Title
People vs. Monico Badillo
Case
G.R. No. 249832
Decision Date
Nov 13, 2024
Defendant Monico Badillo was convicted of homicide after the Court of Appeals downgrades his initial murder conviction, affirming that there was insufficient evidence for treachery. Badillo's claim of alibi was not substantiated.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 186227)

Prosecution's Version

The prosecution presented three witnesses: Salvador Fernandez, Jomel Escasinas, and Marilou Olbes. Salvador testified to witnessing Badillo stabbing Joseph Olbes, identifying him positively as the attacker due to the considerable light from the victim's kitchen. Jomel corroborated Salvador's testimony, recounting seeing Badillo leave Olbes's residence with a blood-stained knife. Marilou, the victim's wife, affirmed that her husband was attacked, ultimately dying from his injuries shortly after being taken to two hospitals. A post-mortem examination confirmed the cause of death being multiple injuries resulting from stabbing.

Defense's Version

Badillo's defense rested on denial and alibi. He claimed to have been in Batuan, Masbate, at the time of the stabbing and asserted he was unaware of Olbes prior to the incident. He was supported by two relatives, Felipe Basig and Emilio Badillo, who testified that they were with him at home on the evening of the stabbing. However, the court found their defense unconvincing due to their familial relationship to Badillo.

Ruling of the RTC

On July 7, 2017, the Regional Trial Court (RTC) found Badillo guilty of murder, highlighting the treachery involved in the stabbing, despite Badillo's claim of denial and alibi. The RTC sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and ordered him to pay civil and moral damages to the heirs of the deceased.

Appeal to the Court of Appeals

Badillo appealed the RTC's decision, arguing that the CA erred in its assessment of witness credibility and that there was insufficient evidence to establish treachery. Nonetheless, the CA affirmed the RTC's decision but modified the charge from murder to homicide due to the lack of clear evidence of treachery.

Supreme Court's Assessment

Upon review of the case, the Supreme Court noted that Badillo had incorrectly pursued an appeal through a Notice of Appeal rather than the appropriate petition for review. However, the Court opted to treat the appeal as a petition for review on certiorari for the sake of justice.

The Court upheld the CA's finding that the RTC's witness assessments were credible and reiterated the principle that the trial court's assessment of the witnesses should be given considerable deference. The Court found no reversible error in the conviction and confirmed that the elements of murder, specifically treachery, were not sufficiently proven based on eyewitness accounts. The testimonies lacked detail on how the attack commenced, which disqualified the homicide from being classified as murder.

Penalty and Damages

The Supreme Court modified the punishment, reducing Badillo's sentence to that for homic

...continue reading

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