Case Summary (G.R. No. 263560)
Facts
The appeal arises from an Information filed charging Cadorna with murder under Section 10 of Republic Act No. 7610, the Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act. Witness testimonies included that of the victim's father, BBB, and another witness, Bael, who observed Cadorna’s suspicious actions before and after the incident. Bael discovered AAA dead with a rope around his neck, and despite attempts to revive the child, AAA was pronounced dead upon arrival at the hospital. Medical testimony indicated that AAA's death was due to asphyxia consistent with strangulation.
RTC Ruling
On November 20, 2017, the RTC convicted Cadorna of homicide, finding him guilty based on circumstantial evidence. The court did not find sufficient grounds to establish the qualifying aggravating circumstance of taking advantage of superior strength, resulting in a lesser charge compared to murder. Cadorna received a sentence of reclusion perpetua and was ordered to pay various damages to AAA's heirs.
CA Ruling
The CA, in its decision dated November 29, 2021, modified the RTC's ruling, upgrading Cadorna's conviction to murder on the grounds that the killing was attended by the aggravating circumstance of taking advantage of superior strength. It affirmed the same penalty of reclusion perpetua and reviewed the damages awarded.
The Issue
The primary issue addressed by the Court was whether Cadorna was guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder.
Court's Ruling
The Court affirmed the CA's decision, indicating that circumstantial evidence, which included multiple pieces of testimony pointing to Cadorna's actions before and after the crime, was sufficient to establish guilt. The Court emphasized that direct evidence is not always necessary for conviction and that circumstantial evidence could form a compelling case against an accused.
Jurisprudence on Circumstantial Evidence
The Court reiterated existing jurisprudence regarding the use of circumstantial evidence in criminal cases, which must consist of multiple circumstances from which inferences can be drawn, leading to a conclusion of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Circumstantial Evidence Against Cadorna
The circumstantial evidence included Cadorna's confrontational behavior earlier in the day, witness observations of his presence near the crime scene, and the nature of AAA's death. The failure of Cadorna to testify in his defense added to the circumstances suggesting his guilt, as the Court noted that such silence could be interpreted against his interests.
Murder and Qualifying Aggravating Circumstances
The Court determined that taking advantage of superior strength was evident in this case due to the significant age and physical disparity between Cadorna and the child victim. It aligned with prior cases where the killing of young victims by adults invoked this aggravating circumstance, automatically raising the charge to mu
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 263560)
Facts of the Case
- Ferdinand Cadorna y Decembriano alias "Maco" was charged with murder in relation to Section 10 of Republic Act No. 7610 (Special Protection of Children Against Abuse, Exploitation and Discrimination Act).
- The incident occurred around March 19, 2011, involving the unlawful killing of a 9-year-old child (victim AAA) by strangulation with a rope within the victim's house.
- Prosecution witnesses included the victim's father (BBB), Salvador Bael who saw Cadorna leaving the victim’s house and found the victim with a rope tied around his neck, Dr. Manuel S. Pastor who confirmed death by asphyxia, and CCC, a classmate of the victim who was pinched by the accused after the killing.
- The defense presented an alibi through testimonies of Judith (Cadorna's wife) and Erlinda Lagando claiming Cadorna was elsewhere at the time of the killing.
- Cadorna did not testify to refute accusations.
Trial Court Decision (RTC Ruling)
- RTC found Cadorna guilty beyond reasonable doubt of homicide in relation to RA 7610 and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.
- Awarded moral, exemplary, civil indemnity, and temperate damages to the victim's heirs with interest.
- Conviction for homicide was due to absence of direct evidence for qualifying circumstance of taking advantage of superior strength.
- Considered the failure of Cadorna to testify as weakening his defense.
Court of Appeals Ruling
- The CA affirmed the RTC decision with modification, upgrading the conviction from homicide to murder.
- Applied the qualifying aggravating circumstance of taking advantage of superior strength due to victim’s tender ag