Title
People vs. Maglinas y Quindong
Case
G.R. No. 255496
Decision Date
Aug 10, 2022
Accused-appellant acquitted of murdering a child due to insufficient evidence; circumstantial proof failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Case Digest (G.R. No. 255496)
Expanded Legal Reasoning Model

Facts:

  • Antecedents
    • Irma Maglinas y Quindong (accused-appellant) was charged by Information dated September 9, 2015 with Murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code for allegedly inflicting injuries on and then drowning one-year-and-four-month-old Krishna Dizon on May 15, 2015 in Barangay District 3, San Miguel, Catanduanes.
    • Accused-appellant pleaded not guilty at arraignment and trial followed.
  • Prosecution Version
    • At about 9:30 a.m., witness Eufresina Teves heard a baby crying and sounds like whipping/slapping from the appellant’s house but did not actually see the act.
    • At around 3:00 p.m., Krishna was found face-down and floating in a nearby river by accused’s grandson (“Eboy”) and others; her body was retrieved and turned over to appellant, who brought it to the Rural Health Unit (RHU).
    • Witnesses observed wounds on Krishna’s eyelids and blood from her mouth; Municipal Health Officer Dr. Elva Joson issued a death certificate labeling the cause as “Drowning, Freshwater, Accidental” and noted minor external injuries (two blisters on right hand, small abrasion at right eye corner) in post-mortem exam, recommending full autopsy.
  • Defense Version
    • Appellant, a manicurist, was caring for Krishna (left in her custody by mother) on May 15, 2015; she fed and laid the child down to sleep around 1:30 p.m.
    • At about 2:00 p.m., she briefly left to buy dinner provisions at a nearby store; returning at roughly 2:14 p.m., she found Krishna missing, and then learned from Eboy that the child’s body was in the river; she attempted resuscitation, changed the child’s clothes, and brought her to the RHU.
  • Lower Courts’ Decisions
    • RTC (June 6, 2018) convicted appellant of Murder, sentenced her to reclusion perpetua, and awarded civil, moral, exemplary, and temperate damages.
    • CA (September 8, 2020) affirmed with modification, adding six-percent per annum interest on damages from finality of decision.

Issues:

  • Appellant’s Assignments of Error
    • Whether the circumstantial evidence was insufficient to convict her of murder.
    • Whether the prosecution failed to prove her guilt beyond reasonable doubt despite her corroborated testimony.
  • Prosecution’s Position
    • The elements of murder—death, killing by accused, attendant circumstance of treachery, and non-infanticide—were established by the evidence.
    • Direct evidence is not indispensable; circumstantial evidence suffices when it produces moral certainty.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.