G.R. No. 129284 ; March 17, 2000
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROSALINO FLORES, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On the evening of June 13, 1992, Antonio Garcia was celebrating his birthday at his home in San Miguel, Bulacan, drinking with friends in his backyard. His daughter, Myla Garcia, was in the same area when she heard a noise from nearby bamboo trees. Investigating, she saw the accused-appellant, Rosalino Flores alias “Jianggo,” standing half-naked and holding a short gun pointed at her father from a close distance. Before she could intervene, Flores fired, hitting Antonio. Myla rushed to her father, shouted “si Jianggo,” and saw the accused flee. The victim was brought inside the house, where, while conscious and embraced by his family, he uttered, “Hoy, may tama ako. Binaril ako ni Jianggo.” He died en route to the hospital from a gunshot wound.
The prosecution presented Myla Garcia and another guest, Roberto Sebastian, who corroborated the identification of Flores as the shooter and the victim’s dying declaration. The defense consisted of a denial and an alibi, claiming Flores was at a birthday party of a police officer at the time of the shooting. The Regional Trial Court convicted Flores of murder qualified by treachery and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua, ordering him to pay various damages to the victim’s heirs.

ISSUE

The core issues were: (1) the admissibility of the victim’s dying declaration; (2) the sufficiency of the prosecution’s evidence to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt; and (3) the propriety of the damages awarded.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the awarded damages. On the dying declaration, the Court ruled it was admissible. The statement, “Binaril ako ni Jianggo,” directly concerned the crime and the circumstances of his death. It was made under a consciousness of impending death, as the victim had just been mortally wounded, was being comforted by his family, and died shortly after. The declarant, as the victim himself, would have been competent to testify. The declaration was therefore a valid exception to the hearsay rule.
The Court found the prosecution’s evidence, including the positive identification by eyewitness Myla Garcia, credible and sufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Her testimony was clear, consistent, and given under adequate illumination from a nearby electric bulb. The defense of alibi was correctly rejected for being weak and unsubstantiated, especially as it failed to demonstrate the physical impossibility for Flores to have been at the crime scene. Treachery was properly appreciated, as the attack was sudden and from behind bamboo trees, giving the victim no opportunity to defend himself.
Regarding damages, the Court affirmed the P50,000 death indemnity. It reduced the moral damages from P60,000 to P50,000 in line with jurisprudence. The awards for wake and funeral expenses (P9,000 and P13,000) were deleted for lack of supporting receipts. The award for loss of earning capacity was recomputed using the victim’s age (39) and established daily income (P150), resulting in a modified amount of P737,999.99. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was sustained.