Title
Source: Supreme Court
People vs. Credo y De Vergara
Case
G.R. No. 230778
Decision Date
Jul 22, 2019
Two men acquitted of murder, frustrated murder, and illegal firearm possession due to insufficient evidence and inconsistent witness testimonies.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 57623)

Charges and Background

Juan and Daniel were charged with murder under Case No. Q-04-125714 and frustrated murder under Case No. Q-04-125715, as part of a larger conspiracy allegedly involving four unidentified individuals. The murder charge stemmed from the fatal attack on Antonio Asistin, while the frustrated murder charge pertained to the attack on Evangeline Cielos-Asistin, who survived the incident. Juan also faced charges for illegal possession of a firearm under Presidential Decree No. 1866.

Prosecution's Case

During the trial, the prosecution presented testimonies from witnesses that included neighbors and law enforcement. These witnesses described the events leading to the stabbing, highlighting the alleged participation of Juan and Daniel in a conspiracy. Evangeline testified that several men, including Daniel, were present during the attack, and claimed that Daniel failed to assist her.

Defense's Position

Both Juan and Daniel pleaded not guilty and denied involvement in the crimes. They argued that the prosecution's evidence was insufficient, highlighting that mere presence at the scene does not establish complicity. They maintained that Daniel, instead of aiding the attackers, helped carry Antonio after the incident.

Trial Court Ruling

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Quezon City found both accused guilty of murder and frustrated murder, sentencing them to reclusion perpetua and an indeterminate prison term, respectively. The court primarily relied on the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses to establish the culpability of the accused.

Appeal to the Court of Appeals

Juan and Daniel appealed the RTC's ruling, claiming that the prosecution lacked substantial evidence to prove conspiracy or their direct involvement in the crimes. They contended that circumstantial evidence provided by the prosecution was insufficient for a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt.

Court of Appeals Decision

The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC's decision, ruling that circumstantial evidence was sufficient to establish guilt, including the claim that Juan and Daniel were seen near the crime scene talking to other unidentified individuals. However, the appellate court acknowledged the lack of direct evidence tying them to the actual stabbing.

Supreme Court Review

Upon review, the Supreme Court determined that both the RTC and the Court of Appeals had ove

...continue reading

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