G.R. No. 124914 - Ugaddan vs. Court of Appeals

On January 27, 1991, in the municipality of Tumauini, Province of Isabela, the fatal incident took place at the Geraldine Canteen in Barangay Lingaling.
Patrolman Paulino Baquiran was present at the scene when an altercation occurred.
The prosecution alleged that the accused, Police Corporal Jesus Ugaddan, acted willfully, unlawfully, and feloniously with intent to kill when he fired his .38 caliber service gun at Baquiran, striking him in the neck.

An altercation reportedly began when an entertainer, identified as Emy, complained that Baquiran had poked a gun at her.
It was contended that during the ensuing incident, a struggle for the possession of the firearm ensued between the victim and Ugaddan.
Ugaddan, according to the prosecution’s narrative, drew his service weapon and shot Baquiran, with the bullet entering the upper portion of the right side of the neck and exiting from the left lateral aspect at the base of the neck.
After firing the shot, Ugaddan fled the scene by boarding a tricycle with a companion.

Immediate response by colleagues resulted in Baquiran being transported first to the Tamauini District Hospital and then to the Cagayan Regional Hospital; however, he ultimately succumbed to his injuries on January 29, 1991.
A dying declaration was obtained from Baquiran while he was still alive, identifying Corporal Ugaddan as his assailant and providing details of the incident.
Several eyewitnesses, including police personnel present at the scene, testified regarding the events and the positioning of the parties involved.
Physical evidence—most notably, the bullet’s trajectory as described in the Medico-Legal Certificate by Dr. Brainard Vagay—corroborated the sequence of events advanced by the prosecution.

At trial in the Regional Trial Court of Isabela, Jesus Ugaddan was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code and sentenced within the prescribed penalty range (reclusion temporal) with an intermediate imposition, applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law.
The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction with a modification concerning the minimum penalty segment, asserting that it should be measured as prision mayor rather than prision correctional.
Ugaddan, dissatisfied with these proceedings, elevated the case to the Supreme Court under Rule 45, challenging the factual findings—particularly the witness credibility and the asserted “two-shot” theory as his means of exculpation.

Whether the trial and appellate courts erred in their assessment and acceptance of the factual evidence, particularly regarding the events in the canteen.
Whether the court should have given credence to the defense’s contention that claims of a grappling incident and the firing of a shot from outside the canteen’s window were plausible.

Whether the facts supporting the single-shot theory, including physical evidence (e.g., bullet trajectory) and eyewitness testimonies, sufficiently undermined the defense's two-shot narrative.
Whether the dying declaration, despite its unusual circumstances (such as the lack of the victim’s signature), could be legitimately relied on as a probative piece of evidence.

Whether the modification by the Court of Appeals concerning the minimum penalty—from prision correctional to prision mayor—was proper and consistent with the applicable sentencing laws under the Revised Penal Code and the Indeterminate Sentence Law.