Case Digest (G.R. No. 185390)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Alex Paling, G.R. No. 185390, March 16, 2011, First Division, Velasco Jr., J., writing for the Court. The accused-appellant is Alex Paling; co-accused were Ernie Vilbar (at large) and Roy Vilbar. The case arose from an Information charging the three with murder for the July 1, 1996 killing of Walter Nolasco in Pres. Roxas, Cotabato. The Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 17, Kidapawan City, in Criminal Case No. 10-97 convicted Alex Paling and Roy Vilbar of murder in a March 10, 2003 decision; Ernie remained at large and an alias warrant was ordered against him.At arraignment on April 3, 1997, Paling and Roy pleaded not guilty. Trial produced three prosecution witnesses — Richard Nolasco (eye witness), Francisco Perez (corroborative witness), and Agustin Nolasco — and defense witnesses including Paling, Roy and Leonida Mondejar. Richard testified he saw Paling, Roy and Ernie assault and stab Walter at Paling’s farmhouse; the three thereafter warned him not to speak. Francisco testified he saw Walter walking with Ernie and Roy toward Paling’s place and later saw Ernie and Roy running away; he did not see Paling with them at the moment he first observed them.
The RTC convicted Paling and Roy of murder and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua, ordering indemnities and other consequences in its March 10, 2003 dispositive order. The accused filed a Notice of Appeal which the Supreme Court accepted and then, under People v. Mateo, transferred to the Court of Appeals (CA) for intermediate review. The CA, in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 00189, affirmed the RTC in an April 28, 2006 decision (penned by Associate Justice Myrna Dimaranan‑Vidal). The CA later treated Paling’s post-dec...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Does the fact that the judge who rendered the appealed judgment was not the same judge who heard the witnesses invalidate the conviction?
- Did the prosecution prove beyond reasonable doubt that Alex Paling participated in the killing of Walter Nolasco (i.e., are the testimony of the eye witness and the corroborative witness sufficiently credible to sustain conviction, and does Paling’s alibi prevail)?
- Were the qualifying circumstances of treachery and evident premeditation established?
- Was the killing nonetheless qualified as murder by taking advantage of superior strength? ...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)