Title
Ardonio vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 134596
Decision Date
Sep 21, 2001
Raymund Ardonio convicted of homicide for shooting Emmanuel Balano during a fiesta altercation; alibi rejected, eyewitness testimonies upheld by courts.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 134596)

Facts of the Case

The prosecution's narrative indicates that during a fiesta celebration, an altercation erupted between Emmanuel Balano and another individual, Allan Ardonio. Following the disturbance, Raymund Ardonio, alongside his brother Allan, was implicated in a physical confrontation that escalated to Raymund shooting Emmanuel. Witnesses testified to the presence of all parties involved, assuring their identification of Raymund as the shooter.

Defense Presented

Raymund Ardonio’s defense hinged on an alibi and the assertion that he was not the one who shot Emmanuel. He claimed to have distanced himself from the altercation following the initial chaos and alleged that he was not arrested immediately after the shooting. Witnesses Adolfo Ardonio and Elvis Calubia corroborated his account to some extent, but their testimonies were considered weak compared to the prosecution's evidence.

Trial Court's Decision

On April 4, 1995, the trial court found Raymund Ardonio guilty of homicide, ruling out aggravating circumstances of treachery and abuse of superior strength. It sentenced him to a prison term and ordered him to pay damages to the heirs of Emmanuel Balano. The court justified its decision by underscoring the eyewitness testimonies that positively identified Raymund as the perpetrator.

Appeal to the Court of Appeals

Raymund appealed to the Court of Appeals, asserting that reasonable doubts existed about his guilt. He highlighted the failure of law enforcement to arrest him at the time of the incident despite the claims of an eyewitness, Salvador Castor, that he was present and involved in the shooting.

Supreme Court's Rationale

Upon reviewing the records, the Supreme Court did not find merit in Raymund's appeal, emphasizing the credibility of eyewitness accounts corroborating the prosecution’s claims. The Court highlighted the well-established legal principle that the credibility of witnesses lies predominantly with the trial judge, who is in a better position to assess demeanor and reliability.

Findings on Credibility

The Court noted that the prosecution witnesses, Liezl Vitala and Salvador Castor, were not shown to have any ill motive against Raymund, which lent further credence to their testimonies. The failure of law enforcement to arrest Raymund at the scene of the crime was not definitive proof of his innocence, especially given the circumstances surrounding the events that transpired in quick succession.

Addressing the Arguments on Arrests

The defense’s focus on the arrest of Allan Ardonio over Raymund was dismissed by t

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.