Title
People vs. Belaro
Case
G.R. No. 99869
Decision Date
May 26, 1999
Romeo Belaro, convicted of murder, shot Salvador Pastor at his home in 1989. Despite his alibi, eyewitness testimony and forensic evidence confirmed guilt. The Supreme Court upheld reclusion perpetua, citing treachery and lack of mitigating factors.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 216120)

Charges and Proceedings

Romeo Belaro was charged with the crime of Murder under the Revised Penal Code, based on an information specifying that he willfully shot Salvador Pastor y Salientes with an M-16 rifle, resulting in the victim's immediate death, compounded by the aggravating circumstance of nighttime. Upon his arraignment, Belaro pleaded not guilty and a trial ensued.

Prosecution's Evidence

Myrna Azur Pastor, the widow of the deceased, was the sole eyewitness for the prosecution. She testified that she saw Belaro, who appeared drunk and was holding an M-16 rifle, approach their house and call for her and her husband. Upon opening the door, she recalled the sequence of events leading to the shooting of her husband, whereby he was directly hit as she attempted to move aside. In response to her distress call, her father arrived and found her husband deceased.

Defense’s Claim

Belaro mounted a defense of alibi, claiming that he was asleep at the CAFGU detachment center during the time of the incident. He described a timeline detailing his whereabouts and interactions throughout the day, maintaining that he was not in the vicinity of the crime when it occurred. His defense was supported by fellow military acquaintances and CAFGU members, who corroborated his presence elsewhere.

Trial Court Verdict

On December 14, 1990, the Regional Trial Court of Naga City convicted Belaro of Murder, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering him to indemnify the victim’s heirs and reimburse funeral expenses. The trial court deemed the prosecution’s evidence, particularly Myrna Pastor’s witness account, credible and more reliable than the alibi presented by the defense.

Appeal and Appellant's Arguments

Belaro appealed the conviction, raising several issues: alleged bias of the trial judge, the credibility of defense witnesses, and the incorrect classification of the crime as Murder rather than Homicide. Belaro also argued for the acknowledgment of mitigating circumstances such as drunkenness and lack of education, and contended the imposed penalty was excessive.

Evaluation of Appeals

The appellate court evaluated the allegations of bias against the trial judge, finding no prejudgment in the decision-making process. The trial court's careful assessment of witness credibility was noted, with the appellate court reaffirming the positive identification of the appellant by the victim's widow and the consistency of her testimony in contrast to that of the defense witnesses.

Discussion of Treachery and Mitigating Circumstances

Despite the defense asserting that the attack was frontal and therefore lacked treachery, the court clarified that treachery can s

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.