Title
Seguritan y Jara vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 172896
Decision Date
Apr 19, 2010
Petitioner convicted of homicide after punching victim during an argument, causing fatal head injury; autopsy confirmed trauma, rejecting defense's heart attack claim. Damages awarded.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 205487)

Factual Antecedents

On October 1, 1996, a charge of homicide was lodged against the petitioner, alleging that on November 25, 1995, in Gonzaga, Cagayan, he intentionally assaulted Lucrecio Seguritan, causing fatal head injuries. During trial, it was established that the petitioner and the victim were engaged in a drinking session, during which a dispute arose over agricultural damage allegedly caused by the victim's carabao. The altercation escalated into physical violence, leading to the victim falling and suffering severe head injuries. Despite efforts to revive him, Lucrecio succumbed to his injuries later that night. An autopsy confirmed the death was due to traumatic head injuries.

The Version of the Prosecution

The prosecution presented evidence that the petitioner had punched Lucrecio, causing him to fall and hit his head. Witness accounts noted that the victim was incapacitated, and the autopsy revealed significant head trauma. Testimony from Dr. Antonio Vertido, who conducted the autopsy, confirmed that Lucrecio died from these injuries. Furthermore, discrepancies emerged about Lucrecio's alleged heart attack, as such claims did not hold against the established forensic evidence showing fatal head injuries.

The Version of the Defense

Contrarily, the petitioner denied hitting Lucrecio, asserting that Lucrecio's death resulted from a heart attack rather than from any assault. The defense attempted to introduce witness testimony suggesting that the victim's health issues were the cause of death, as indicated in the Certificate of Death. However, this assertion was countered by expert forensic findings.

Ruling of the Regional Trial Court

On February 5, 2001, the RTC convicted the petitioner of homicide, determining that he acted with intent and caused the victim's death through his actions. The court sentenced him to an indeterminate prison term of 6 years and 1 day as the minimum and 17 years and 4 months as the maximum, along with orders for damages to be paid to the victim’s heirs.

The Decision of the Court of Appeals

The CA upheld the RTC's conviction but modified the sentence to reflect an indeterminate range of 6 years and 1 day to 12 years and 1 day of reclusion temporal. The CA also increased the damages to include moral damages and affirmed the other financial awards. The petitioner’s subsequent motion for reconsideration was denied.

Issues Presented

In appealing the CA's decision, the petitioner asserted that the appellate court erred in affirming the RTC’s judgment and argued that the evidence pointed towards the accidental nature of the injuries rather than a clear intention to kill.

Our Ruling

The Supreme Court denied the petition. The Court affirmed the findings of both the RTC and CA regarding the nature of the injuries inflicted by the petitioner, finding sufficient evidence to support the homicide conviction. It also clarified that the act of violence and the resultant injuries warranted criminal liability irrespective of the absence of intent to kill

...continue reading

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