Case Summary (G.R. No. 214453)
Procedural History
An Information charging Palanas with murder was filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Pasig City (Criminal Case No. 133352-H). The RTC convicted Palanas of murder (Decision dated October 20, 2010) and imposed reclusion perpetua with awards for civil indemnity, exemplary damages, moral damages, and actual damages. Palanas appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA), which affirmed the conviction and modified the damages (Decision dated January 16, 2014). Palanas appealed to the Supreme Court, which issued the decision under review.
Material Facts — summary of the incident
On the morning of March 26, 2006 at about 6:40 a.m., SPO2 Borre took his five‑month‑old grandson outside his residence. PO3 Zapanta, inside the residence, heard four successive gunshots, looked out, and observed two men about one meter from SPO2 Borre armed with .38 caliber revolvers. Zapanta saw Palanas deliver the fourth shot but could not identify the other shooter. The assailants fled on a motorcycle driven by the accused. SPO2 Borre was transported to Pasig City General Hospital by PO3 Zapanta and Ramil. En route and at the hospital, SPO2 Borre identified his assailant as “Abe,” “Aspog,” or “Abe Palanas.” SPO2 Borre died at around 11:00 a.m. of gunshot wounds to the head and trunk.
Defence asserted by the accused
Palanas pleaded denial and alibi. He claimed to have been in Parañaque on March 25 attending to his sick father and to have been at a baptism in Tondo on March 26 from morning until about 9:00 p.m., thereafter returning to Parañaque. He denied knowledge of the killing and of any reason why Resurreccion would accuse him.
RTC findings and disposition
The RTC found the prosecution proved Palanas’ guilt beyond reasonable doubt by positive eyewitness identification and admitted statements of the victim as ante mortem (dying) declaration and res gestae. The RTC found treachery present but did not find evident premeditation. It rejected the alibi for lack of impossibility to commit the crime and observed the short travel time between Parañaque and Pasig. The RTC sentenced Palanas to reclusion perpetua and awarded P50,000 civil indemnity, P25,000 exemplary damages, P50,000 moral damages, and P2,464,865.07 actual damages.
Court of Appeals ruling and modification
The CA affirmed the conviction, giving weight to the victim’s dying declaration and finding treachery present. The CA modified the damages, increasing civil indemnity to P75,000 and exemplary damages to P30,000, and otherwise upheld the RTC’s findings and sentence.
Issue before the Supreme Court
Whether Palanas’ conviction for murder should be upheld.
Legal standards applied — murder and treachery
The Court applied Article 248, RPC (as amended by R.A. 7659) defining murder and the attendant circumstance of treachery. The decision recited the two conditions for treachery: (a) employment of means of execution that deprives the person attacked of opportunity to defend or retaliate; and (b) the means of execution was deliberately or consciously adopted. The Court emphasized the sudden, unexpected nature of an attack that leaves the victim no chance to resist as the essence of treachery.
Legal standards applied — dying declaration and res gestae
The Court reiterated the requisites for a dying declaration under Section 37, Rule 130: (a) the declaration concerns the cause and surrounding circumstances of death; (b) the declarant was conscious of impending death when made; (c) the declarant was competent; and (d) the declaration is offered in a criminal case where the declarant is the victim. For res gestae under Section 42, Rule 130, the Court noted the requirements: (a) a startling occurrence; (b) statements made before the declarant had time to contrive; and (c) statements concern the occurrence and its immediate circumstances.
Court’s analysis of evidence and findings of fact
The Supreme Court agreed with the lower courts that the prosecution sufficiently proved that Palanas and his companion killed SPO2 Borre. PO3 Zapanta’s eyewitness testimony placed Palanas at the scene delivering a shot. SPO2 Borre’s statements identifying “Abe” were admitted both as a dying declaration—because his multiple severe wounds and imminent death made it reasonable to conclude he spoke under consciousness of impending death—and as res gestae, being spontaneous reactions to the startling
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 214453)
Procedural History
- Case reported at 760 Phil. 964, First Division; G.R. No. 214453, decision rendered June 17, 2015 by the Supreme Court (Perlas-Bernabe, J.).
- Information filed in the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Pasig City, Branch 157, docketed as Criminal Case No. 133352-H, charging Bernabe P. Palanas alias “Abe” with murder.
- RTC rendered Decision dated October 20, 2010, convicting Palanas of Murder, imposing reclusion perpetua and awarding damages (RTC rollo, pp. 27–41; RTC decision penned by Pairing Judge Nicanor A. Manalo, Jr.).
- Accused filed Notice of Appeal to the Court of Appeals (CA) dated February 18, 2011; CA acted in CA‑G.R. CR HC No. 04925.
- CA rendered Decision dated January 16, 2014 affirming the RTC’s conviction with modifications to damages (CA rollo, pp. 2–18; CA Decision penned by Associate Justice Elihu A. Ybanez with Associate Justices Japar B. Dimaampao and Melchor Quirino C. Sadang concurring).
