this case may be inferred from the following circumstances where all the accused acted in concert at the time of the commission of the offense, to wit: (1) The accused-appellant together with the other accused arrived at the crime scene at the same time, (2) Accused-appellant alighted from the same tricycle where the other accused rode, (3) Accused-appellant and the other accused successively assaulted the victims – x x x x ; and (4) All accused fled from the crime scene immediately after the stabbing incident.51 x x x x
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:
- With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed men, or employing means to weaken the defense or of means or persons to insure or afford impunity;
x x x x x x x x x
Eric Evangelista Q: Thereafter, what transpired next, Mr. Witness? A: Then, my older brother, Abelardo Evangelista, was also stabbed by Dennis Ramos, Madam. Q: And what portion of his body was stabbed by accused Dennis Ramos was hit (sic)? A: He was hit on (the) left side of his abdomen, Madam. Q: What was the weapon used by Dennis Ramos in stabbing your brother, Abelardo Evangelista, on the left stomach of his body? A: A knife, Madam. Q: And after he was stabbed, what happened next, Mr. Witness? A: Then, James Santos helped each other in stabbing my brother wherein Dennis Ramos again stabbed my older brother, Abelardo Evangelista, on the right side of his stomach, Madam.57 x x x x x x x x x COURT Q: Who stabbed your brother, Abelardo Evangelista first? WITNESS A: Dennis Ramos, sir. Q: And he (was) hit on what part? A: Left side of his stomach, sir. Q: And then you said the other accused helped each other in attacking your brother, Abelardo? A: Yes, sir. Q: Did you see if aside from Dennis Ramos the other accused also stabbed your brother? A: Yes, sir. Q: Who was the second person who stabbed your brother, Abelardo Evangelista, if you know? A: James (Santos), alias "Chita", sir. Q: What did he use in stabbing your brother? A: A knife, sir. Q: What part of the body of your brother Abelardo Evangelista, was hit by James Santos? A: On his right abdomen, sir.[58 x x x x x x x x x Q: So, after James Santos, alias "Chita" stabbed your brother, Abelardo Evangelista, on the right abdomen, who was the next one who stabbed your brother, Mr. Witness? WITNESS: A: Dang Angeles, Madam. Q: And what portion of the body of your brother was hit by accused Dang Angeles? A: On his left chest, Madam. Q: And what was the weapon used by accused Dang Angeles when he stabbed your brother on his left chest? A: He used icepick, Madam. Q: Can you tell us, if you know, how long that icepick which was used by Dang Angeles when he stabbed your brother? A: One (1) foot long, Madam. Q: And at that time after sustaining three (3) fatal wound(s), Mr. Witness, can you tell us the relative condition of your brother? A: He turned weak, Madam. Q: But he was still standing? A: Yes, Madam. Q: So, after Dang Angeles stabbed him, what transpired next, Mr. Witness? A: Then, Sonny Baynosa followed in stabbing my brother, Madam. Q: And what portion was hit by Sonny Baynosa, alias "Jong"? A: On his right chest, Madam. Q: And what weapon was used by accused Sonny Baynosa, alias "Jong" when he stabbed your brother on his right chest x x x x A: Icepick about a foot long, Madam, of the same size. Q: And after he was stabbed by accused Sonny Baynosa, alias "Jong", what happened to your brother, Abelardo Evangelista, Mr. Witness? A: Then, he died, Madam.[59 x x x x x x x x x Mark Ryan Evangelista Q: When you fell down, what transpired next, Mr. Witness? A: Then my older brother Abelardo came to us.[60 x x x x x x x x x Q: What happened Mr. Witness, when your brother who is the victim in this case Abelardo Evangelista went out to see likewise what was happening to you and your other brothers? A: He was stabbed by Dennis Ramos.[61 x x x x x x x x x Q: What happened to your brother Abelardo after he was stabbed by Dennis x x x x ? A: He was also stabbed by James Santos.[62 x x x x x x x x x Q: So, after he was hit for the second time by accused James Santos, what happened to your brother, Mr. Witness? A: Then Dang Angeles stabbed my brother again on the left chest x x x x[63 x x x x x x x x x Q: So after he was hit with an icepick by accused Dang Angeles which you said to the Court, he was hit on his left chest, what happened to your brother? A: Then Sonny Baynosa stabbed my brother Abelardo with an icepick on his right chest.