Chua y Dumawa v. People

THIRD DIVISION

[G.R. No. 257189. March 16, 2022.]

ARNALDO CHUA y DUMAWA, EDUARDO CHUA y DUMAWA, and JUN MANLUNAS y NIEGAS, 1petitioners,vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution datedMarch 16, 2022, which reads as follows:

"G.R. No. 257189 (Arnaldo Chua y Dumawa, Eduardo Chua y Dumawa, and Jun Manlunas y Niegas, petitioners v. People of the Philippines, respondent.) — After a judicious study of the case, the Court DENIES the petition and AFFIRMS with MODIFICATION the Decision 2 dated June 16, 2020 and the Resolution 3 dated May 17, 2021 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No. 40295, finding Arnaldo Chua y Dumawa, Eduardo Chua y Dumawa, and Jun Manlunas y Niegas (petitioners) guilty of (a) the crime of Homicide in Criminal Case No. 60-2001, under Article 249 4 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC); and (b) Attempted Homicide in Criminal Case No. 63-2001, under Article 249, in relation to Article 6 5 of the RPC.

The elements of Homicide are: (a) a person was killed; (b) the accused killed him without any justifying circumstance; (c) the accused had the intention to kill, which is presumed; and (d) the killing was not attended by any of the qualifying circumstances of Murder, or by that of Parricide or Infanticide, were proven beyond reasonable doubt. 6 On the other hand, the elements of Attempted Homicide are: (a) that the accused intended to kill his victim; (b) the victim sustained a non-fatal wound; and (c) none of the qualifying circumstances for murder under Article 248 of the RPC, as amended, are present.

As correctly found by the CA, all the elements of Homicide in Criminal Case No. 60-2001 are present considering that: (a) the victim Lloyd Gelido (Gelido) was killed; (b) petitioners stabbed him, which caused his death; (c) there was an intent to kill; and (d) the killing was not attended by qualifying circumstances of murder, parricide, or infanticide. Likewise, the CA correctly found that all the elements of Attempted Homicide are present in Criminal Case No. 63-2001 considering that: (a) petitioners intended to kill the victim Archiebal 7 Bunales (Bunales) by using a deadly weapon (fan knife) to stab him; (b) Bunales sustained non-fatal wounds; and (c) the infliction of injuries upon Bunales was not attended by qualifying circumstances of murder, parricide, or infanticide. Verily, the Court finds no reason to overturn the findings of the court a quo, as affirmed by the CA, as there was no showing that they overlooked, misunderstood, or misapplied the surrounding facts and circumstances of the case. 8

Considering that no mitigating or aggravating circumstances exist, the Court finds it proper to adjust the penalty to be imposed on petitioners pursuant to the Indeterminate Sentence Law, as follows: (a) in Criminal Case No. 60-2001, petitioners are sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for an indeterminate period of (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as minimum, to fourteen (14) years, eight (8) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum; and (b) in Criminal Case No. 63-2001, petitioners are sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for an indeterminate period of four (4) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to two (2) years, four (4) months, and one (1) day of prision correccional, as maximum. CAIHTE

Finally, and pursuant to prevailing jurisprudence, 9 the monetary awards are also adjusted as follows: (a) in Criminal Case No. 60-2001, petitioners are ordered to pay the heirs of Gelido the amounts of P75,296.00 as actual damages, P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, and P50,000.00 as moral damages, all with legal interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from finality of this ruling until full payment; and (b) in Criminal Case No. 63-2001, petitioners are ordered to pay Bunales the amounts of P20,000.00 as civil indemnity, P20,000.00 as moral damages, and P25,000.00 as temperate damages, all with legal interest 10 at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from finality of this ruling until full payment.

WHEREFORE, the Court finds petitioners Arnaldo Chua y Dumawa, Eduardo Chua y Dumawa, and Jun Manlunas y Niegas GUILTY of the crimes of Homicide and Attempted Homicide, and accordingly:

(a) In Criminal Case No. 60-2001, petitioners are sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for an indeterminate period of (8) years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as minimum, to fourteen (14) years, eight (8) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, as maximum, and ordered to pay the heirs of Gelido the amounts of P75,296.00 as actual damages, P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, and P50,000.00 as moral damages, all with legal interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from finality of this ruling until full payment; and

(b) In Criminal Case No. 63-2001, petitioners are sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for an indeterminate period of four (4) months of arresto mayor, as minimum, to two (2) years, four (4) months, and one (1) day of prision correccional, as maximum, and ordered to pay Bunales the amounts of P20,000.00 as civil indemnity, P20,000.00 as moral damages, and P20,000.00 as exemplary damages, all with legal interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum from finality of this ruling until full payment.

SO ORDERED."

By authority of the Court:

(SGD.) MISAEL DOMINGO C. BATTUNG IIIDivision Clerk of Court

Footnotes

1. "Niaga" in some parts of the rollo.

2.Rollo, pp. 60-76. Penned by Associate Justice Nina G. Antonio-Valenzuela with Associate Justices Celia C. Librea-Leagogo and Tita Marilyn B. Payoyo-Villordon, concurring.

3. Not attached to the rollo.

4. Article 249. Homicide. — Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall kill another without the attendance of any of the circumstances enumerated in the next preceding article, shall be deemed guilty of homicide and be punished by reclusion temporal. (emphasis supplied)

5. Article 6. Consummated Frustrated, and Attempted Felonies. — Consummated felonies, as well as those which are frustrated and attempted, are punishable.

xxx xxx xxx

There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance. (emphases supplied)

6.Wacoy v. People, 761 Phil. 570, 578 (2015).

7. "Archibal" in some parts of the rollo.

8. See People v. Estonilo, G.R No. 248694, October 14, 2020, citing People v. Naciongayo, G.R. No. 243897, June 8, 2020.

9. See People v. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806, 846 (2016) and People v. Aquino, G.R. No. 203435, April 11, 2018.

10. See Nacar v. Gallery Frames, 716 Phil. 267 (2013).