Case Digest (G.R. No. 104994)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Wilfredo Morales, G.R. No. 104994, February 13, 1995, Supreme Court Second Division, Regalado, J., writing for the Court.
Accused-appellant Wilfredo Morales (also known as "Willie Bato") was charged in the Regional Trial Court, Branch 156, Pasig, Metro Manila, in Criminal Case No. 72122 with the murder of Rogelio Lodo on or about December 3, 1987 in Mandaluyong, Metro Manila. The information alleged that the accused, armed with a gun, shot the victim with intent to kill, with treachery and evident premeditation and taking advantage of superior strength.
At trial the prosecution presented eyewitness testimony by Carmelita Legaspi, who said she saw appellant, armed with a short firearm about six inches long, walk to Rogelio, who was lying on a table in front of his house, and shoot him twice without warning; the first shot struck the victim’s right thigh and the second struck his body (a .38 slug was recovered), after which the victim tried to flee but was pursued and later died from hemorrhagic shock per autopsy. Legaspi testified that appellant threatened her ("Ikaw rin papatayin ko") as he passed. Prosecution witness Rebecca Maraya, a first cousin of the victim, corroborated Legaspi’s account: she said she was about five meters away, saw appellant approach and shoot Rogelio (who was about one meter from appellant), and that there was light from the victim’s house enabling her to see the assailant. Several other persons were reportedly present but declined to testify and their names were not disclosed.
The defense presented a witness, Matilde Labampa, who testified she heard two shots and saw a man in a black t-shirt running away holding a gun, but admitted she could not recognize his face and did not tell police earlier that the arrested person was not the shooter. Appellant himself denied being "Willie Bato," claimed he left for Cavite on November 15, 1987 and returned only in January 1988 to work as a part-time construction worker, and alleged he was not informed of the charge at arrest and no warrant was shown. He could not name employers or project owners to substantiate his claim of being in Cavite.
The trial court found appellant guilty of murder qualified by treachery and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordered indemnity and damages, and assessed costs. Appellant appealed, contending the trial court erred in crediting the p...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in finding appellant guilty of murder based on the testimony of the prosecution witnesses and rejecting appellant’s al...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)