Case Summary (G.R. No. L-32792)
Incident Description
On the evening of December 2, 1987, Herminigildo Isidro witnessed events following the sound of gunfire. He heard his uncle, Sixto Selma, cry out for help after two shots were fired in quick succession. Concerned for Sixto’s safety, Herminigildo rushed to inform his family. Despite seeking assistance from a local councilor, who refused fearing for his safety, Herminigildo and other family members went to the scene where they found Sixto wounded. Upon interrogation, Sixto identified Alex Garma as one of his attackers. Sixto was subsequently taken to the hospital, where he was pronounced dead due to multiple gunshot wounds.
Legal Proceedings
Following the incident, separate sworn statements from Herminigildo and another witness were used to charge Garma and an unidentified accomplice with murder. At his arraignment, Garma pleaded not guilty. The trial culminated in a conviction by the Regional Trial Court, sentencing him to imprisonment and ordering him to pay civil indemnity to Sixto’s heirs. The Court of Appeals later affirmed this conviction, increasing both the penalty and the indemnity.
Admissibility of Dying Declaration
The prosecution’s case heavily relied on Sixto’s dying declaration identifying Garma as one of his assailants. The Court acknowledged this declaration as qualifying both as a res gestae statement and a dying declaration. To satisfy the dying declaration admissibility criteria, Sixto’s statement concerning the crucial crime elements was established, indicating he was conscious of impending death and competent to testify before his demise.
Evaluation of Witness Testimonies
Four critical witnesses corroborated Sixto’s dying declaration. They individually recounted their respective experiences upon discovering Sixto wounded. Their statements were deemed consistent and credible, countering Garma’s assertion that the testimonies were contradictory. The trial court’s observations further supported the witnesses’ reliability, undermining Garma's claims regarding their credibility.
Defense of Alibi
Garma’s defense rested on an alibi, asserting that he was watching television at his grandfather’s house during the time of the murder. However, this defensive strategy was undermined by the direct identification from Sixto. The law maintains that a solid alibi cannot outweigh a positive identification of the accused by the victim at the time of the crime.
Credibility of the Witnesses
Contrary to Garma’s claims, the Court of Appeals found the inconsistencies presented by the appellant to be minor, not sufficient to discredit the witnesses. The absence of precise replication of Sixto’s final words did not invalidate the essence of their testimonies. Rather, witnesses need only provide the substance of what was said, which was duly satisfied in this case.
Finding of Treachery
The court, while affirming Garma’
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. L-32792)
Case Background
- The incident occurred on December 2, 1987, around 8:00 PM in Sitio Alinaay, Baguingao, Cabugao, Ilocos Sur.
- Herminigildo Isidro heard two gunshots and subsequently heard his uncle, Sixto Selma, calling for help, suggesting that he had been shot.
- Herminigildo alerted his family, and they sought assistance from Councilor Jose Ardesani, who refused to help due to fear of the assailants.
- Herminigildo, along with family members, bravely proceeded to the scene and found Sixto lying on the ground, wounded.
- Sixto identified Alex Garm as one of three assailants just before being taken to the hospital, where he died from multiple gunshot wounds.
Charges and Trial Process
- Based on the statements from Herminigildo and Gil Morales, Alex Garm, along with an unidentified co-accused, was charged with murder.
- The Information stated that the accused conspired to kill Sixto Selma with treachery and evident premeditation.
- Upon arraignment, Garm pleaded not guilty, and a trial ensued.
- The trial court convicted Garm on December 4, 1989, sentencing him to a prison term ranging from ten years and one day to eighteen years, eight months, and one day, along with a civil indemnity of P30,000.00 to Sixto's heirs.
Appellate Court Ruling
- Garm appealed the trial court's decision.
- The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua and increased the civil indemnity to P50,000.00.
- The case was then certified to the Supreme Court for review.
Evidence and Testimonies
- The conviction primar