Title
People vs. Navarro
Case
G.R. No. 132696
Decision Date
Feb 12, 2001
Ramon Navarro convicted of murder for shooting Romeo Calizar in 1987; eyewitness testimony deemed credible despite defense claims of conspiracy and alternative shooter.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 132696)

Charges and Proceedings

The accused faced two separate charges: Murder (Criminal Case No. 3082-A) and Aggravated Illegal Possession of Firearm and Ammunition (Criminal Case No. 3083-A). The prosecution alleged that, on the evening of August 28, 1987, Navarro shot Calizar with intent to kill, utilizing treachery and the cover of darkness.

Prosecution's Evidence

The prosecution relied heavily on the testimony of Bob Regaspi, who claimed to have witnessed the crime. Regaspi testified that he saw Navarro exit a jeep, pull Calizar from it, kick him, and then shoot him three times using a .45 caliber pistol under the illumination of surrounding vehicle lights. Regaspi admitted that he did not report the crime immediately out of fear for his life, leading to his relocation to Manila for three years.

Additional Testimonies

Other witnesses for the prosecution included Demetria Calizar, the victim's wife, who confirmed that Regaspi identified Navarro as the murderer. Medical testimony regarding the cause of death certified it as “severe hemorrhage due to multiple gunshot wounds.” Police officers corroborated the occurrence of the shooting and found evidence at the crime scene.

Defense's Case

The defense called several witnesses, including Mayor Leon Rivera, who testified about Navarro's character; however, he acknowledged the community's fear of Navarro's alleged criminal affiliations. Other defense witnesses sought to portray inconsistencies in Regaspi’s testimony, suggesting he may be implicated in the murder alongside the victim's widow, Demetria.

Trial Court's Verdict

The trial court convicted Navarro of Murder with the use of an unlicensed firearm, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering the payment of damages to the victim’s heirs. The court found the prosecution's evidence credible, despite attempts from the defense to undermine it through allegations of bias and conspiracy among witnesses.

Analysis of Appellant's Arguments

Navarro's appeal raised several points:

  1. Inconsistency in Testimony: He claimed that Regaspi’s testimony was uncorroborated and led to a wrongful conviction. However, the appellate court noted that minor inconsistencies do not significantly detract from a witness's credibility.

  2. Judicial Notice of Reputation: Navarro contested the trial court's consideration of extraneous facts regarding his notoriety. The appellate court clarified that the conviction was primarily based on Regaspi's direct eyewitness account.

  3. Timing of Crime: Accused-appellant argued that committing the murder under bright conditions made his actions implausible. The court counte

...continue reading

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