Title
People vs. Acquiatan
Case
G.R. No. 225640
Decision Date
Jul 30, 2019
Joel Acquiatan acquitted of murder as prosecution failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; insufficient evidence of conspiracy or direct involvement in Franco Anacio's shooting.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 225640)

Applicable Law

The applicable legal framework is derived from the 1987 Philippine Constitution, which upholds the rights of the accused, including the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Case Background

The Accused-Appellant sought to overturn a decision made by the Court of Appeals (CA) which affirmed the Regional Trial Court's (RTC) ruling that found him guilty of murder for the killing of Franco Anacio. The RTC sentenced Acquiaton to reclusion perpetua and imposed damages to be paid to the victim's heirs.

Charges and Allegations

Acquiaton along with Palada and Logrosa was charged for murder, alleging that on February 1, 2009, they conspired to kill Franco Anacio by shooting him with an unlicensed shotgun. All accused pleaded not guilty. Palada died during the proceedings, leading to the dismissal of the charges against him.

Summary of Evidence

The prosecution's case hinged on the testimonies of key witnesses who provided accounts of the events surrounding the murder. Marly Anacio, the victim's wife, testified about the moments leading to the shooting, indicating that she saw Acquiaton and his co-accused leaving the crime scene shortly after hearing gunshots. Eva Anacio, the mother of the victim, corroborated her daughter's account.

Defense Strategy

Acquiaton presented an alibi, alleging he was asleep at home during the incident. Witnesses, including family members, supported his claim. However, the credibility of the defense was undermined when the prosecution’s witnesses provided direct testimony against Acquiaton’s presence at the crime scene.

RTC Findings and Sentencing

The RTC considered the testimonies of the prosecution as credible and ruled that treachery was present in the commission of the murder since Franco was shot while asleep. Consequently, it declared Acquiaton guilty of murder and acquitted Logrosa for lack of evidence.

CA Decision and Findings

The CA affirmed the RTC's decision with modifications regarding the damages awarded to Franco’s heirs. It emphasized the presence of circumstantial evidence indicating a conspiracy among the accused to commit the murder.

Issues on Appeal

Acquiaton contested the CA’s findings, arguing that there was insufficient evidence to establish conspiracy and that the circumstantial evidence did not conclusively support his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

Court's Ruling on Conspiracy

The Supreme Court highlighted that conspiracy must be proven with the same burden of proof as the crime itself—beyond a reasonable doubt. The concurrence of actions needs to demonstrate a common design to commit the crime, which th

...continue reading

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