Case Digest (G.R. No. L-36377)
Case Digest (G.R. No. L-36377)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Noel Agda and Romy Gelina, G.R. No. L-36377, January 30, 1982, Supreme Court Second Division, Concepcion, Jr., J., writing for the Court.On November 30, 1969, at about 10:00 p.m., Antonio Quitorio was stabbed and died a short time later during a drinking party in the poblacion of Dolores, Eastern Samar. An information for murder dated February 24, 1970, was filed in the Court of First Instance of Samar, Branch VIII charging Noel Agda and Romy Gelina with conspiring and acting together to stab and kill Quitorio.
After arraignment and trial, the trial court, in a decision dated November 20, 1972, convicted both Agda and Gelina of murder and sentenced each to reclusion perpetua, ordered indemnity of P12,000 to the heirs, and imposed accessory penalties. The accused appealed on December 16, 1971. Later, appellant Noel Agda moved to withdraw his appeal, which this Court granted on July 6, 1981, leaving Romy Gelina as the remaining appellant before the Court.
Prosecution witnesses Victor Almazan and Paulino Beros testified they were at a drinking spree at Toribio Crisologo’s house when Agda and Gelina arrived, drank, and then asked permission to leave. Almazan went outside to urinate and, upon hearing a noise, saw Agda stab a man who later was identified as Quitorio; Gelina was seen standing nearby; both fled. Quitorio managed briefly to say, “I am stabbed by Noel Agda,” then collapsed and died. The post-mortem by Dr. Necito, Jr. showed a clean penetrating stab wound of the anterior abdominal wall causing fatal hemorrhage; there was also a lower lip injury possibly from a fist blow. The doctor recorded the infliction at about 10:00 p.m. and death at about 10:30 p.m.
The defense for both accused asserted an alibi: they claimed they left Crisologo’s house around 7:00 p.m. and thereafter drank at Francisco Magro’s house from about 8:00 p.m. until 2:00 a.m., where they allegedly slept. At trial the testimonies of Almazan and Beros were credited by the trial court as clear and positive; the trial court also found treachery established and convicted both accused. On appeal, however, the prosecution and defense agreed there was no proof of conspiracy. The Supreme Court reviewed the trial court’s findings and, upon recommendation of the Solicitor General, modified the decision by reversing and setting aside Gelina’s conviction and acquitting him for lack of evidence; Justice Aquino filed a dissent arguing Gelina should have been affirmed.
Issues:
- Was appellant Romy Gelina proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt as a principal or co-conspirator in the murder of Antonio Quitorio?
- Was treachery established as an aggravating circumstance in the killing?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)