SECOND DIVISION
[G.R. No. 232391. January 23, 2019.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, petitioner,vs. ABNER VISTAN Y CAPIT, respondent.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Second Division, issued a Resolution dated 23 January 2019 which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 232391 — People of the Philippines v. Abner Vistan y Capit
The records of this case were elevated to this Court on July 13, 2017, pursuant to the Court of Appeals (CA) Resolution 1 dated January 11, 2017, which gave due course to the Notice of Appeal 2 filed by Abner Vistan y Capit (accused-appellant). The CA Decision 3 dated November 14, 2016 affirmed the Regional Trial Court's (RTC's) ruling which found accused-appellant Vistan guilty of Murder. 4
On September 4, 2017, the Court issued a Resolution 5 requiring the parties to simultaneously file their respective supplemental briefs, if they so desire, within 30 days from notice.
On November 17, 2017, accused-appellant, through the Public Attorney's Office (PAO), filed its Manifestation in Lieu of Supplemental Brief 6 stating that he will no longer file a supplemental brief considering that the Brief for the Accused-Appellant 7 before the CA dated February 5, 2016 had exhaustively argued all the relevant issues pertinent to his defense. On December 5, 2017, the Office of the Solicitor General (OSG) filed its Manifestation (in Lieu of Supplemental Brief) 8 stating that it will no longer submit a supplemental brief considering that it has substantially and exhaustively responded to and refuted accused-appellant's arguments in its Brief for the Appellee 9 dated June 6, 2016. On December 8, 2017, Remedios Vistan, mother of accused-appellant, filed before the Court a letter-request 10 for leave of court to consider said letter as accused-appellant's supplemental brief. She contended that accused-appellant's case was decided in haste by the RTC, Branch 3 of Baguio City and that there was a denial of his right to due process of law. She stressed that accused-appellant was not positively identified by Robert Alan Cajang y Balinbin (Cajang) as shown by his affidavit executed before the City Prosecutor of Baguio.
After a perusal of the records of the case, the Court resolves to dismiss the appeal for failure of accused-appellant to sufficiently show reversible error in the challenged decision to warrant the exercise of the Court's appellate jurisdiction.
The supposed sworn statement of Cajang, which was invoked by accused-appellant's mother in her letter, is of no moment since the trial court based its conviction on the testimonies of prosecution witnesses Jeremy de Castro (De Castro) and Juanito Ingco (Ingco) who separately testified that they saw accused-appellant stab the victim, who was then drunk and sleeping in a sitting position in one of the beds in the room they were sharing in a bunkhouse in Baguio. De Castro was three meters away from the victim while Ingco was a meter away, and the room was illuminated by a light bulb in the middle portion of the room. 11 The trial court found the testimonies of these witnesses to be categorical, straightforward and spontaneous while it found the allegations of the defense witness to be riddled with inconsistencies. 12
As for the qualifying circumstance of treachery, it is settled that there is treachery when the following conditions are present: (1) the employment of such means of execution that gave the one attacked no opportunity to defend oneself or to retaliate; and (2) deliberate or conscious adoption of the means of execution. 13
Here, De Castro testified that the victim was sleeping when the accused-appellant repeatedly stabbed him. This was consistent with the testimony of Ingco who said that the victim was "sitting with his head bowed down because he was drunk." Then when the accused-appellant arrived, he went straight to the victim, held him at the collar, lifted him up, asking "Why kuya are you like that?" and at the same time moving his hand [i]n a thrusting manner. 14
Based on the foregoing, the RTC and the CA correctly found the presence of treachery.
The Court, however, finds that the award of damages by the CA should be modified to conform to recent jurisprudence. As pronounced in People v. Jugueta, 15 the amounts of civil indemnity, moral damages and exemplary damages are P75,000.00 each, where the penalty imposed is reclusion perpetua as in this case.
WHEREFORE, the instant appeal is DISMISSED. The Decision dated November 14, 2016 of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 07185, which affirmed the September 25, 2014 Decision of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 3, Baguio City, in Criminal Case No. 25996-R, finding accused-appellant Abner Vistan y Capit guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay P63,000.00 as actual damages for funeral expenses is AFFIRMED, with MODIFICATION that: (1) the award of civil indemnity in the amount of P50,0000.00 is increased to P75,000.00; (2) the award of moral damages in the amount of P50,000.00 is increased to P75,000.00; and (3) the amount of exemplary damages is increased from P30,000.00 to P75,000.00, with legal interest on all damages awarded at the rate of 6% per annum from the date of the finality of this Resolution until fully paid.
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) MARIA LOURDES C. PERFECTODivision Clerk of CourtBy:TERESITA AQUINO TUAZONDeputy Division Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. CA rollo, p. 162.
2.Rollo, p. 23.
3. Penned by Associate Justice Ramon A. Cruz and concurred in by Associate Justices Marlene B. Gonzales-Sison and Henri Jean Paul B. Inting; id. at 2-16.
4. CA rollo, pp. 83 and 148.
5.Rollo, p. 23.
6.Id. at 24-26.
7.CA rollo, pp. 45-70.
8.Rollo, pp. 29-31.
9.CA rollo, pp. 90-101.
10.Rollo, pp. 35-38.
11. CA rollo, pp. 76-77.
12.Id. at 79.
13.People v. Concepcion, 789 Phil. 124, 131 (2016).
14.CA rollo, pp. 76-78.
15. 783 Phil. 806, 853 (2016).