Title
People vs. Matito y Torres
Case
G.R. No. 144405
Decision Date
Feb 24, 2004
Mariano Raymundo, Jr. was shot dead; his dying declaration identified Ferdinand Matito as the shooter. Matito denied involvement, but circumstantial evidence, including a positive paraffin test and prior disputes, led to his conviction for homicide, not murder.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. 46375)

Facts:

  • Procedural Background
    • On November 24, 1998, the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Bulacan filed an Information charging Ferdinand Matito y Torres (alias “Freddie”) with murder for the October 16, 1998 killing of Mariano Raymundo, Jr. in Paombong, Bulacan.
    • Appellant pleaded not guilty at arraignment on February 5, 1999. After trial, the RTC of Malolos, Bulacan (Branch 12) found him guilty of murder and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, indemnity of P75,000, moral damages of P100,000, and costs.
  • Prosecution’s Version
    • On October 16, 1998 at around 10:30 PM, Filomena Raymundo heard gunshots as her husband Mariano stepped into the backyard. She opened the kitchen door and saw Mariano bleeding, who twice said, “Binaril ako ni Pareng Freddie.” He was rushed to Divine World Hospital where he died of hypovolemic shock due to a neck gunshot wound.
    • Autopsy by Dr. Manuel Aves revealed three gunshot wounds: a fatal neck wound at the carotid triangle, and two others on the shoulder and hand.
    • Police questioned appellant and his father; a paraffin test on appellant’s right hand cast was positive for nitrates.
    • Filomena and her daughters testified to prior quarrels between appellant and the victim over water supply and a right-of-way dispute; appellant was also seen drunk and ranting threats against the victim.
  • Defense Version
    • Ceferino Galvez (third cousin of the victim) testified only that at the wake Mariano could not speak due to severe bleeding.
    • Dr. Aves on cross-examination stated the neck injury would have prevented speech.
    • Appellant testified he was at home with family, asleep between 8:00 PM and the early hours of October 17; he only learned of the killing when police woke him around 1:00–2:00 AM. He denied quarrels, threats, or presence at the crime scene.

Issues:

  • Whether the trial court erred in admitting and relying on the victim’s dying declaration.
  • Whether the prosecution proved appellant’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
  • Whether the killing qualified as murder or only homicide.

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. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.