- Accused filed Notice of Appeal to the Supreme Court dated January 30, 2014 (rollo, pp. 19–21).
- Supreme Court resolution: appeal denied; CA Decision affirmed with modification (June 17, 2015).
Facts
- Date and place: On or about March 26, 2006, in Pasig City.
- Victim: SPO2 Ramon Borre y Orio (SPO2 Borre).
- Circumstances of the attack:
- At around 6:40 a.m., SPO2 Borre took his five‑month‑old grandson outside his residence at Block 14, Kenneth Street corner Eusebio Avenue, Pasig City.
- PO3 Leopoldo Zapanta, who was sleeping at SPO2 Borre’s residence, heard four successive gunshots while watching television.
- PO3 Zapanta looked through an open door and observed two men, each armed with .38 caliber revolvers, standing about a meter away from SPO2 Borre.
- PO3 Zapanta saw Palanas deliver the fourth shot to SPO2 Borre; he could not identify the other shooter.
- The two assailants then fled on a motorcycle driven by the accused (as alleged in the Information and supported by eyewitness testimony).
- Post‑shooting events:
- PO3 Zapanta and SPO2 Borre’s stepson, Ramil Ranola, brought SPO2 Borre to Pasig City General Hospital.
- On the way to the hospital, SPO2 Borre told Ramil and PO3 Zapanta that it was “Abe,” “Aspog,” or “Abe Palanas” who shot him; this identification was later repeated to his wife, Resurreccion Borre, who followed him to the hospital.
- SPO2 Borre died at around 11:00 a.m. of the same date due to gunshot wounds to the head and trunk.
Information / Charge Alleged
- The Information charged Palanas as co‑principal with one male person at large, acting as co‑principal in the killing of SPO2 Borre, alleging:
- That the other male person, armed with a gun, with intent to kill and with the qualifying circumstances of treachery and evident premeditation, attacked and shot SPO2 Borre on his head and different parts of his body which directly caused his death;
- Thereafter took the firearm of the victim, boarded a motorcycle driven by the accused, who drove the motorcycle away from the scene of the crime;
- Offense charged: Murder, contrary to law (Information reproduced in the source).
Prosecution’s Evidence and Contentions
- Eyewitness testimony of PO3 Leopoldo Zapanta:
- Heard four gunshots; observed two men armed with .38 revolvers near the victim; saw Palanas fire the fourth shot.
- Victim’s statements:
- SPO2 Borre identified his assailant as “Abe,” “Aspog,” or “Abe Palanas” while being transported to the hospital; this statement was communicated to family members and police.
- Medical outcome:
- SPO2 Borre sustained multiple gunshot wounds to the head and trunk and died at around 11:00 a.m. on March 26, 2006.
- Prosecution’s theory:
- Positive eyewitness identification and the victim’s statements (treated as dying declaration and/or res gestae) established Palanas as the perpetrator beyond reasonable doubt; treachery attended the killing.
Defense’s Contentions
- Plea and defenses interposed by Palanas:
- Denial of commission of the crime.
- Alibi: asserted presence in Paranaque City on March 25, 2006 attending to his sick father; on March 26, 2006 attended a baptism in Tondo, Manila, staying there from morning until about 9:00 p.m., after which he returned to Paranaque City.
- Claimed ignorance of the shooting and of any motive why SPO2 Borre’s wife Resurreccion would accuse him.
- Alibi particulars and evidential support:
- Defense witnesses and circumstances asserted travel between Paranaque City and Pasig City could be traversed in less than one hour (admitted in record and considered by RTC).
RTC Findings and Ruling (October 20, 2010)
- Conviction and sentence:
- RTC found Palanas guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Murder and sentenced him to suffer reclusion perpetua.
- Damages awarded by RTC:
- P50,000.00 as civil indemnity;
- P25,000.00 as exemplary damages;
- P50,000.00 as moral damages;
- P2,464,865.07 as actual damages (with detailed breakdown).
- Basis of conviction:
- RTC found the prosecution proved guilt by positive identification of the eyewitnesses.
- SPO2 Borre’s statements constituted an ante mortem statement and formed part of the res gestae, and were admissible.
- Treachery was present: victim had no inkling the attack would take place and was in no position to mount any feasible defense.
- Evident premeditation:
- RTC did not find evident premeditation for lack of the necessary elements enumerated by the court: (a) time when offender determined to commit the crime; (b) an act manifestly indicating clinging to such determination; and (c) sufficient lapse of time allowing reflection.
- Alibi rejected:
- RTC gave no credence to alibi because travel time made presence at locus criminis physically possible; it noted the admitted travel time between Paranaque and Pasig could be less than one hour (RTC findings at CA rollo, pp. 36–39).