[64 x x x x x x x x x Rolando Quinto Q: Mr. witness, after victim Mark Ryan Evangelista had fallen likewise (in) the ground due to stab wound he sustained from accused James Santos, what happened next? A: Then Abelardo also arrived, ma'am. Q: This Abelardo that you are referring to is the victim in this case? A: Yes, ma'am. Q: What happened when Abelardo arrived? A: Dennis suddenly stabbed him on his stomach, ma'am. Q: What happened to Abelardo when he was stabbed by Dennis? A: He was stabbed by James and then they helped each other in stabbing him, ma'am. Q: You said that Abelardo was stabbed by Dennis and James, can you tell us the names of those persons who also stabbed Abelardo aside from Dennis and James? A: Dang Angeles and Sonny Baynosa alias Jhong also stabbed him, ma'am.[65 x x x x x x x x x Q: So who followed James, was it Dang Angeles or Sonny Baynosa? A: Dang Angeles followed James in stabbing Abelardo, ma'am.[66 x x x x x x x x x Q: After Dang Angeles hit Abelardo on his left chest, he was followed by Sonny Baynosa? A: Yes, ma'am.[67 x x x x x x x x x Q: So that, (sic) after the victim in this case sustained at least four (4) stab wounds inflicted by the accused one after the other using their respective weapons, can you tell this Honorable Court what transpired next? A: He fell on the ground when Dennis stabbed him again on his back, ma'am.[68 x x x x x x x x x
In cases where the issue rests on the credibility of witnesses, as in this case, it is important to emphasize the well-settled rule that "appellate courts accord the highest respect to the assessment made by the trial court because of the trial judge's unique opportunity to observe the witnesses firsthand and to note their demeanor, conduct and attitude under grueling examination."
We explained in Reyes, Jr. v. Court of Appeals that the findings of the trial court will not be overturned absent any clear showing that it had overlooked, misunderstood or misapplied some facts or circumstances of weight or substance that could have altered the outcome of the case, viz.:Also, the issue hinges on credibility of witnesses. We have consistently adhered to the rule that where the culpability or innocence of an accused would hinge on the issue of credibility of witnesses and the veracity of their testimonies, findings of the trial court are given the highest degree of respect. These findings will not be ordinarily disturbed by an appellate court absent any clear showing that the trial court has overlooked, misunderstood or misapplied some facts or circumstances of weight or substance which could very well affect the outcome of the case. It is the trial court that had the opportunity to observe 'the witnesses' manner of testifying, their furtive glances, calmness, sighs or their scant or full realization of their oaths. It had the better opportunity to observe the witnesses firsthand and note their demeanor, conduct and attitude under grueling examination. Inconsistencies or contradictions in the testimony of the victim do not affect the veracity of the testimony if the inconsistencies do not pertain to material points. (Emphasis supplied)x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x
Noteworthy, in People v. Banez, the Court ruled that it is not at all uncommon or unnatural for a witness who, as in this case, having seen the killing of a person, did not even move, help, or run away from the crime scene, but simply chose to stay and continue plowing. It explained its ruling as follows:It is settled that there could be no hard and fast gauge for measuring a person's reaction or behavior when confronted with a startling, not to mention horrifying, occurrence, as in this case. Witnesses of startling occurrences react differently depending upon their situation and state of mind, and there is no standard form of human behavioral response when one is confronted with a strange, startling or frightful experience. The workings of the human mind placed under emotional stress are unpredictable, and people react differently to shocking stimulus - some may shout, some may faint, and others may be plunged into insensibility. (Emphasis supplied)x x x x x x x x x
x x x x x x x x x
In the instant case, it is evident that the attack in the victim made by accused-appellant and by the other accused was sudden and deliberate. The attack was unexpected on the part of the unarmed victims considering that they were in their house celebrating the forthcoming wedding of their sister. The attack was executed in a manner that the victims were renderd defenseless and unable to retaliate. The severity of the wounds forestalled any possibility of resisting attack. Without doubt, accused-appellant and his co-accused took advantage of the situation. The acts of accused-appellant and his co-accused were clear indications that they employed means and methods which tended directly and specifically to ensure the successful execution of the offense.83x x x x x x x x x
Art. 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted felonies. — Consummated felonies as well as those which are frustrated and attempted, are punishable.
