SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 246376. June 26, 2019.]
RYAN Q. ESTRELLA, petitioner, vs.PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated26 June 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 246376 (Ryan Q. Estrella v. People of the Philippines)
After a judicious study of the case, the Court resolves to DENY the instant petition 1 and AFFIRM the November 28, 2018 Decision 2 and the March 15, 2019 Resolution 3 of the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR No. 40670 finding petitioner Ryan Q. Estrella (petitioner) GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Frustrated Homicide, defined and penalized under Article 249, in relation to Article 250, of the Revised Penal Code (RPC). Accordingly, he is sentenced to suffer the penalty of imprisonment for an indeterminate period of three (3) years, six (6) months and twenty (20) days of prision correccional, as minimum, to nine (9) years and four (4) months of prision mayor, as maximum; and to pay Jhun Laurena (Laurena) the following amounts: (a) P30,000.00 as civil indemnity; and (b) P30,000.00 as moral damages, 4 and the costs of suit. Moreover, all monetary awards shall earn an interest at the legal rate of six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of this Resolution until full payment. CAIHTE
As correctly ruled by the CA, the prosecution had established with moral certainty all the elements 5 of the crime of Frustrated Homicide, given that: (a) Laurena was hit by a stone on the head and was stabbed below the armpit; 6(b) Laurena sustained a fatal wound that would have resulted in his death if not for the timely medical attention; 7 and (c) none of the qualifying circumstance for Murder under Article 248 of the RPC, as amended, was present. 8 It is settled that the assessment and findings of the trial court are generally accorded great weight, and are conclusive and binding on the Court unless tainted with arbitrariness or oversight of some fact or circumstance of weight and influence, 9 which were not shown in this case.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of Court
By:
TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 11-29.
2.Id. at 34-44. Penned by Associate Justice Manuel M. Barrios with Associate Justices Japar B. Dimaampao and Henri Jean Paul B. Inting (now a member of this Court), concurring.
3.Id. at 46-47.
4. See People v. Jugueta, 783 Phil. 806, 852 (2016).
5. Significantly, in cases of Frustrated Homicide, the prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that: (i) the accused intended to kill his victim, as manifested by his use of a deadly weapon in his assault; (ii) the victim sustained a fatal or mortal wound but did not die because of timely medical assistance; and (iii) none of the qualifying circumstances for murder under Article 248 of the RPC, as amended, are present. (See Miranda v. People, G.R. No. 234528, January 23, 2019, citing De Guzman, Jr. v. People, 748 Phil. 452, 458 [2014].)
6. See rollo, pp. 39-40.
7. See id. at 40.
8. See People v. Alejandro, 807 Phil. 221, 229 (2017).
9. See People v. Bagamano, 793 Phil. 602, 608 (2016).