Case Digest (G.R. No. L-513)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Antonio Raganit, G.R. No. L-513, May 12, 1949, the Supreme Court En Banc, Ozaeta, J., writing for the Court. The respondent in the criminal information was Antonio Raganit (appellant below), charged with the murder of Tiburcio Pontillas; the prosecution was The People of the Philippines (plaintiff-appellee). The Court of First Instance of Leyte convicted Raganit of homicide and sentenced him to ten years and one day of prision mayor to seventeen years, four months, and one day of reclusion temporal, ordered indemnity of P2,000 to the heirs, and imposed costs.On the morning of January 5, 1945, Pontillas was found dead in the yard of Andres Adlawan in the barrio of Olotan, municipality of Jaro, Leyte. A medical examination recorded a punctured wound in the perineal region about 3 1/2 inches deep and one inch wide, which cut the rectum and wounded part of the large intestine; death was from external hemorrhage. An information for murder was filed by the acting provincial fiscal on January 16, 1945.
The prosecution's case rested primarily on the testimony of one supposed eyewitness, Jesus Adlawan, a first cousin of the deceased's widow, who testified that on the night of January 4, 1945 he saw the accused puncture the anus of Pontillas with a bolo as Pontillas descended a coconut tree; he said the assailant ran away, that he did not pursue or succor the victim, and that he did not inform the deceased's wife until the following morning because he was preparing his supper. The widow, Clara Navarra, testified she learned the next morning that her husband had been wounded and that Jesus had named Raganit as the assailant; she also testified that Raganit had a grudge because he had been caught stealing tuba on December 25, 1944 and denounced to Lt. Francisco Regis.
Police procedure and time of declarations featured in the record: three policemen came after Clara discovered the body; Jesus accompanied them but (he said) did not then tell them he had witnessed the assault because he feared retaliation, and the policemen did not immediately question him. Clara's sworn Q&A statement was taken January 6; Jesus' sworn statement was not...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Was the conviction for homicide supported by evidence beyond reasonable doubt where it rested principally on the uncorroborated testimony of a single eyewi...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)