Title
People vs. Canete
Case
G.R. No. 128321
Decision Date
Mar 11, 2004
A fraternity-related killing led to Enrique CaAete's acquittal due to insufficient evidence, contradicting witness testimony, and unproven qualifying circumstances.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 36429)

The Case for the Prosecution

The prosecution presented the testimony of Manolito U. Manuyag, Jr., who detailed an altercation between members of the APO and TAU Gamma fraternities, culminating in the death of Fernando. On the night of the incident, Manuyag and a companion were confronted by a group of APO members, including CaAete, who attacked Fernando with wooden clubs and knives. Despite attempts to escape, Fernando was fatally assaulted. Witness Mario Sillar corroborated the situation, stating he observed a severe beating but acknowledged uncertainty regarding the weapons used.

Medical and Police Testimonies

Dr. Florante Bautista performed an autopsy and confirmed the cause of death was multiple stab wounds, some inflicted by what appeared to be bladed instruments. His report indicated specific fatal injuries, reinforcing the claim of a violent attack. Police were informed promptly, and testimonies established a timeline that implicated CaAete and his companions. Sillar's identification of CaAete, despite challenges regarding his description and inconsistency with physical evidence, played a critical role in the prosecution's narrative.

Defense and Alibi

CaAete’s defense revolved around an alibi, asserting he was at a police event during the time of the offense. He dismissed the accusations as stemming from personal animosity, narrating incidents between himself and Manuyag that might have influenced the latter's testimony against him. Likewise, Elmer Alipio, a co-accused, provided a similar disavowal of involvement and constructed his alibi based on his whereabouts during the critical timeframe.

Trial Court Findings

The Regional Trial Court observed the accounts of witnesses, ultimately finding Enrique CaAete guilty of murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay substantial damages to the victim's heirs. The court ruled out Alipio's culpability due to insufficient evidence linking him to the crime, primarily discrediting Manuyag's testimony while accepting Sillar's despite its contradictory nature.

Appellate Review

On appeal, CaAete challenged the trial court's conviction, asserting errors regarding the sufficiency of evidence, the reliability of witness Sillar, the applicability of treachery and superior strength as qualifying circumstances, and the overarching presumption of innocence. The appellate court meticulously scrutinized the testimonies and evidence, emphasizing the prosecution's

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.