GR 144113; (June, 2001) (Digest)
G.R. No. 144113 ; June 28, 2001
EDWEL MAANDAL, petitioner, vs. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, respondent.
FACTS
Petitioner Edwel Maandal was charged with murder along with Noel Maandal and Elmer Maandal (both at large) for the killing of Danilo Atienza on May 9, 1993, in Lipa City. The information alleged they attacked and shot the victim with an armalite with intent to kill and with treachery. Upon arraignment, petitioner pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented Marino Atienza (victim’s cousin), who testified that he was in a house when he heard gunshots, looked out the window, and saw petitioner shooting the victim with an armalite. He also saw Elmer Maandal nearby. The assailants then fled in a jeep driven by Noel Maandal. Rafael Atienza (victim’s father) testified on funeral expenses. Dr. Elviro Africa conducted the postmortem, finding multiple gunshot wounds as the cause of death. A paraffin test on petitioner was positive for gunpowder residue on his left hand. The defense presented Patricio Lopez, who claimed he witnessed the shooting and saw an unidentified man, not petitioner, holding a firearm and fleeing. Defense also presented police officers regarding petitioner’s surrender and the firearm issued to him. The Regional Trial Court found petitioner guilty of homicide, not murder, sentencing him to an indeterminate penalty and ordering him to pay damages. The Court of Appeals affirmed the decision in its entirety.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the prosecution proved petitioner’s guilt for the crime charged beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court denied the petition and affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals. The Court held that the prosecution established petitioner’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The positive identification by eyewitness Marino Atienza, who had no ill motive to testify falsely, was credible and prevailed over the denial and alibi of the petitioner. The witness’s proximity to the event and his clear view of the petitioner, whom he knew, made his testimony reliable. The paraffin test result, showing gunpowder residue on petitioner’s left hand, corroborated the eyewitness account. The defense witness’s testimony was deemed unreliable due to inconsistencies and the improbability of his delayed reporting of the incident. The Court agreed with the lower courts that treachery was not proven, thus convicting petitioner of homicide only. The penalty imposed and the awards for actual damages and civil indemnity were sustained.