Case Digest (G.R. No. 252276) Core Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
The case involves Jerrico Juada y Navarro (accused-appellant), who was charged before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Malolos City, Bulacan, with robbery with homicide under Article 294 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act No. 7659. The incident occurred on December 18, 2011, in Bocaue, Bulacan, where Jerrico was accused of willfully and unlawfully robbing Florante Garcia y Celestino of cash amounting to P110,000.00 and a Colt MK IV caliber 45 pistol by means of violence and intimidation. During the robbery, Jerrico allegedly shot Florante treacherously on the temple, causing his immediate death. The prosecution relied on testimonies from various witnesses including traffic enforcer Amalia Valentin who saw the assailant disguised with a white cap, red and blue jacket, and a blue handkerchief. The fleeing suspect used a motorcycle borrowed from one Marlon Geronimo. Angel Bonbon, a waitress, testified that the man later used the comfort room in her workplace, l
...
Case Digest (G.R. No. 252276) Expanded Legal Reasoning Model
Facts:
- Background and Charge
- Jerrico Juada y Navarro (hereafter, Jerrico) was charged with robbery with homicide for the killing of Florante Garcia. The incident occurred on December 18, 2011, in Bocaue, Bulacan.
- The information alleged that Jerrico, intending to gain by means of violence and intimidation, robbed Florante of ₱110,000.00 in cash and a Colt MK IV .45 caliber pistol, and shot Florante resulting in his instantaneous death.
- Jerrico pleaded not guilty, denying involvement.
- Prosecution Evidence
- Amalia Valentin, a traffic enforcer, witnessed a man wearing a white cap, red and blue jacket, and with his face covered by a blue handkerchief, shoot Florante at the temple while the latter was driving his jeep, then take two bags from Florante and escape on a motorcycle.
- PO2 Carlito Bucco, Jr. corroborated Amalia's testimony, confirming the presence of the suspect on a motorcycle and the attempt of police pursuit.
- Angel Bonbon, a carinderia staff, saw a man wearing the same description arrive at the carinderia, requested to use the comfort room, and inadvertently stained a dining table with blood. Angel found the suspect’s white cap, jacket, and handkerchief left behind, smelling of blood.
- PO3 Richard Higoy confirmed police investigation and recovery of the suspect’s garments and the stolen motorcycle at the crime scene.
- Marlon Geronimo testified that Jerrico borrowed his motorcycle on the day of the incident to purchase spare parts. Marlon was later informed to retrieve the motorcycle at the police station and identified Jerrico after police investigation.
- Jonathan Garcia, son of the victim, saw his father’s lifeless body at the scene and was informed of the arrest of the suspect afterwards.
- Defense Evidence
- Jerrico claimed he was working as a kargador at the fish port on the date of the incident, had borrowed Marlon’s motorcycle early in the morning but lost it around 11:00 a.m., then spent time drinking and running personal errands with his wife.
- Jayson Duhilag testified he saw Jerrico aboard a motorcycle on the date of the crime but did not implicate him in the offense.
- Imelda Santos corroborated Jerrico’s presence near the fish port area, seeing him alighting from a motorcycle around 9:00 a.m.
- Trial Court Decision and Appeal
- The RTC found the circumstantial evidence established an unbroken chain linking Jerrico to the crime and convicted him of robbery with homicide, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering payment of civil indemnity, moral and exemplary damages at ₱100,000.00 each.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, rejecting Jerrico’s denial and alibi defenses.
Issues:
- Whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that Jerrico is guilty of robbery with homicide.
- Whether the defense of denial and alibi should be given credence over the prosecution's circumstantial evidence.
- Whether treachery was properly applied as an aggravating circumstance in fixing the penalty.
- Whether the penalty and damages imposed by the RTC and affirmed by the CA were proper and compliant with existing laws, specifically considering RA No. 9346 prohibiting death penalty.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)