Case Digest (G.R. No. 100199)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Prudencio Dominguez and Rodolfo Macalisang, G.R. No. 100199, January 18, 1993, Supreme Court Second Division, Per Curiam. The case involves the prosecution of Prudencio Dominguez (then Mayor of Sinacaban, Misamis Occidental) and Rodolfo Macalisang (his brother-in-law and a PC/CHDF supervisor) for the murders of Regional Trial Court Judge Purita A. Boligor and her brother Luther Avancena on the night of 6 February 1986.On the evening in question Mayor Dominguez and his brother Roger visited Judge Boligor’s house in an INP jeep driven by Felix Am-is. Rodolfo Macalisang was seen loitering near the vehicle. The Mayor and Roger entered the house and, about ten minutes later, Macalisang allegedly entered with an M-16 rifle; bursts of gunfire were heard; the Mayor and Roger ran out and fled in the waiting jeep; Macalisang left the scene into the darkness. Judge Boligor and Luther were found dead from multiple gunshot wounds.
At trial the prosecution’s case rested largely on the testimony of Oscar Cagod, who claimed to have witnessed the sequence from a store across the street. Defense attacked Cagod’s credibility (relationship to the victim, four-month delay in giving a statement, alleged promise of immunity, prior conviction at age twelve, and alleged inconsistencies) and presented ballistics reports and alibi testimony. Two other prosecution witnesses—Diosdado Avancena and Oscar Cagod—ceased to be available: Diosdado disappeared after direct examination (his testimony was stricken), and Cagod was slain after testifying.
The Regional Trial Court convicted Prudencio and Rodolfo of murder, sentencing them to reclusion perpetua and ordering indemnities of P30,000 each for each victim; Roger Dominguez was acquitted for lack of evidence. The trial court found treachery and the aggravating circumstances of dwelling and abuse of superior strength. The co...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in crediting the prosecution’s evidence, particularly the testimony of Oscar Cagod, despite his relationship to the victim, delay in giving a statement, alleged promise of immunity, prior juvenile conviction, and asserted inconsistencies?
- Did the trial court err in refusing to give weight to the accused’s evidence (ballistics and alibi) and thus in denying acquittal?
- Were the trial court’s findings as to aggravating/qualifying circu...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)