Case Digest (G.R. No. 183094)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Reynaldo Barde, G.R. No. 183094, September 22, 2010, the Supreme Court First Division, Perez, J., writing for the Court. The prosecution charged Reynaldo Barde (appellant) and his brother Jimmy Barde with the complex crime of multiple murder and multiple frustrated murder for allegedly rolling and detonating an M26‑A1 fragmentation grenade inside a dancing place in Sitio Sto. Niño, Liguan, Rapu‑Rapu, Albay on or about 15 April 1999, causing fifteen (15) deaths and injuring many others. The Information (13 August 1999) alleged qualifying circumstances of treachery, evident premeditation and explosion. Upon arraignment both accused pleaded not guilty and trial ensued.At trial, prosecution witnesses including Elmer Oloroso and Antonio Barcelona testified they saw appellant enter the dance area, withdraw a rounded object from a belt bag, roll it toward the crowd and leave immediately; the object exploded seconds later. Forensic evidence (shrapnels and Physical Identification Report No. PI‑601‑A‑99) identified fragments recovered at the scene as from an M26‑A1 grenade. Numerous death certificates and medical records were offered for the victims. The police explosives expert, SPO2 Hipolito Talagtag, and a forensic chemical officer likewise corroborated the grenade evidence.
Appellant offered a defense of denial and alibi: he testified he had been at a nearby house, later entered the dancing place with brothers and was some 20–25 meters from the explosion; he claimed he and Jimmy were coerced to sign statements and were allegedly tortured while in custody. A late witness, Violeta Buemia, told a radio broadcaster she saw someone named Eddie outside the dancing place throw an object inside, but also admitted she saw appellant inside the venue before the explosion. Defense witnesses (including appellant’s mother and brothers) supported appellant’s version.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 1, Legazpi City, sentenced appellant on 29 January 2005 to reclusion perpetua after finding him guilty of the complex crime of multiple murder with multiple frustrated murder, and ordered indemnities and damages to the heirs and to surviving victims; Jimmy was acquitted for insufficiency of evidence and lack of proof of conspiracy. Reconsideration was denied (15 June 2005).
On appeal the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA‑G.R. CR‑H.C. No. 01245, Decision dated 24 September 2007, affirmed the RTC with modifications: it initially imposed death for murder (later reduced to reclusion perpetua because of Republic Act No. 9346...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was appellant’s conviction supported by proof beyond reasonable doubt, or should this Court disturb the factual findings of the trial court as affirmed by the Court of Appeals?
- What is the proper legal characterization of the offenses committed — multiple murder with multiple frustrated murder, or multiple murder with double attempted murder?
- What penalty should be imposed in view of the applicable law, including Republic Act No. 9346?
- What damages are properly awarded to the heirs...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)