Title
People vs. Flores
Case
G.R. No. 98069
Decision Date
Jan 27, 1993
Camilo Mamuyac, Jr. was killed in his home; Evangeline identified neighbor Ramon Flores as the shooter. Forensic evidence and prior threats supported Flores’ conviction for murder, affirmed by the Supreme Court.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 98069)

Charge and Proceedings

Both accused were charged with the crime of murder, which included allegations of treachery and evident premeditation resulting in the death of Camilo Mamuyac. Upon arraignment, they both pleaded not guilty, leading to a trial involving six prosecution witnesses and a single defense witness, aside from the accused. The trial ultimately resulted in Ramon Flores being found guilty, while Renato Macabiog was acquitted due to insufficient evidence.

Trial Court Verdict

The trial court found Ramon Flores guilty beyond reasonable doubt and sentenced him to a penalty of reclusion temporal for a maximum period of 17 years, 4 months, and 1 day to 20 years, along with a monetary indemnity of P30,000 to the victim’s heirs. Conversely, Renato Macabiog was acquitted.

Appeal to the Court of Appeals

Flores appealed to the Court of Appeals, which gathered evidence including witness testimonies recounting the events surrounding the murder. The court found corroborative evidence, noting witness accounts of the moments leading up to and following the shooting, as well as a paraffin test on Flores indicating his possible involvement.

Eyewitness Testimony and Credibility Issues

Evangeline Mamuyac, the victim's wife and key eyewitness, testified to witnessing the shooting. Appellant Flores challenged her credibility, arguing that her observations were improbable, and that her testimony was uncorroborated. However, the Court of Appeals found her testimony plausible, maintaining that human reactions to trauma can vary and that immediate disclosure of the assailant's identity is not always feasible.

Defense and Counterarguments

The defense centered on denials and alibi, primarily presented by Flores and his mother, who claimed he was engaged in a family conversation during the time of the murder. The appellate court scrutinized this defense and found contradictions and a lack of solid proof to support the alibi, which was further undermined by the presence of gunshot residue on Flores’ hands.

Reaffirmation of Guilt

The appellate court upheld the trial court's findings, asserting that the prosecution successfully established guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The court also noted the absence of physical impossibility for Flores to be at the scene of the crime at the pertinent time. Furthermore, the motives for the crime, aggravated by previous threats made by Flores, were also considered compelling.

Sentencing and Final Ru

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources. AI digests are study aids only—use responsibly.