A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present; and it is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator.
There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly or over acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than this own spontaneous desistance. (Emphasis supplied)
x x x x x x x x x Q: Doctor, in connection with Criminal Case No. L-8887 – Eric Evangelista, can you tell us if there was a time (that) you treated him? A: Yes, I did attend (to) this patient. I admitted him on April 28, 2010 and discharged him the following day, April 29, 2010. Q: Can you tell us the x x x physical condition of the patient, if you can recall? A: x x x during the time I attended to this patient he sustained a stab wound at the right scapular area x x x (Witness pointing to the right back in this area scapular bone at the right).[86 x x x x x x x x x Q: Aside from this stab wound, did you find any injury from the body of the victim Eric Evangelista? A: No more. Q: Can you tell the Honorable Court what would be the possible effect the cause in connection (with) this injury if it bot be (sic) treated immediately x x x? A: I think you are referring to whether the wound is fatal? Before I answer that all wound(s) no matter (how) superficial is fatal if you will not seek medical attendance. You might develop tetanus or because the wound was attended properly and medical attendance that wound is none (sic) fatal. We remove that factor about possible infection. COURT: Q: What if factor not considered, will you consider? WITNESS: A: It is not fatal. PROSECUTOR PORLUCAS: Q: As a follow up doctor, you stated this is stab wound, the injury of victim Eric Evangelista is not fatal. Can you tell the Honorable Court likewise the complication that may set in if no medical attendance and can you tell this is not fatal will heal of (sic) its own? WITNESS: A: Yes. Q: And can you tell this Honorable Court without any adequate medical attendance, how many days will it heal? A: Ten (10) days because of the possible infection.[87x x x x x x x x x
That the head wounds sustained by the victim were merely superficial and could not have produced his death does not negate petitioners' criminal liability for attempted murder. Even if Edgardo did not hit the victim squarely on the head, petitioners are still criminally liable for attempted murder.x x x x x x x x x
The first requisite of an attempted felony consists of two elements, namely:
(1) That there be external acts; (2) Such external acts have direct connection with the crime intended to be committed.
The Court in People v. Lizada elaborated on the concept of an overt or external act, thus:An overt or external act is defined as some physical activity or deed, indicating the intention to commit a particular crime, more than a mere planning or preparation, which if carried out to its complete termination following its natural course, without being frustrated by external obstacles nor by the spontaneous desistance of the perpetrator, will logically and necessarily ripen into a concrete offense. The raison d'etre for the law requiring a direct overt act is that, in a majority of cases, the conduct of the accused consisting merely of acts of preparation has never ceased to be equivocal; and this is necessarily so, irrespective of his declared intent. It is that quality of being equivocal that must be lacking before the act becomes one which may be said to be a commencement of the commission of the crime, or an overt act or before any fragment of the crime itself has been committed, and this is so for the reason that so long as the equivocal quality remains, no one can say with certainty what the intent of the accused is. It is necessary that the overt act should have been the ultimate step towards the consummation of the design. It is sufficient if it was the "first or some subsequent step in a direct movement towards the commission of the offense after the preparations are made." The act done need not constitute the last proximate one for completion. It is necessary, however, that the attempt must have a causal relation to the intended crime. In the words of Viada, the overt acts must have an immediate and necessary relation to the offense.
