Case Digest (G.R. No. 77396)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Leo T. Villanueva, G.R. No. 77396, July 20, 1992, the Supreme Court Third Division, Bidin, J., writing for the Court. The prosecution in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Virac, Catanduanes, Branch 43, charged Leo T. Villanueva with Homicide with the use of an unlicensed firearm in violation of Presidential Decree No. 1866, Sec. 1, par. 2. Upon arraignment the accused pleaded not guilty.At trial the prosecution presented eyewitness and investigative witnesses who testified that on November 11, 1985 a group drinking session occurred at the residence/store of Mamerto Rojas in Viga, Catanduanes, involving the victim Deogracias Tubianosa, Jr. and the accused. Roberto Olarte testified he saw Villanueva point a gun at the victim immediately before a shot was heard. Jaime Torrocha said he heard the shot and then saw Villanueva holding a gun while the victim slumped, bleeding from the forehead. Dr. Loreto Rojas performed the autopsy and testified that the cause of death was severe cerebral hemorrhage secondary to a gunshot wound to the forehead. Other witnesses (Purita Padilla, police officers and investigators) corroborated the occurrence of the shooting, the presence of Villanueva at the scene, his subsequent refusal to give a statement, and his later apprehension. The parties stipulated that Villanueva did not possess a firearm license (Exhibit “I”).
The defense presented Villanueva’s own testimony that the firearm “exploded” accidentally while in the group’s presence, that he left the gun on the table and did not fire it, and witnesses (Amelia Tulalian Molod, Geronima Rojas) who sought to discredit Olarte’s account. The prosecution rebutted with additional witnesses who maintained sightings of persons at the scene and the prosecution also elicited evidence that a member of the accused’s circle (Horacio Aquino, Jr.) made a statement identifying Villanueva as the shooter.
The RTC convicted Villanueva of homicide with use of an unlicensed firearm and sentenced him to death, ordered indemnities and other damages. The case proceeded to the Supreme Court on automatic review. Villanu...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in convicting the accused on circumstantial evidence — i.e., was guilt proved beyond reasonable doubt?
- Did the trial court err in admitting Corporal De Leon’s testimony recounting a statement by Horacio Aquino, Jr. (hearsay)?
- Did the evidence establish that the homicide was committed with an unlicensed firearm?
- Was the de...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)