Case Digest (G.R. No. L-30882)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Constante Anies y Fabro, G.R. No. L-30882, October 29, 1982, the Supreme Court En Banc, Makasiar, Actg. C.J., writing for the Court. This is an automatic review of the death sentence with accessory penalties imposed on August 4, 1969 by the Circuit Criminal Court, Seventh Judicial District, Pasig, Rizal, in Criminal Case No. CCC‑VII‑153‑Quezon City (9467), after conviction for the murder of Jaime Cruz.The information, filed April 26, 1969, charged the defendant-appellant Constante Anies y Fabro with murder qualified by treachery and aggravated by evident premeditation. Anies was arraigned May 20, 1969 and pleaded not guilty. After trial the trial court found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced him to death, ordered indemnity of P12,000 to the heirs, and imposed costs.
The prosecution’s evidence established that on the night of April 24–25, 1969, at Daling’s Restaurant in Quezon City, Jaime Cruz was shot multiple times and died almost instantly. Eyewitness waitress Belen Gacias signed an extrajudicial statement and testified that Anies suddenly rose, walked up to Cruz, pulled a gun from his waist and fired five successive shots at a distance of about one and one‑half meters while Cruz was seated lighting a cigarette; Cruz’s lone companion was in the comfort room at the time. Police recovered a nickel‑plated .38 pistol, five empty cartridges and a slug from the scene; ballistic and chemistry reports linked the weapon and projectiles to the pistol bearing Serial No. 4‑9946, licensed to Evangelo Savellano.
Anies gave an extrajudicial statement admitting the shooting but asserting self‑defense: he claimed Cruz made a threatening remark, kicked his chair, put his right hand into his pocket as if to draw a weapon, and that Anies, being lame and fearing attack, drew the gun and fired. At trial Anies and a companion, Aniceto Velasco, corroborated the self‑defense story, but their testimony conflicted internally and with other evidence (e.g., distance of shooting, number and direction of wounds). The medico‑legal report recorded six gunshot wounds whose trajectories suggested the assailant was in front and slightly higher than the victim, consistent with Cruz being seated and unsuspecting. The trial court rejected self‑defense, credited the waitress’s immediate extrajudicial statement and the ballistic/necropsy evidence, and found the killing attended by treachery and evident premeditation.
On automatic review, the Supreme Court considered the trial record, the ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the plea of self‑defense established, taking into account appellant’s claim of unlawful aggression and his lameness?
- Was the circumstance of evident premeditation proven?
- Was the killing attended by treachery (alevosia)?
- Did the trial court err in drawing adverse inference of “criminal instinct” from appellant’s posse...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)