Case Summary (G.R. No. 139692)
Factual Background: The Shooting of Alfredo Donque
The prosecution established that Rodolfo Matinig served as caretaker of a duck farm owned by Marcelino Ipes in Barangay Los Angeles, Butuan City. At about 12:00 midnight on July 21, 1997, Matinig and the victim Alfredo Donque went to a small hut in the duck farm to watch the ducks. Matinig testified that Jessielito Badajos, Fretchie Sanchez, and Jerry Lamosao arrived. When Donque refused Badajos’ request for duck eggs, the three men left. When they returned, Badajos allegedly came back armed with a gun.
Matinig testified that Donque was shot four times by Badajos while Donque was seated about two-and-a-half meters away. Matinig further testified that Donque, despite his wounds, managed to flee toward the ricefield. Matinig attempted to escape but claimed that Badajos held him and pointed a gun at him. Matinig testified that Sanchez wrested the gun from Badajos, whereupon Matinig freed himself, ran to the nearby house of Mamer Pandac (about twenty-five meters, more or less), and informed him that his companion had been shot. Matinig and Pandac peeped through a window, saw Badajos and Sanchez leave, and later found Donque sprawled in the ricefield, already dead.
Medical evidence was presented through Dr. Jesus Chin Chiu, the City Health Medical Officer, who performed an autopsy on Donque’s cadaver and signed a Necropsy Report and the death certificate. The findings included entrance wounds and the recovery of a slug embedded above the left clavicle. The doctor concluded that the cause of death was shock due to gunshot wound and noted the presence of gunpowder burns on the victim’s body. A photographer, Cyrille Konahap, also testified that he took pictures of the victim’s body in the ricefield.
Madelyn Donque, the victim’s widow, testified on burial and related expenses, the existence of a nine-year-old son, and the victim’s claimed monthly salary of P1,000.00. She also testified that when Rodolfo informed her that her husband was dead, he told her that it was Badajos who killed her husband.
Defense Version: Denial and Alternative Accusation Against Sanchez
Badajos denied that he shot and killed Donque. He claimed that Sanchez was the culprit. He testified that at 6:00 p.m. on July 21, 1997, he and Sanchez and Jerry Lamosao went on a drinking spree at the Palacas Store in Sitio Dumognay, Los Angeles, Butuan City. After dinner, they planned to return to continue drinking. Around midnight, Badajos asserted that Sanchez decided to buy cracked duck eggs from Donque. According to Badajos, Sanchez and Lamosao entered the hut, while Badajos waited outside by the roadside about eight meters away. When Sanchez failed to obtain eggs, he allegedly pulled Donque outside by the collar, and Lamosao followed. Badajos testified that Sanchez then shot Donque four times, and that two other men fled from the scene. Badajos also claimed that Sanchez reported the incident to SPO2 Benjamin Liwanag, and that on July 22, 1997, Badajos reported the shooting to Mario Romero, another police officer, who conducted an investigation at the scene.
Badajos presented corroboration through Carlito Dumas, a farmer, who testified that on July 19, 1997 Donque agreed to sell five hundred duck eggs at P2.00 each, to be delivered at 11:00 p.m. on July 20, 1997. Dumas paid Donque and waited for delivery. On July 21, Dumas and his friend Rolando Tiape slept in a cousin’s house and later proceeded to the duck hut at 11:00 p.m., but were told only two hundred fifty eggs were available. Dumas stated that only Dumas, Tiape, and Donque were in the hut when Sanchez and Lamosao arrived, while Badajos allegedly stood by the roadside about eight meters away. Dumas testified that Sanchez asked Donque for eggs, refused Donque’s refusal to provide ducks, grabbed Donque by the shirt collar, and pulled him outside, while Badajos shouted “Don’t touch him!” Dumas said Sanchez then shot Donque four times, and that Dumas and Tiape fled back to their sleeping place, leaving the purchased eggs behind. Dumas later learned that Badajos was charged, and he stated that he did not report the matter to the police because he did not want to get involved.
Badajos also invoked his absence from the preliminary investigation, stating he did not receive notice to file his counter-affidavit because he was not found. He claimed he surrendered only on September 22, 1997.
Trial Court Conviction and Its Disposition
The trial court convicted Badajos of murder and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. It also directed him to indemnify the heirs of Donque and to pay damages that included amounts for loss of earnings and “regular monthly commission for every egg sold,” actual damages, and moral damages. The trial court, on the other hand, noted that it was not imperative to send the case against Sanchez to the files because there was no evidence that implicated him, and it observed that Sanchez allegedly prevented the death of Matinig by taking away the gun from Badajos who was pointing it at Matinig’s head.
