Title
People vs. Bautista
Case
G.R. No. 111149
Decision Date
Sep 5, 1997
Renato Bautista convicted of murder for stabbing Rodel Yarza in 1989; Supreme Court upheld conviction, citing credible dying declaration and abuse of superior strength, but rejected evident premeditation.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 131512)

Facts of the Case

The prosecution's narrative describes the incident as a concerted attack by the accused, where they allegedly conspired to assault Yarza with intent to kill, using personal violence and the advantage of their superior strength. The charge was formalized through an information dated February 28, 1990, leading to Bautista's arrest on March 26, 1990, after which he pleaded not guilty during arraignment.

Trial and Judgment

The Regional Trial Court, Manila, convicted Renato Bautista on June 1, 1993, finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua, and ordering him to indemnify the victim's heirs. The trial court considered the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength but noted mitigating factors such as provocation.

Prosecution's Evidence

Witness testimonies indicated that Rodel Yarza, after playing cards in his neighborhood, was assaulted and severely stabbed. Zenaida Yarza, the victim's wife, testified that her husband identified Bautista as the assailant before succumbing to his injuries. This declaration was deemed a dying declaration and submitted as crucial evidence by the prosecution.

Defense's Arguments

Bautista's defense contended that he did not participate in the stabbing and claimed that he returned home after being struck first by Yarza. They argued that the dying declaration lacked admissibility because it was not made under the consciousness of impending death. The defense also pointed out that the time between the initial altercation and the fatal attack did not allow for premeditation.

Court's Analysis on Dying Declaration

The court found that the criteria for a dying declaration were met. Despite the defense's argument, it recognized that Yarza's condition indicated a realization of his impending death, which warranted the admissibility of his last words identifying Bautista as his attacker. This corroborated the prosecution's narrative of events leading to the murder.

Conclusion and Verdict

The Supreme Court upheld the lower court's ruling, affirming Bautista's conviction for murder. The appeal was dismissed, re

...continue reading

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