Padua y Migano v. People
This is a criminal case, G.R. No. 241998, Gil Padua y Migano vs. People of the Philippines, decided by the First Division of the Supreme Court on April 1, 2019. The Court denied the petition for review on certiorari filed by the petitioner, who was convicted of homicide by the Regional Trial Court and affirmed by the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court held that all the elements of homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code were proven by the prosecution. The Court also modified the temperate damages awarded by the RTC from P25,000 to P50,000, in line with its ruling in People v. Jugueta. The Court clarified that only errors of law, not of fact, are reviewable by the Court under Rule 45.
ADVERTISEMENT
FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 241998. April 1, 2019.]
GIL PADUA y MIGANO, petitioner, vs.PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedApril 1, 2019which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 241998 (Gil Padua y Migano v. People of the Philippines)
After review of the records, the Court resolves to DENY the petition for failure to sufficiently show that the Court of Appeals (CA) committed any reversible error in its January 16, 2018 Decision 1 and August 13, 2018 Resolution, 2 as to warrant the exercise of the Court's appellate jurisdiction.
As correctly ruled by the CA, all the elements of homicide under Article 249 3 of the Revised Penal Code were proven by the prosecution, warranting the affirmance of judgment of the Regional Trial Court convicting petitioner. The petition also raises a factual issue which is not proper in petitions for review on certiorari under Rule 45 of the Rules of the Court. It is settled that only errors of the law, not of fact, are reviewable by the Court under Rule 45. 4
Nevertheless, the temperate damages awarded by the RTC must be modified. In People v. Jugueta5 the Court ruled that the amount of P50,000.00, temperate damages in homicide or murder cases is proper when no evidence of burial and funeral expenses is presented in the trial court. Accordingly, temperate damages in this case must also be increased to P50,000.00.
WHEREFORE, the January 16, 2018 Decision and the August 13, 2018 Resolution of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR No. 38346 are AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION that the award of temperate damages is increased to P50,000.00.
SO ORDERED."Jardeleza, J.,on official leave.
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 42-50; penned by Associate Justice Samuel H. Gaerlan with Associate Justices Mariflor P. Punzalan-Castillo and Marie Christine Azcarraga-Jacob, concurring.
2.Id. at 56-57.
3. Art. 249. Homicide — Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall kill another without the attendance of any circumstances enumerated in the next preceding article, shall be deemed guilty of homicide and be punished by reclusion temporal.
4. See Macad v. People, G.R. No. 227366, August 1, 2018.
5. 783 Phil. 806 (2016).
RECOMMENDED FOR YOU