Appellant’s Assignments of Error
On appeal, Badajos insisted that his guilt was not proved beyond reasonable doubt. He argued that the trial court erred in relying on the alleged uncorroborated and contradicted testimony of Rodolfo Matinig. He further argued that the trial court ignored the “unrebutted” testimony of defense witness Carlito Dumas. He also asserted that the prosecution’s failure to establish his guilt overcame neither the presumption of innocence nor the probative weakness attributed to the prosecution evidence.
Credibility of the Single Eyewitness and the Effect of Lack of Corroboration
The Court rejected the argument that Matinig’s testimony required corroboration. It held that testimonies are weighed, not numbered, and that the testimony of a single witness may be sufficient for conviction if found trustworthy and reliable. It emphasized that there is no general rule requiring corroboration of a single witness except in cases where the law expressly mandates such corroboration.
The Court examined Matinig’s testimony in detail. It observed that Matinig, though barely fourteen years old and having finished only the third grade, provided a coherent account that Badajos shot Donque four times, after which Badajos held Matinig and pointed a gun at him, and Sanchez wrested the gun. Matinig also testified to the immediate aftermath, including his flight to Mamer Pandac, his warning to Pandac that Donque had been shot, their act of peeping through the window, and the finding that Donque was dead in the ricefield. When asked to identify the perpetrator, Matinig spontaneously and unerringly pointed to Badajos in open court and identified him as “Toto Badajos.”
The Court accorded respect to the trial court’s evaluation of Matinig’s testimony. It reiterated the settled rule that appellate courts do not interfere with the trial court’s findings on witness credibility unless the record reveals overlooked facts or misapprehended significance. After reviewing the record, the Court found no reason to deviate from the trial court’s assessment.
Discretion of the Prosecution Not to Call Other Eyewitnesses
The Court likewise dismissed the complaint that the prosecution did not call Jerry Lamosao, despite being included in the Information. It ruled that the public prosecutor has discretion over the witnesses to be presented and that the prosecution is not required to present all eyewitnesses. The Court stated that the testimony of only one eyewitness may suffice if credible. It added that if Lamosao’s testimony could have corroborated Badajos’ version given that Badajos claimed he was present when Donque was shot, then Badajos should have called Lamosao to the witness stand.
The Court also addressed the defense’s claim that Matinig alleged that he was afraid to implicate Sanchez because Sanchez was at large. It noted, however, that the defense failed to effectively show a motive to falsely testify against Badajos. It also observed that Matinig claimed initial reluctance due to fear of Sanchez, not a motive attributable to Badajos.
Cross-Examination Confusion and Matinig’s Clarification
Badajos argued that Matinig admitted on cross-examination that he was only “told” what to testify about, implying lack of personal knowledge. The Court was not persuaded. It held that Matinig misunderstood the framing of counsel’s questions. It explained that the confusion was aggravated by misinterpretation and by an initial wrong premise in counsel’s next question. The Court relied on Matinig’s clarification that no one ordered or compelled him to testify that Badajos shot Donque. It noted Matinig answered truthfully that when he testified that Badajos shot Donque, it was the truth.
Positive Identification Prevails Over Denial and Misidentification Theories
The Court ruled that Badajos’ denial and claim that Sanchez was the killer could not prevail over the positive and credible testimony of Matinig that Badajos shot the victim. It further stated that Badajos’ denial, contrasted against Matinig’s consistent account and in-court identification, did not create reasonable doubt.
Treachery Not Proven; Modification from Murder to Homicide
The Court held that the trial court erred in appreciating treachery. It recalled the doctrinal requirements for treachery: proof beyond reasonable doubt of (1) the employment of means of execution that afforded the victim no opportunity to defend himself or retaliate, and (2) the conscious or deliberate adoption of such means.
The Court found that while the first condition appeared to be present, the second condition was not established. It found no evidence that Badajos prepared to kill Donque in a manner designed to ensure execution or to make defense or retaliation impossible or difficult. It held that the shooting occurred because Donque refused to give Badajos duck eggs, meaning the killing was perpetrated at the spur of the m
...continue reading
Case Syllabus (G.R. No. 139692)
Parties and Procedural Posture
- People of the Philippines prosecuted Jessielito Badajos y Sumbidan alias Toto for murder.
