Title
People vs. Castillo y Lumayro
Case
G.R. No. 131592-93
Decision Date
Feb 15, 2000
Accused-appellant convicted of homicide, not murder, after shooting victim at a construction site. Use of unlicensed firearm treated as aggravating circumstance; illegal possession charge dismissed due to lack of proof. Penalty modified, civil liabilities affirmed.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 131592-93)

Criminal Charges

In Criminal Case No. 45708, Castillo was charged with murder for allegedly shooting Rogelio Abawag with a handgun, resulting in Abawag's death. In Criminal Case No. 45709, he was charged with illegal possession of a firearm for possessing a homemade .38 caliber revolver without the necessary permits.

Incident Description

On the morning of November 14, 1995, multiple witnesses observed Castillo chasing Abawag and firing shots at him. Roberto Lustica, a construction worker, and Franklin Acaso, a mason, both testified to witnessing the shooting, with Acaso noting that Abawag pleaded for mercy before being shot multiple times.

Arrest and Evidence Collection

Following the shooting, the management of the Gaisano construction site reported the incident to the police. Assisting police in locating the accused, Jun Lim, Abawag's brother-in-law, identified Castillo aboard a vessel attempting to leave for Cebu. Upon apprehension, Castillo was found in possession of the .38 caliber revolver used in the crime, along with ammunition.

Trial Court Proceedings and Verdict

During the trial, Castillo invoked a self-defense argument, which the trial court did not accept. The court ultimately found him guilty of homicide but did not recognize the qualifying circumstances of evident premeditation and treachery. He was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty for homicide and the death penalty for illegal possession of firearms, aggravated by homicide.

Appeal and Legal Issues

On appeal, Castillo focused primarily on his conviction for illegal possession of a firearm. He contended that the trial court erred in imposing separate penalties for homicide and illegal possession due to the amendment under Republic Act No. 8294, which redefined the legal handling of crimes committed with unlicensed firearms as a special aggravating circumstance.

Legal Implications of Republic Act No. 8294

The amendment to P.D. 1866 by R.A. 8294 clarified that using an unlicensed firearm in the commission of homicide or murder should not be treated as a separate offense. The court highlighted the retroactive application of this law, benefiting Castillo, as it mandated that he be convicted solely for homicide, with the illegal possession of a firearm treated as an aggravating circumstance.

Burden of Proof on the Prosecution

The court emphasized that the prosecution bore the burden to prove both the existence of the firearm and that Castillo did not have a permit to possess it. Whi

...continue reading

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