GR 133923; (July, 2003) (Digest)
G.R. Nos. 133923-24; July 30, 2003
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Appellee, vs. JUANITO IBAÑEZ Y CARTICIANO @ JUANITO CARTICIANO, Appellant.
FACTS
Appellant Juanito Ibañez was charged with Murder for the killing of Rosario Olanda and Frustrated Murder for the hacking of Felix Olanda. The incidents occurred in the early morning of October 17, 1996, in Aliaga, Nueva Ecija, while the elderly spouses were asleep in their bedroom. Felix Olanda, upon being hacked, saw and recognized appellant as the assailant before losing consciousness. Rosario Olanda died from her wounds. Felix survived after immediate medical intervention. Appellant later went to the house of a former employer, bearing scratches, and asked for money to leave town. He was subsequently apprehended and executed an extrajudicial confession.
ISSUE
The core issue for automatic review is whether the trial court correctly convicted appellant of Murder and Frustrated Murder and imposed the death penalty for Murder.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but modified the penalties and damages. The legal logic proceeds as follows: First, the plea of guilt, while judicial confession, does not automatically warrant conviction; the prosecution must still prove the crime and the precise degree of culpability. Here, the prosecution successfully discharged this burden. The testimony of surviving victim Felix Olanda, who positively identified appellant, was credible and constituted direct evidence. His testimony was corroborated by the physical evidence and appellant’s flight and confession. The qualifying circumstance of treachery was correctly appreciated for both crimes because the attack was sudden and deliberate, employing a bolo against sleeping, elderly victims who were rendered defenseless.
However, the Court found that the aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation was not proven with equal certainty. The prosecution failed to establish clear evidence of the time when appellant determined to commit the crime, an act manifestly indicating his determination, and a sufficient lapse of time between this determination and execution to allow for reflection. Consequently, with treachery as the sole qualifying circumstance and no other aggravating or mitigating circumstances, the proper penalty for Murder is reclusion perpetua, not death. The penalty for Frustrated Murder was affirmed. The Court also awarded civil indemnity, moral damages, and temperate damages in lieu of unsubstantiated actual damages, following prevailing jurisprudence.