Title
People vs. Gargar
Case
G.R. No. 110029-30
Decision Date
Dec 29, 1998
A family's house was set on fire, leading to a fatal shooting. Accused were acquitted of arson but convicted of murder due to credible witness testimonies and proven conspiracy.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 110029-30)

Charges and Sentencing

The trial court convicted the accused-appellants of arson under Criminal Case No. 9463, sentencing them to an indeterminate penalty of four years and two months of prision correccional, as minimum, to eight years and one day of prision mayor, plus a P500 indemnity to Arsenio Acabo. In Criminal Case No. 9474, for murder, they received the penalty of reclusion perpetua and were ordered to indemnify Joedex Acabo's heirs P50,000.

Prosecution's Allegations

The prosecution alleged that on the night of December 23, 1989, accused-appellants, conspired to set fire to Arsenio Acabo's house while it was occupied, and subsequently shot Joedex Acabo. Evidence included witness testimonies and a death certificate confirming Joedex's death due to gunshot wounds.

Testimonies and Evidence

Prosecution witnesses Arsenio and Mario Wellan Acabo provided firsthand accounts of the events. Arsenio testified he saw Gargar wielding a bolo while Gamboa fired at their house, while Mario witnessed Gamboa shooting Joedex. The firearm used was established to belong to Gamboa. A torch made of dried coconut leaves was discovered near the house, linking the appellants to the arson.

Defense Arguments

The defense argued that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were inconsistent and unreliable. Appellant Gargar claimed he was home caring for his family during the incident, while Gamboa stated he was at a distant CAFGU outpost. They asserted that the evidence was insufficient to convict them of the crimes charged, particularly regarding arson.

Trial Court's Findings

The trial court rejected the defenses of alibi provided by both appellants, citing their proximity to the crime scene and the established timeline of events. The court found sufficient circumstantial evidence indicating the accused participated in the conspiracy to commit arson and murder.

Appeals and Rulings

On appeal, the accused-appellants contended that the evidence presented was insufficient, and the alleged conspiracy was not conclusively proven. The appellate court d

...continue reading

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