G.R. No. 133964 ; February 13, 2002
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RAMIL PEÑA, accused-appellant.

FACTS

Accused-appellant Ramil Peña was charged with Murder for the killing of tricycle driver Jimbo Pelagio on December 8, 1995, in Obando, Bulacan. The prosecution established that Peña hired Pelagio, and upon reaching their destination, robbed him, struck him on the head with a gun, and then shot him before fleeing with the tricycle. The gravely wounded Pelagio was brought to a hospital where he gave a statement to SPO1 Froilan Bautista, identifying Peña as his assailant. He also made similar declarations to the tricycle owner, Wilfredo Lampa, and his mother, Francisca Pelagio. Jimbo Pelagio later died on February 6, 1996.
The defense interposed an alibi, claiming Peña was in Pampanga during the incident and only learned of the charge while detained on a different case. The trial court convicted Peña of Murder, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua and ordering him to pay actual damages. On appeal, Peña challenged the cause of death and the admissibility of the victim’s statements as hearsay.

ISSUE

The pivotal issue is whether the victim’s ante-mortem statements constitute admissible evidence as part of the res gestae or as a dying declaration, and whether the crime committed is Murder or Homicide.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the trial court’s decision. It held that the victim’s statements were admissible under the res gestae exception to the hearsay rule, not as a dying declaration. For a dying declaration, the declarant must have a consciousness of impending death. The victim’s written statement indicated he was pistol-whipped and “almost” shot, failing to show he spoke under a fixed belief in his imminent death. However, the statements were admissible as part of the res gestae. The requisites are present: the startling occurrence was the violent assault; the statements related to that occurrence; and they were made spontaneously before the victim had time to contrive, while he was still under the stress and excitement caused by the event. The statements to SPO1 Bautista, Lampa, and Francisca Pelagio were all made shortly after the traumatic incident while the victim was in pain and receiving medical attention.
The Court affirmed the conviction but reduced the crime from Murder to Homicide. While the Information alleged treachery and evident premeditation, the prosecution failed to prove these qualifying circumstances with concrete evidence. The crime proven is Homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, Peña was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of ten (10) years of prision mayor, as minimum, to seventeen (17) years and four (4) months of reclusion temporal, as maximum. The award of P26,000.00 as actual damages was upheld, and civil indemnity of P50,000.00 was additionally awarded to the victim’s heirs.