Case Digest (G.R. No. 206381)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Daniel Matibag y De Villa @ Dani or Danilo, G.R. No. 206381, March 25, 2015, the Supreme Court First Division, Perlas-Bernabe, J., writing for the Court.In an Amended Information dated May 5, 2005, the People charged accused-appellant Daniel Matibag y De Villa with Murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), alleging that on March 27, 2005 at about 8:40 p.m. in Twin Villa Subdivision, Batangas City, Matibag, while armed with a Beretta .9mm pistol, assaulted and shot Enrico Clar de Jesus Duhan, causing gunshot wounds to the head and chest that resulted in Duhan’s death; the Information also alleged the qualifying circumstance of treachery and the special aggravating circumstance of use of an unlicensed firearm.
At arraignment Matibag pleaded not guilty. At trial the prosecution presented testimony that at about 8:40 p.m. Duhan, returning from a homeowners’ association meeting, was confronted by Matibag who allegedly asked him why he had been talking about him; after Duhan answered “wala,” Matibag allegedly punched him, then drew a gun and shot Duhan repeatedly until he fell face-first. PO2 Tom Falejo testified to having positively identified and arrested Matibag the same night; Dr. Antonio S. Vertido performed the autopsy confirming fatal gunshot wounds to the head and chest.
Matibag testified in his own defense, claiming he had approached Duhan at a despedida party to reconcile, that Duhan pushed his hand away and insulted him, that he struck Duhan once, saw Duhan reach toward his waist (which Matibag feared was a gun), and then fired in perceived self-defense; he asserted he later tried to surrender to a police friend but was stopped and admitted involvement to officers.
The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 3, Pallocan West, Batangas City, rendered a Decision dated August 1, 2008 convicting Matibag of Murder, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua, and awarding P50,000 civil indemnity, P50,000 moral damages, P59,000 actual damages, and P25,000 exemplary damages to Duhan’s heirs. The RTC rejected self-defense for lack of proof of unlawful aggression, noted the absence of a firearm recovered from the victim, found the number of gunshot wounds inconsistent with self-defense, and appreciated treachery and an unlicensed firearm as aggravating circumstances.
Matibag appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA). In a Decision dated September 13, 2012 in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 03759, the Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC in toto, agreeing that treachery attended the killing and that the use of an unlicensed firearm was a ...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals correctly uphold the conviction of Daniel Matibag for Murder? ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)