Case Digest (G.R. No. L-26103)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Elmer Estrada, G.R. No. L-26103, January 17, 1968, the Supreme Court En Banc, Angeles, J., writing for the Court. The accused-appellant is Elmer “Baby” Estrada; the victim was Alexander “Sonny” Almendras; the People prosecuted the criminal case.On the night of November 27, 1963, outside the Insular Cafe in Cebu City, gunshots were fired and Alexander Almendras was fatally wounded. Eyewitnesses saw three men standing in front of Almendras; one witness, Jorge Cordero, immediately told pursuing police that “Sonny gipusil ni Baby Estrada” (Sonny was shot by Baby Estrada) while carrying the dying victim. The police recovered the body, and an autopsy by Dr. Venerando Pilapil described a gunshot wound entering about 3.5 cm left of the median line at the second left rib, perforating the ascending aorta and lodging a slug posteriorly toward the right scapula.
Estrada, together with Alberto Tejero and others, was charged in the Court of First Instance of Cebu with murder with conspiracy and evident premeditation; aggravating circumstances alleged included nocturnity, grave abuse of superior strength and treachery. Both Estrada and Tejero pleaded not guilty and interposed alibi defenses. After the People rested, the defense moved for dismissal for insufficiency of evidence; the trial court denied the motion and ordered presentation of defense evidence. On February 17, 1964 the trial court convicted Estrada of murder (acquitting Tejero) and sentenced him to an indeterminate term under the Indeterminate Sentence Law (minimum 12 years and 1 day to maximum 20 years reclusion temporal), ordered indemnity of P3,000, and costs.
Estrada filed notice of appeal and the trial court set bail (released February 29, 1964 upon posting P20,000). Shortly thereafter he was rearrested for illegal possession of a .45 caliber pistol and his appeal bond was cancelled. The appeal proceeded to the Court of Appeals; because the Solicitor General failed to file the People’s brief, the case was submitted on appellant’s brief. The Court of Appeals denied a motion for bail (April 22, 1966) and, upon review, concluded that the trial court had erred in applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law and that the penalty appropriate for the...(Pro-only)
Issues:
- Was there sufficient evidence to establish conspiracy and to hold appellant Elmer Estrada criminally liable as a co-conspirator for the murder of Alexander Almendras?
- Was appellant’s alibi sufficiently proven to create reasonable doubt and defeat conviction?
- Was the out-of-court statement by Jorge Cordero to the police admissible as res gestae and, if admitted, did it improperly prejudice the accused?
- Were the alleged aggravating circumstances (nocturnity, treachery, grave abuse of superior strength) present?
- Was the indeterminate sentenc...(Pro-only)
Ruling:
- (Pro-only)
Ratio:
- (Pro-only)
Doctrine:
- (Pro-only)