GR 113026; (July, 1998) (Digest)
G.R. No. 113026 July 2, 1998
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Ricolito Rugay alias Jun, accused-appellant, Arvil Villalon, accused.
FACTS
Accused Ricolito Rugay and Arvil Villalon were charged with Murder and Rugay was separately charged with Illegal Possession of Firearms under P.D. No. 1866 for the killing of Ariel Mendoza on August 28, 1991, in Puerto Princesa City. The prosecution’s principal witness was Jesus Madrid, who testified that he was at the scene with his friend Joy Cortez when a drunk Villalon attacked him. When Mendoza came to help, Villalon ran away. Rugay then emerged from a nearby Mami House, shot Mendoza, and after Mendoza fell, Villalon stabbed him. Rugay also shot Madrid in the foot. Both accused fled. Madrid claimed he was temporarily released from detention that night for surveillance work by SPO4 Guba. Both accused interposed alibi as their defense. Rugay claimed he was drinking at his in-laws’ house in Aborlan, Palawan, while Villalon claimed he was in Taytay, Palawan. They presented witnesses to corroborate their alibis. The defense also presented SPO4 Guba, who denied releasing Madrid, and an NBI Forensic Chemist who testified that paraffin tests on both accused were negative for gunpowder nitrates. The Regional Trial Court convicted both accused of Murder and Rugay of Illegal Possession. Both appealed, but Villalon later withdrew his appeal.
ISSUE
1. Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of accused-appellant Ricolito Rugay for Murder beyond reasonable doubt.
2. Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of accused-appellant Ricolito Rugay for Illegal Possession of Firearms beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
1. The Supreme Court REVERSED the trial court’s decision and ACQUITTED Ricolito Rugay of Murder. The prosecution failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction rested mainly on the testimony of Jesus Madrid, whose presence at the crime scene was highly doubtful as he was in detention from August 15, 1991, and his claim of temporary release was belied by SPO4 Guba. No other eyewitnesses, such as Joy Cortez or people from the Mami House, were presented. No medical evidence was presented to corroborate Madrid’s claimed injuries. The weakness of the defense of alibi does not relieve the prosecution of its burden to prove guilt based on strong evidence.
2. The Supreme Court also ACQUITTED Ricolito Rugay of Illegal Possession of Firearms. The prosecution failed to establish the existence of the subject firearm, as no gun was presented in evidence. While a police certification showed no license for Rugay, the paraffin test yielded negative results. Although a negative paraffin test is not conclusive, taken with the other circumstances, it favored innocence. The Court also ruled that the acquittal of Rugay benefits his co-accused Arvil Villalon, despite the latter’s withdrawn appeal, as the evidence against both was the same and equally insufficient. The immediate release of both accused was ordered unless detained for another lawful cause.