- Fretchie Sanchez y Amparo was named as co-accused but remained at large, and the trial court did not order the case against him sent to the files.
- The Regional Trial Court, Branch 4, Butuan City, convicted Badajos for murder, sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, and awarded damages to the heirs of Alfredo Donque.
- Badajos appealed, insisting that the evidence failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt and that the trial court misappreciated witness credibility.
- The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the offense to homicide, and correspondingly modified the penalty and damages.
Key Factual Allegations
- The Information alleged that on or about 12:00 oclock in the evening of July 21, 1997 at P-12, Brgy. Los Angeles, Butuan City, the accused, with conspiracy, treachery, and intent to kill, attacked Alfredo Donque and shot him on his neck, right hand, and right shoulder, causing his instantaneous death.
- The prosecution’s evidence placed the incident in the duck farm where Donque hired Rodolfo Matinig as caretaker.
- Matinig testified that at around 12:00 midnight on July 21, 1997, Badajos, Sanchez, and Jerry Lamosao arrived, asked Donque for duck eggs, and left.
- When the three men returned, Badajos was armed with a gun.
- Matinig testified that Badajos then shot Donque four times, and that after Donque fled, Badajos pointed the gun at Matinig and grabbed him.
- Matinig stated that Sanchez wrested the gun from Badajos, enabling Matinig to free himself.
- Matinig reported the shooting to Mamer Pandac and later to Donque’s in-laws, and the two witnesses peeped through the window and saw Badajos and Sanchez leave.
- Dr. Jesus Chin Chiu testified that he performed an autopsy, and the necropsy revealed entrance wounds on the neck and upper arm, with a recovered slug embedded above the left clavicle.
- The cause of death was stated as shock due to gunshot wound, and the doctor noticed gunpowder burns.
- The defense was denial and substitution: Badajos claimed that Sanchez shot Donque, while he merely waited by the roadside about eight meters away.
Defense Theory at Trial
- Badajos denied shooting or killing Donque and attributed the act to Fretchie Sanchez.
- Badajos testified that the group earlier had a drinking spree and then planned to continue drinking.
- He claimed that around midnight, Sanchez decided to buy cracked duck eggs from Donque.
- He asserted that Sanchez and Lamosao entered the hut, while Badajos waited by the roadside.
- Badajos testified that when Sanchez failed to get duck eggs, he grabbed Donque by the collar and pulled him outside, and Lamosao followed.
- The defense narrative stated that Sanchez shot Donque four times, and two other male persons fled.
- Badajos further testified that Sanchez reported the incident to SPO2 Benjamin Liwanag, and that later he reported it to Mario Romero.
- Carlito Dumas corroborated portions of the defense, including the arrangement regarding duck eggs and the presence of specific persons at Donque’s hut on July 21, 1997.
- The defense also emphasized the absence of proof of treachery and maintained that the trial court erred in relying on Matinig.
Issues Raised on Appeal
- The appellant challenged the conviction on the ground that prosecution evidence failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, focusing on Matinig’s alleged lack of corroboration and alleged inconsistencies.
- The appellant argued that the prosecution’s failure to present Jerry Lamosao, despite being named in the Information, supported a presumption that the witness would have been adverse to the prosecution.
- The appellant contended that the trial court ignored the defense testimony of Carlito Dumas.
- The appellant asserted that treachery should not have been appreciated.
- The appellant further implicated sentencing consequences by challenging the legal characterization of the offense and the aggravating circumstances tied to the use of an unlicensed gun.
- The appellant did not prevail on the factual identification issue but succeeded in obtaining a modification from murder to homicide and relief on the civil awards.
Evaluation of Prosecution Witnesses
- The Supreme Court treated Matinig as the principal eyewitness who testified directly that Badajos shot Donque four times.
- The Court held that the lack of corroboration of Matinig’s testimony did not matter because testimonial reliability, rather than witness count, controls.
- The Court reiterated the settled rule that the testimony of a single credible eyewitness may suffice for conviction in the absence of a specific legal rule requiring corroboration.
- The Court stressed that the trial court credited Matinig’s testimony and gave it full probative weight.
- On the defense claim that Matinig was untrustworthy because he was told to testify, the Court found the cross-examination context confusing and resolved in Matinig’s clarifications.
- The Supreme Court found that Matinig was afraid to testify because Sanchez was still at large, and the Court treated this fear as consistent with credibility rather than fabrication.
- The Court observed that when the defense counsel’s questioning assumed an incorrect premise, the trial court allowed corrective questi