Title
People vs. Hatton
Case
G.R. No. 85043
Decision Date
Jun 16, 1992
A man was acquitted of murder after flawed identification procedures, inconsistent witness testimonies, and insufficient evidence failed to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 85043)

Charges and Initial Proceedings

Glenn Hatton was charged with murder, characterized by treachery and evident premeditation, as outlined in the initial complaint. Upon arraignment, Hatton pleaded not guilty. The prosecution's case relied on the testimony of eyewitnesses who provided details of the event leading to Algarme's death.

Testimonies of the Prosecution

Eyewitnesses Edgardo Ongue and Romeo Basierto testified that Algarme was attacked during a fiesta celebration. Ongue saw a tall man stab Algarme while Basierto, who chased the assailant, recognized Hatton as the attacker. The victim succumbed to a stab wound that caused massive hemorrhage after being rushed to the hospital. The witnesses corroborated their observations about the attack and the assailant's height and features.

Defense and Alibi

Hatton's defense was primarily alibi; he claimed that he spent the evening at a friend’s house during the time of the crime. His alibi was supported by testimonies from individuals present during the gathering. Hatton also contested claims asserting he was the attacker by stating he is left-handed, challenging the assertion that the fatal blow had been made with a right hand.

Trial Court's Judgment

The trial court found Hatton guilty of murder, imposing the penalty of reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay damages to Algarme’s heirs. The decision asserted that the evidence produced by the prosecution was compelling.

Appellant's Arguments

Hatton raised multiple issues in his appeal against the trial court’s judgment, including claims of bias from the judge, the relevance of being left-handed, the validity of eyewitness identifications, and the alleged failure of the court to give weight to his defense.

Judge's Conduct During Trial

Hatton argued that the trial judge displayed bias and conducted the examination of witnesses in a leading manner, favoring the prosecution. The appellate court examined the trial transcripts, ultimately concluding that while the judge was active in questioning, it did not create bias against the defense.

Eyewitness Identification Credibility

The appellate court scrutinized the reliability of the eyewitness identification of Hatton. It highlighted the issue of identification taking place not in a proper lineup, but rather in a suggestive manner where police indicated him as their suspect, which is a substantial concern in legal proceedings regarding due process rights.

Left-Handedness as a Factor

The appeal pointed out the trial court's dismissal of Hatton’s handedness as a trivial detail. However, the appellate court disagreed, emphasizing that the nature of the stab wound delivery was significant and could pertain to the identity of the assailant, given Hatton’s claim as a left-handed individual.

Pre-Trial Identification Concerns

Witness Ongue’s identification of Hatton was deeply scrutinized, considering he was shown Hatton as the suspect without a proper process of identification in place. The co

...continue reading

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