Title
People vs. Floresta y Selencio
Case
G.R. No. 239032
Decision Date
Jun 17, 2019
Jay Lourd shot during drinking session; wife implicated Gilbert. Supreme Court acquitted due to insufficient evidence, inconclusive res gestae, and failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 239032)

Facts of the Case

On the evening of December 28, 2012, Jay Lourd was drinking with friends when he suddenly expressed distress, indicating he had been shot. Allan Andaya, who was present during the incident, heard a gunshot and saw Jay Lourd bleeding. Jay Lourd's wife, Jennifer Bones, attended to him and later reported to authorities that Gilbert was the shooter. Gilbert claimed he was elsewhere, engaging in activities during the time of the incident, supported by testimonies of acquaintances.

RTC Ruling

The Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Masbate City rendered a decision on November 23, 2015, finding Gilbert guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder, attributing treachery to the crime. The RTC sentenced him to reclusion perpetua and ordered him to pay damages to the victim's heirs. The Court emphasized the reliability of Jay Lourd's statements to Jennifer, deemed part of the res gestae, and rejected Gilbert’s alibi due to insufficient proof of impossibility.

CA Ruling

The Court of Appeals (CA) upheld the RTC's conviction in its decision dated April 21, 2017, but with increased monetary damages awarded to the victim's heirs, including civil indemnity, exemplary damages, and temperate damages. The CA affirmed that the prosecution met its burden of proof, citing Jay Lourd's res gestae statement identifying Gilbert as the shooter.

Legal Issue

The core issue addressed by the Court was whether Gilbert's conviction should be maintained.

The Court's Ruling

The Court found merit in Gilbert’s appeal, stating that a criminal appeal allows for a comprehensive review of the case, enabling the correction of lower court errors. The Court assessed the elements needed to substantiate a murder charge, specifically focusing on the prosecution’s failure to establish Gilbert’s unequivocal identity as the shooter beyond reasonable doubt.

Evaluation of Res Gestae

Although acknowledging the admissibility of Jay Lourd's utterance as part of res gestae, the Court emphasized that admissibility does not equate to sufficient weight of evidence. Jay Lourd's declaration failed to positively and categorically identify Gilbert as the assailant, which led the Court to invoke the equipoise rule—asserting that the evidence did not achieve the level of moral certainty required for conviction.

Insufficient Circumstantial Evidence

The Court further noted the lack of circumstantial evidence supporting Gilbert's guilt. The only potentially implicat

...continue reading

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