People vs. Samson Berk Bayogan Case Digest

People of the Philippines vs. Samson Berk Bayogan

G.R. No. 204896. December 7, 2016

Facts

Appellant and his co-accused Jeneto Serencio were charged before the RTC of Lingayen, Pangasinan, Branch 39 with murder as follows:

That on or about 10:45 o'clock in the morning of December 16. 2007, in Poblacion East, Sual, Pangasinan and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring and confederating with each other with treachery and with intent to kill, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, and shot Clarita Disu several times, inflicting upon her several gunshot wounds which [caused] her instantaneous death, to at:he damage and prejudice of her heirs.

Contrary to Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code in relation to RA 7659 as amended.

During arraignment, appellant pleaded not guilty to the crime charged. Serencio remains at large. The prosecution presented eyewitnesses Marbie S. Disu (Marbie) and Loreto Inocencio (Loreto), respectively the daughter and grandson of the victim. Their testimonies established that in the morning of 16 December 2007, the victim Clarita Disu and her daughter Marbie were tending their neighbourhood variety store in Sual, Pangasinan with Loreto, when two (2) men on board a motorcycle arrived. One dismounted the vehicle and bought a cigarette from Marbie while the other stayed on the vehicle. The man who bought the cigarette suddenly pulled a gun and pointed it to Clarita and shot her four ( 4) times. Marbie shouted for help and ran to the fallen victim to help and embrace her. The assailant, who had been wearing a yellow t-shirt, then boarded the motorcycle and headed east. Marbie noted the motorcycle plate number as AR 3273.

On 29 January 2008, police authorities invited Marbie and Loreto to the police station to identify whether the gunman had been among those whom they arrested. Of three (3) persons in the prison cell, both Marbie and Loreto pointed to appellant. Both also identified appellant in open court as the victim's assailant.

Appellant asserted that he had been away on a fishing boat off Pangasinan on the date and time of the incident. He also countered that he had been arrested for alleged illegal possession of a gun. While he was in prison, Marbie came and was allegedly apprised by the police that it was appellant who had killed her mother.

After trial, the RTC gave credence to the eyewitness accounts of Marbie and Loreto of appellant's liability in the killing of the victim. On 19 July 2010, the RTC rendered the assailed decision finding the accused SAMSON BERK GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of MURDER as defined in Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Rep. Act No. 7659, qualified by treachery.

The Court of Appeals found no reason to disturb the findings of the RTC and upheld its ruling. The appellate court also found the eyewitness accounts credible, straightforward and reliable and upheld their positive identification of appellant as the perpetrator.

Issue

Whether the accused is guilty of murder beyond reasonable doubt.

Ruling

Now before the Court for final review, we affirm appellant's conviction. Well-settled in our jurisprudence is the rule that findings of the trial co on the credibility of witnesses deserve great weight, as the trial judge is in the best position to assess the credibility of the witnesses, and has the unique opportunity to observe the witness first hand and note his demeanor, conduct and attitude under grueling examination.

That Judge Robert P. Fangayen was not the one who heard the evidence and had no opportunity to observe the demeanor of the witnesses is of no moment so long as he based his ruling on the records before him the way appellate courts review the evidence of the case raised on appeal. Absent any showing that the trial court's findings of facts were tainted with arbitrariness or that it overlooked or misapplied some facts or circumstances of significance and value, or its calibration of credibility was flawed, the appellate court is bound by its assessment.

In the prosecution of the crime of murder as defined in Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC), the following elements must be established by the prosecution: (1) that a person was killed; (2) that the accused killed that person; (3) that the killing was attended by treachery; and ( 4) that the killing is not infanticide or parricide.

Our review of the records convinces us that these elements were clearly met. The prosecution eyewitnesses positively identified appellant as the person responsible for killing the victim through valid out-of-court and in-court identifications. The Court finds no reason to disbelieve these credible and straightforward testimonies.

The prosecution ably established the presence of the element of treachery as a qualifying circumstance. The shooting of the unsuspecting victim was sudden and unexpected which effectively deprived her of the chance to defend herself or to repel the aggression, insuring the commission of the crime without risk to the aggressor and without any provocation on the part of the victim.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Decision dated 29 June 2012 of the Court of Appeals, Third Division, in CA-G.R. CR-H.C. No. 04573, finding Samson Berky Bayogan guilty of murder in Criminal Case No. L-8391 is AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Appellant is ORDERED to pay the heirs of Clarita Disu as follows: P75,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, P75,000.00 as exemplary damages and P50,000.00 as temperate damages

He is FURTHER ordered to pay interest on all damages awarded at the legal rate of six percent ( 6%) per annum from the date of finality of this judgment until fully paid.