In the case at bar, petitioners, who acted in concert, commenced the felony of murder by mauling the victim and hitting him three times with a hollow block; they narrowly missed hitting the middle portion of his head. If Edgardo had done so, Ruben would surely have died.
x x x x x x x x x PROSECUTOR PORCULAS: Q: Likewise, doctor, the private complainant is Mark Ryan Q. Evangelista. Can you tell the Court if you remember treat(ing) this victim on April 28, 2010? WITNESS: A: Yes. I admit(ted) the patient and was discharged (in) May 7, 2010. Q: Can you tell us likewise the physical condition of the victim at the time of the admition (sic)? A: At the time of the admition (sic) of the patient and after a few hours the condition of the patient worsen and I have to schedule the operation. Q: Can you tell us what were the injury or injuries sustained as you noticed to the patient when you admit(ted) him? A: There was (a) stab wound at the right lower back, in this area. "Witness pointing to his lower back. Q: And aside from that, what else did you do? A: I think the main injury of this patient. Q: So, that is the main injury. You mean it is fatal injury, doctor? A: Yes, (it) is fatal. Q: What did you do when you immediately noticed his fatal injury, doctor? A: This patient was admitted to the ICU at 1:30 in the morning and then, at about 1:10 in the (afternoon) about twelve (12) hours as admitted in the ICU I noticed that there is something wrong, so, I scheduled immediately operation. Q: Few hours, thereafter, from admission this patient's operation was done upon his person? A: Yes. Q: What was the result of your operation? A: When I open the entire abdomen was filled of clotted (sic) blood meaning none clotting component in the entire abdomen and the reason for that was, the liver was injured. There was stab wound.[91 x x x x x x x x x Q: Aside from qualification of the injury as fatal in nature, can you tell us if you can approximately or probable time that the victim will sustain his life any probable adequate medical attendance? A: The patient may die on the same depending (on) the rate of the bleeding or fast bleeding the patient might live about 1 to 3 days depending on the rate of the blood lost inside.[92 x x x x x x x x x
As for BBB's case, We agree with the RTC and CA's factual finding that the eight gunshot wounds sustained by BBB, as contained in the Medico-Legal Certificate, would have caused his death if he was not given timely medical attention. Furthermore, it does not appear that BBB was armed or was in a position to deflect the attack. As a matter of fact, based on CCC's narration of the events that transpired, the suddenness of the attack upon AAA and BBB cannot be denied. Only that, unlike AAA, BBB survived.
The act of killing becomes frustrated when an offender performs all the acts of execution which could produce the crime but did not produce it for reasons independent of his or her will.
Here, taking into consideration the fact that BBB was shot eight times with the use of a firearm and that AAA, who was with him at that time, was killed, convinces Us that the malefactor intended to take EBB's life as well. However, unlike in AAA's case, BBB survived. It was also established that he survived not because the wounds were not fatal, but because timely medical attention was rendered to him. Definitely, EBB's survival was independent of the perpetrator's will. As such, this Court is convinced that the attack upon BBB qualifies as frustrated murder.
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 x x x x
x x x x x x x x x
Following the jurisprudence laid down by the Court in People v. Jugueta, accused-appellants are ordered to pay the heirs of Hernando Villegas, Jose Villegas, and Benito Basug, Jr. P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P75,000.00 as exemplary damages. It was also ruled in Jugueta that when no documentary evidence of burial or funeral expenses is presented in court, the amount of P50,000.00 as temperate damages shall be awarded. In addition, interest at the rate of six percent per annum shall be imposed on all monetary awards from the date of finality of this decision until fully paid.x x x x x x x x x
Art. 51. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of attempted crimes. — A penalty lower by two degrees than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be imposed upon the principals in an attempt to commit a felony.
I. For those crimes like, Murder, Parricide, Serious Intentional Mutilation, Infanticide, and other crimes involving death of a victim where the penalty consists of indivisible penalties:x x x x
2.2 Where the crime committed was not consummated:
b. Attempted:i. Civil indemnity – P25,000.00
ii. Moral damages – P25,000.00
iii. Exemplary damages – P25,000.00
When actual damages proven by receipts during the trial amount to less than P25,000.00, the award of temperate damages for P25,000.00 is justified in lieu of actual damages of a lesser amount. Conversely, if the amount of actual damages proven exceeds P25,000.00 then temperate damages may no longer be awarded; actual damages base on the receipts presented during trial should instead be granted.x x x x x x x x x
In the case of Eric Evangelista, the actual damages proven during the trial amount to less than P25,000.00. Only medical expenses amounting to P7,032.00 were duly supported by receipts. Thus, the award of temperate damages of P25,000.00 in lieu of P7,032.00 as actual damages is justified.102
Art. 50. Penalty to be imposed upon principals of a frustrated crime. — The penalty next lower in degree than that prescribed by law for the consummated felony shall be imposed upon the principal in a frustrated felony.
