Case Digest (G.R. No. 125867)
Facts:
Benjamin Rivera v. Court of Appeals and People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 125867, May 31, 2000, the Supreme Court Second Division, Bellosillo, J., writing for the Court.Petitioner Benjamin Rivera was charged by Information dated March 22, 1989 with murder, the killing of Renato U. Camacho qualified by treachery. The fatal shooting occurred on January 18, 1989 in West Poblacion, Natividad, Pangasinan; Dr. Perfecto Tabangin conducted the autopsy and found a penetrating gunshot wound to the occipital region that shattered brain tissue.
Eyewitnesses for the prosecution included Renato's wife Jenny Camacho, co-player Rosario Olipas, and others who described Rivera's presence at a nearby house, an earlier altercation in which Rivera accused Renato of stealing a goat, and Rivera aiming a short gun through a window before a shot was fired. Jenny initially fled and later fainted when informed of her husband's death. Rivera raised an alibi, claiming he spent the morning in Barangay Cacandiungan preparing his field and the evening attending to a sick daughter; his alibi was supported by his wife, brother and sister.
On February 20, 1992 the Regional Trial Court (Branch 52, Tayug, Pangasinan) found petitioner guilty of murder, appreciated the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, and sentenced him to ten (10) years and one (1) day of prision mayor maximum as minimum to seventeen (17) years four (4) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal maximum as maximum; the court also ordered payment of civil indemnity (P50,000), moral damages (P30,000), and actual damages (P9,770). The Solicitor General later manifested and moved for acquittal, characterizing prosecution testimonies as "highly improbable and nebulous."
The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's conviction on July 31, 1996 despite the Solicitor General's recommendation of acquittal. Petitioner then filed this petition for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of Court, challenging the credibility of prosecution witnesses, the consistency of eyewitness accounts with medico-legal findings, the supposed unnatural rea...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the Court of Appeals and the trial court commit reversible error by crediting the prosecution witnesses and their identifications?
- Did petitioner’s alibi establish physical impossibility of his presence at the crime scene?
- Was the killing properly qualified by treachery and was voluntary surrender correctly appreciated as a mitigating circumstance?
- Were the sentence and civil damages imposed by the trial court correct und...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)