G.R. No. 170530 - Sargasso Construction and Development Corp. vs. Philippine Ports Authority

1987 Constitution of the Philippines.
Revised Penal Code (Articles 6(2), 248 on frustrated murder).
Republic Act No. 9344 (Juvenile Justice and Welfare Act of 2006), as amended by RA 10630.
JJWC Resolution No. 03-2006 implementing RA 9344 transitory provisions.

Two rival groups encountered on A. Reyes Street, Lower Bicutan, Taguig.
Dorado’s group threw stones and bottles; Dorado was seen carrying a sumpak.
Victims hid in a talipapa; upon emerging, stones were again hurled, and Dorado fired, hitting Ronald between the eyes.
Ronald survived due to prompt medical intervention; he lost one eye and retained limited vision in the other.

RTC convicted Dorado of frustrated murder (Crim. Case No. 127784) and acquitted co‐accused; acquitted all on cruelty charge under RA 7610 (Crim. Case No. 127785).
CA affirmed the conviction, stressing intent, evident premeditation, and positive identification; rejected alibi and denial defenses.
Supreme Court granted Dorado’s petition for review.

Whether Dorado’s conviction for frustrated murder should stand, considering his minority and the absence of proven evident premeditation.

Dorado was 16 at the time of the offense; RA 9344 applies retroactively (favorabilia sunt amplianda).
Section 6 exempts from criminal liability:
a) children 15 and under;
b) children above 15 but under 18 unless they “acted with discernment.”
Prosecution must prove, as a separate element, that a minor above 15 but below 18 possessed discernment—the mental capacity to know right from wrong—by direct or circumstantial evidence (appearance, behavior, nature of weapon, concealment of evidence, etc.).
Neither the RTC nor the CA determined discernment; absence of such finding mandates exemption under RA 9344 and liberal construction in favor of the minor.

Frustrated stage acknowledged: all acts of execution performed but victim survived due to independent cause (medical aid).
Aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation requires proof of:
1. prior determination to commit the crime;
2. manifest act clinging to that determination;
3. sufficient lapse for cool reflection.
Prosecution failed to establish preparations or precise lapse of time; mere possession of the weapon at the encounter and waiting for victims did not suffice.
OSG likewise conceded absence of evident premeditation; the offense is frustrated homicide, not murder.

On or about March 15, 2004, in Lower Bicutan, Taguig City, Jerwin Dorado and co-accused engaged in a group assault on Ronald Bonion and companions.
Dorado was charged in Criminal Case No. 127784 with frustrated murder under Article 248 in relation to Article 6(2) of the Revised Penal Code, by shooting Ronald between the eyes with an improvised shotgun (“sumpak”), qualifying circumstances of treachery, evident premeditation, nighttime, and use of unlicensed firearm.
In Criminal Case No. 127785, Dorado and co-accused were charged under Section 10(a) of R.A. No. 7610 for acts of cruelty against a minor, Raniel Parino, by hurling stones prejudicial to the child’s normal growth and development.
Dorado pled not guilty; trial ensued before RTC Taguig City, Branch 163.

Prosecution witnesses Ronald Bonion, his brother Robert, Raniel Parino, and Dr. Ronaldo Artes testified.
They narrated that at around 11:00 pm, Dorado’s group threw stones and bottles, drove Ronald’s group into hiding in a talipapa, then resumed assault.
Dorado allegedly waited for Ronald to emerge, then fired his sumpak, hitting the victim between the eyes.
Ronald sustained severe ocular injuries (ruptured globes, corneal and scleral lacerations), lost his left eye, and had light perception only in his right eye.
Dr. Artes confirmed that without timely medical intervention, Ronald would have died.

Dorado and Ramos testified that on April 15, 2004, between 8:00 pm and 11:00 pm Dorado was at home watching television; barangay tanods arrived but found no sumpak in his residence.
Witnesses for Ramos, Confessor, and Cabiaso denied presence at the shooting scene.
Ofelia Ramos stated she saw five persons running, one firing at a teenager, but identified that assailant as not Dorado upon proper identification.

On July 5, 2010, the RTC found Jerwin Dorado guilty beyond reasonable doubt of frustrated murder (Criminal Case No. 127784) and appreciated the privileged mitigating circumstance of minority.
The court imposed prision correccional (minimum) to prision mayor (maximum) and ordered payment of civil indemnity (₱50,000), moral damages (₱50,000), and costs with legal interest.
Dorado was not entitled to suspension of sentence as he was over 21 a