People v. Bendecio
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On December 24, 2011, Gerry Marasigan encountered appellant Nestor Bendecio y Viejo alias "Tan" outside a friend's house. After a brief exchange, Gerry proceeded home with his wife. While Gerry was closing his front door, appellant suddenly appeared, drew a gun, and fired at Gerry. The bullet missed Gerry, hitting his seven-year-old daughter Jonabel in the chest and his sister Princess in the leg. Jonabel died the following day, while Princess sustained injuries. Procedural History: The appellant was charged with the complex crime of attempted murder with murder. The Regional Trial Court (RTC) found him guilty of the complex crime of attempted murder with homicide, sentencing him to an indeterminate penalty and ordering him to pay civil indemnity, moral damages, temperate damages, and exemplary damages. The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the conviction with modification, finding the appellant guilty of the complex crime of attempted murder with murder and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua. The CA ruled that treachery attended the attempted killing of Gerry, and Jonabel's death was a consequence of aberratio ictus, with treachery also appreciated in her killing. The CA also increased the award for temperate damages. The Petition: The appellant appealed to the Supreme Court, faulting the CA for convicting him based on allegedly doubtful testimonies and for affirming the trial court's factual findings. The appellant argued that Gerry's intoxication impaired his identification of the assailant, and Princess's testimony was biased due to her relationship with Gerry. The Supreme Court considered the briefs submitted to the Court of Appeals.
Issue(s)
Whether the Court of Appeals erred in convicting the appellant of the complex crime of attempted murder with murder. Whether the testimonies of Gerry Marasigan and Princess Marasigan were credible despite Gerry's alleged intoxication and Princess's familial relationship with Gerry. Whether treachery could be appreciated in the attempted killing of Gerry and the killing of Jonabel, considering the doctrine of aberratio ictus. Whether the appellant is guilty of the complex crime of murder with attempted murder under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, and the corresponding monetary awards.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Court of Appeals, dismissing the appeal. The appellant was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the complex crime of murder with attempted murder and sentenced to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole. He was ordered to pay civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages to Gerry Marasigan, and civil indemnity, moral damages, exemplary damages, and temperate damages to the heirs of Jonabel Marasigan.
Ratio Decidendi
On the conviction for the complex crime of attempted murder with murder: The Court affirmed the conviction, holding that the appellant's single act of firing a gun constituted both attempted murder against Gerry Marasigan and murder against Jonabel Marasigan. This is a complex crime under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, where the penalty for the most serious crime (murder) is imposed in its maximum period. The Court reiterated that when an offender commits a felony by means of another, the latter is a necessary consequence of the former, the offender is liable for both offenses. The Court found that the appellant intended to kill Gerry but missed, resulting in Jonabel's death and Princess's injury, which falls under the principle of aberratio ictus. The Court emphasized that Jonabel's death was the natural and direct consequence of the appellant's felonious assault against Gerry. On the credibility of witnesses: The Court found no error in the Court of Appeals' affirmation of the trial court's findings on the credibility of Gerry and Princess Marasigan. The Court reiterated the rule that factual findings of the trial court, especially when affirmed by the Court of Appeals, are generally binding and will not be disturbed on appeal, as the trial court is in the best position to observe the witnesses' demeanor and deportment. The Court noted that the appellant failed to present any evidence to support his claims that Gerry's intoxication impaired his ability to identify the assailant or that Princess had an ulterior motive to falsely incriminate the appellant. The Court held that denial and alibi are inherently weak defenses that cannot prevail over positive and credible testimonies. On the appreciation of treachery and aberratio ictus: The Court held that treachery attended the attempted killing of Gerry because the attack was sudden, unexpected, and without provocation, with the appellant employing means to ensure his safety from any defense or retaliatory act. Even though Gerry was not hit, the manner of attack qualified the attempt to murder. Regarding Jonabel's death, the Court applied the doctrine of aberratio ictus under Article 4 of the Revised Penal Code. The Court clarified that while Jonabel was not the intended victim, her death was the natural and direct consequence of the appellant's felonious assault. Crucially, the Court found that treachery could also be appreciated in Jonabel's killing, citing People v. Flora, where it was held that even in cases of poor aim resulting in the death or injury of unintended victims, the suddenness of the attack can still constitute treachery, rendering the victims helpless to defend themselves. On the complex crime, penalty, and monetary awards: The Court confirmed that the appellant's single act of firing his gun constituted both attempted murder (against Gerry) and murder (against Jonabel), thus forming a complex crime under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code. The penalty for the most serious crime, murder, was imposed in its maximum period, which is reclusion perpetua, in accordance with Republic Act No. 9346 (An Act Prohibiting the Imposition of Death Penalty in the Philippines). The Court also specified that the sentence should be without eligibility for parole, as per A.M. No. 15-08-02, to emphasize that the death penalty would have been imposed had it not been prohibited. The Court applied the ruling in People v. Jugueta, mandating that civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages must be awarded for each component of the complex crime. For the crime of attempted murder against Gerry, the Court awarded P25,000.00 each for civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages. For the murder of Jonabel, the Court awarded P100,000.00 each for civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages, and P50,000.00 as temperate damages, with interest at six percent (6%) per annum from finality of the decision until fully paid.
Main Doctrine
A single act of firing a gun, intended to kill one person but resulting in the death of another and injury to a third, constitutes a complex crime of murder and attempted murder. Treachery can be appreciated even in aberratio ictus if the attack was sudden and unexpected, rendering the victims unable to defend themselves. The credibility of witnesses, especially when affirmed by the Court of Appeals, will generally not be disturbed absent clear evidence of bias or impairment.