FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 238619. January 16, 2019.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner,vs. EUSEBIO AGA VILLACRUSIS, JR., respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, First Division, issued a Resolution dated January 16, 2019 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 238619 (People of the Philippines v. Eusebio Aga Villacrusis, Jr.). — After review, the Court resolves to DISMISS the appeal for failure of accused-appellant Eusebio Aga Villacrusis, Jr. to sufficiently show reversible error in the challenged decision to warrant the exercise of the Court's appellate jurisdiction.
It is well-established practice and procedure that the Court refrains from further scrutinizing the findings of the trial courts, more so when these are affirmed by the Court of Appeals (CA). Here, both the trial court and the CA are convinced that accused-appellant is guilty of murder for the death of Aldo Villacrusis. Moreover, the CA likewise ruled that no evidence on record corroborated accused-appellant's defense of denial and alibi. Thus, credence is properly given to the prosecution witness, who positively identified accused-appellant as the only person he saw at the very moment the victim was killed.
WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the Decision dated August 18, 2017 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08096 finding accused-appellant Eusebio Aga Villacrusis, Jr. GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code and ADOPTS the imposed penalty of reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole. Accordingly, accused-appellant is directed to pay the heirs of the late Aldo Villacrusis: a) P100,000.00 as civil indemnity; b) P100,000.00 as moral damages; c) P100,000.00 as exemplary damages; and d) P50,000.00 as temperate damages. The damages awarded shall earn legal interest at six percent (6%) per annum from the date of finality of the judgment until fully paid.
The accused-appellant's manifestation (in lieu of supplemental brief), pursuant to the Resolution dated July 9, 2018, adopting the Brief for the Accused-Appellant filed before the Court of Appeals as the same had adequately discussed all the matters pertinent to his defense; and the Office of the Solicitor General's manifestation (in compliance with this Court's Resolution dated July 9, 2018), stating that it will dispense with the filing of the supplemental brief as it had already exhaustively discussed the people's arguments relative to the issues raised by accused-appellant in the Brief for the Appellee dated December 12, 2016, are both NOTED.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LIBRADA C. BUENADivision Clerk of Court