II. For those crimes like, Murder, Parricide, Serious Intentional Mutilation, Infanticide, and other crimes involving death of a victim where the penalty consists of indivisible penalties:x x x x
2.2 Where the crime committed was not consummated:
a. Frustrated:i. Civil indemnity – P50,000.00
ii. Moral damages – P50,000.00
iii. Exemplary damages – P50,000.00
Endnotes:
1 Penned by Associate Justice Myra V. Garcia-Fernandez and concurred in by Associate Justice Mario V. Lopez and now retired SC Associate Justice Noel G. Tijam, CA rollo, pp. 130-147.
2 Penned by Presiding Judge Teodoro C. Fernandez; Decision dated August 12, 2011 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 38, Lingayen, Pangasinan, in Criminal Case Nos. L-8886, L-8887, and L-8888, entitled People of the Philippines v. Dang Angeles y Guarin, James Santos @ "Chita, " Dennis Ramos, and Sonny Daynosa @ "Jong;" CA rollo, pp. 19-29; Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), pp. 206-216.
3 "John Doe" was later identified to be Sonny Baynosa alias "Jong" or "Jhong," Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), p. 92.
4 Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), pp. 29-30.
5 Record (Criminal Case No. L-8887), p. 64.
6 Record (Criminal Case No. L-8888), p. 58.
7 Record (Criminal Case No. L-8887), p. 93; A fourth case for Murder was also filed against appellant Dang Angeles for the death of Elmer Q. Evangelista. This case was docketed as Criminal Case No. L-8885, and was raffled to RTC, Branch 68. Considering, however, that the victim in said case involved a minor, Judge Georgina D. Hidalgo denied the consolidation of said case to the other three cases; See Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), p. 68.
8 Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), p. 72; Record (Criminal Case No. L-8887), pp. 46 and 48.
9 TSN, August 16, 2010, pp. 9-10; TSN, August 31, 2010, p. 3.
10 TSN, August 16, 2010, pp. 10 and 12-13; TSN, August 31, 2010, p. 4; TSN, September 15, 2010, p. 6.
11 TSN, August 16, 2010, pp. 11-17; TSN, August 31, 2010, pp. 5-10 and 12-13; TSN, September 15, 2010, pp. 8-14.
12 TSN, August 16, 2010, pp. 11-17; TSN, August 31, 2010, pp. 5-10 and 12-13; TSN, September 15, 2010, pp. 8-14.
13 TSN, August 16, 2010, pp. 11-17; TSN, August 31, 2010, pp. 5-10 and 12-13; TSN, September 15, 2010, pp. 8-14.
14 TSN, September 15, 2010, p. 9.
15 TSN, August 31, 2010, p. 13; TSN, September 15, 2010, pp. 13-15.
16 TSN, September 15, 2010, p. 14.
17 TSN, August 31, 2010, pp. 13-14.
18 TSN, February 9, 2011, pp. 5-7.
19Id. at 9-12.
20 See Joint Affidavit of Arrest, Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), p. 10; TSN, August 25, 2010, pp. 4-7; TSN, September 8, 2010, pp. 6-8.
21 TSN, November 3, 2010, pp. 3-4.
22Id. at 4-5.
23Id. at 5-6.
24Id. at 7.
25Id. at 7 and 11.
26Id. at 8.
27 CA Rollo, pp. 19-29; Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), pp. 206-216.
28 CA rollo, pp. 28-29; Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), pp. 215-216
29 See Appellant's Brief dated July 20, 2012; CA rollo, pp. 52-75.
30Id. at 66-67.
31Id. at 67.
32Id. at 67-68.
33Id. at 69.
34Id. at 69.
35Id. at 70.
36Id. at 70-72.
37Id. at 72-73.
38 See the People's Brief dated November 19, 2012, CA rollo, pp. 93-118.
39Id. at 108-109.
40Id. at 109-111.
41Id. at 109-111.
42Id. at 113-115.
