People v. Bustamante y Bansag

FIRST DIVISION

[G.R. No. 208094. April 21, 2014.]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CRISTITO BUSTAMANTE y BANSAG, accused-appellant.

NOTICE

Sirs/Mesdames :

Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution datedApril 21, 2014which reads as follows:

"G.R. No. 208094 — THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,versusCRISTITO BUSTAMANTE y BANSAG,accused-appellant.

Before this Court is an appeal from the June 17, 2011 Decision 1 of the Court of Appeals (CA) which affirmed the judgment 2 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 15 of Davao City, finding appellant guilty for the murder of Eleazar L. Cabagte (Eleazar).

Summarily, the prosecution proved the following facts: At around 7:30 in the evening of February 1, 2001, Eleazar, together with his parents and two siblings, was at the kitchen of their house talking with Felix Moñino and the latter's son, Jose Moniño. Suddenly, appellant, who was armed with a bolo, entered the kitchen and stabbed Eleazar, hitting him on the left side of his abdomen and causing his intestines to spill out. After stabbing Eleazar, appellant immediately ran away before any of Eleazar's shocked companions could do anything. Eleazar died upon his arrival at the hospital. 3

On the other hand, appellant denied the charge against him. Appellant claimed that at around 6:00 in the evening of February 1, 2001, he was drinking Tanduay Rhum at a store when he was attacked by Eleazar and his brother Elmer. Elmer struck him with a stone and Eleazar hit his face with a piece of wood. Appellant drew his bolo from his waist, but Eleazar tried to take it from him. Appellant was able to retain possession of his bolo and ran home. Appellant claimed that he initially was not aware that he had stabbed Eleazar since he was drunk at the time of the incident and he went home thereafter. Upon the advice of his mother and siblings, appellant surrendered to the Barangay Captain of Talandang, Tugbok, Davao City. 4

The RTC found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder qualified by treachery. The RTC sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and ordered him to pay the heirs of Eleazar P50,000 as civil indemnity, P50,000 as moral damages, and P20,000 as actual damages. The trial court noted that appellant admitted that he stabbed Eleazar but claimed that he did not notice it since he was drunk. However, the RTC held that appellant's defense that he was drunk when the stabbing occurred was belied by the testimonies of Felix and Jose Moniño, who corroborated the testimonies of Eleazar's family, that appellant suddenly entered Eleazar's house and stabbed him in the stomach. The RTC found that there was treachery since the facts show that the attack was deliberately planned and executed in order to ensure success of appellant's intent to kill Eleazar without giving the latter any opportunity to defend himself.

On appeal, the CA affirmed the decision of the RTC in finding appellant guilty of murder but modified the monetary damages awarded. It ordered appellant to pay the heirs of Eleazar an additional P20,000 as exemplary damages and P20,000 as temperate damages in lieu of the actual damages awarded by the RTC. The CA agreed with the findings of the RTC on the existence of treachery. It noted that the attack was sudden, swift and totally unexpected, affording the victim no opportunity to defend himself. The CA stated that Eleazar was seated with his back facing the entrance to the kitchen when appellant barged in with a bolo. Given his position, Eleazar could not have immediately seen and reacted to appellant's attack despite the failed effort of Eleazar's mother to hold appellant's hand. The attack was so swift that Eleazar was not able to stand and only managed to turn to his left side before he was stabbed in the left abdomen. The CA further held that even with the existence of a prior altercation between appellant and Eleazar at the store around 6:30 in the evening, the same would not negate the treacherous manner in which Eleazar was killed. The appellate court noted that the stoning incident at the store ended when they all went home to their respective houses. Moreover, the fact that appellant had gone home first and at 7:30 in the same evening suddenly attached Eleazar showed that appellant deliberately and consciously adopted the treacherous manner in killing Eleazar. cECTaD

After a careful review of the records of this case and the parties' submissions, the Court finds no cogent reason to disturb the decision of the CA. It has been consistently held that in criminal cases, the evaluation of the credibility of witnesses is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge, whose conclusion thereon deserves much weight and respect because the judge has the direct opportunity to observe them on the stand and ascertain if they are telling the truth or not. This deference to the trial court's appreciation of the facts and of the credibility of witnesses is consistent with the principle that when the testimony of a witness meets the test of credibility, that alone is sufficient to convict the accused. This is especially true when the factual findings of the trial court are affirmed by the appellate court. 5 Absent any showing that the lower courts overlooked, misunderstood or misappreciated substantial facts and circumstances, which if considered would change the result of the case, this Court gives deference to the trial court's appreciation of the facts and of the credibility of witnesses. TAcSaC

However, based on existing jurisprudence, the award of civil indemnity should be increased to P75,000, 6 and the amount of exemplary damages to P30,000. 7 Likewise, the amount of temperate damages should be increased to P25,000. 8 Under Article 2224 of the Civil Code, temperate damages may be recovered for it cannot be denied that the heirs of the victim suffered pecuniary loss although the exact amount was not proved. 9

Interest at the legal rate of 6% per annum on all damages awarded should likewise be imposed reckoned from the finality of this resolution until fully paid.

WHEREFORE, the Decision dated June 17, 2011 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 00791-MIN affirming the conviction of appellant Cristito Bustamante y Bansag is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. The award of civil indemnity, exemplary damages and temperate damages are increased to P75,000, P30,000 and P25,000 respectively in accordance with prevailing jurisprudence. Interest at the rate of six percent (6%) per annum on all damages awarded in this case reckoned from the finality of this resolution until fully paid shall likewise be paid by appellant to the heirs of Eleazar L. Cabagte.

With costs against the appellant.

SO ORDERED."

Very truly yours,

(SGD.) EDGAR O. ARICHETADivision Clerk of Court

Footnotes

1. Rollo, pp. 3-20. Penned by Associate Justice Pamela Ann Abella Maxino with Associate Justices Rodrigo F. Lim, Jr. and Zenaida T. Galapate-Laguilles concurring. The assailed decision was rendered in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 00791-MIN.

2. CA rollo, pp. 19-28. Penned by Judge Ridgway M. Tanjili.

3. Rollo, pp. 4-5; CA rollo, pp. 20-21.

4. Id. at 4; id. at 23.

5. People v. Obina, G.R. No. 186540, April 14, 2010, 618 SCRA 276, 281.

6. People v. Malicdem, G.R. No. 184601, November 12, 2012, 685 SCRA 193, 206 & 207.

7. People v. Laurio, G.R. No. 182523, September 13, 2012, 680 SCRA 560, 572-573.

8. Id. at 573.

9. People v. Domingo, 599 Phil. 589, 609 (2009).