43Id. at 116-117.
44 CA rollo, pp. 130-147.
45Id. at 145-147.
46Id. at 35-37.
47Id. at 28-30.
48People of the Philippines v. Jimmy Evasco, et al., G.R. No. 213415, September 26, 2018.
49People of the Philippines v. Jimmy Evasco, et al., G.R. No. 213415, September 26, 2018.
50 G.R. No. 213415, September 26, 2018.
51 CA rollo, pp. 138-139.
52 See People of the Philippines v. Ronelo Bermuda, et al., G.R. No. 225322, July 04, 2018.
53 An Act to Impose the Death Penalty on Certain Heinous Crimes, Amending for that Purpose the Revised Penal Laws, as Amended, Other Special Penal Laws, and for Other Purposes.
54People of the Philippines v. Charlie Flores, et al., G.R. No. 228886, August 08, 2018.
55 Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), p. 22.
56 Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), p. 17.
57 TSN, August 16, 2010, pp. 13-14.
58Id. at 14-15.
59Id. at 15-16.
60 TSN, August 31, 2010, p. 7.
61Id.
62 TSN, August 31, 2010, p. 9.
63Id.
64Id. at 10.
65 TSN, September 15, 2010, pp. 10-11.
66Id. at 12.
67Id.
68Id. at 13.
69 CA rollo, p. 84.
70People of the Philippines v. Marcial D. Pulgo, 813 Phil. 205, 211-212 (2017).
71 G.R. No. 218200, August 15, 2018.
72 G.R. No. 203121, November 29, 2017, 847 SCRA 113, 132.
73Romeo Ilisan v. People of the Philippines, 649 Phil. 151, 160 (2010).
74 Supra note 72, at 133.
75People of the Philippines v. Alberto Petalino, G.R. No. 213222, September 24, 2018.
76 TSN, November 3, 2010, p. 22.
77 CA rollo, p. 73.
78People of the Philippines v. Roger Racal, G.R. No. 224886, September 4, 2017, 838 SCRA 476, 489.
79People of the Philippines v. Cezar Cortez, et al., G.R. No. 239137, December 05, 2018.
80 See 141 Phil. 43, 50 (1969).
81 182 Phil. 398, 411 (1979).
82 Supra note 70, at 217.
83 CA rollo, pp. 137-138.
84 See Miguel Cirera y Ustelo v. People of the Philippines, 739 Phil. 25, 39 (2014).
85 750 Phil. 120, 132-133 (2015), citing Rivera v. People, 515 Phil. 824, 833 (2006).
86 TSN, February 9, 2011, p. 5.
87 TSN, February 9, 2011, pp. 6-7.
88People of the Philippines v. Ireneo Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806, 820 (2016).
89Gary Fantastico, et al. v. People of the Philippines, et al., supra note 85, at 833.
90Esmeraldo Rivera, et al. v. People of the Philippines, 515 Phil. 824, 833-834 (2006), citing People of the Philippines v. Freddie Lizada, 444 Phil. 67, 98-99 (2003).
91 TSN, February 9, 2011, pp. 8-10.
92Id. at 10.
93Miguel Cirera y Ustelo v. People of the Philippines, supra note 84, at 40.
94People of the Philippines v. Benito Lababo, G.R. No. 234651, June 06, 2018.
95 Art. 63. Rules for the application of indivisible penalties. — x x x x
In all cases in which the law prescribes a penalty composed of two indivisible penalties, the following rules shall be observed in the application thereof:
x x x x
2. When there are neither mitigating nor aggravating circumstances and there is no aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty shall be applied.
96 G.R. No. 206725, July 11, 2018.
97 Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), pp. 94-95.
98 Supra note 88, at 846-847.
99Gary Fantastico, et al. v. People of the Philippines, et al., 750 Phil. 120, 139-140 (2015).
100 Exhibits "M" to "M-7"; Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), pp. 162-168.
101 Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), p. 155.
102 CA rollo, pp. 143-144.
103 456 Phil. 14, 28 (2003).
104 445 Phil. 109, 126 (2003).
105 Exhibits "O" to "O-19"; Record (Criminal Case No. L-8886), pp. 170-186.