annibong

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 6
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Information Report
Category:

Documents

Published:

Views: 2 | Pages: 6

Extension: PDF | Download: 0

Share
Related documents
Description
jjjjj
Tags
Transcript
  PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, appellee , vs . GABRIEL ANNIBONG yINGGAO, appellant  .D E C I S I O N QUISUMBING, J  .: For automatic review is the decision [1]   of the Regional Trial Court of Apayao, Branch !, inCriminal Case o# $%$&, convicting appellant 'a(riel Anni(ong of murder and sentencing him todeath#The information []  filed (y the )rovincial )rosecutor reads* That on or about February 13, 1998 at around 2:00 oclock P.M. at barangay Doa Loreta, Pudtol, !ayao, #th#n the $ur#%d#ct#on o& th#% 'onorable (ourt, the abo)e*na+ed accu%ed ar+ed #th a long &#rear+, #th #ntent to k#ll and #th the attendance o& treachery and e)#dent !re+ed#tat#on d#d then and there #ll&ully, unla &ully and &eloneou%ly %#c- attack, a%%ault and %hot one (!l. F#del bngayan, /3  #n&l#ct#ng u!on the latter gun %hot ound% h#ch cau%ed death.(T T L4. +hen arraigned, appellant pleaded not guilty to the charge# Although he admitted illing thevictim, appellant invoed self%defense# Thus, the order of the trial was reversed, with the defensepresenting its evidence first#For the defense, appellant 'a(riel Anni(ong and lone eyewitness Artemio Tallong, a CAF'-mem(er assigned at the Army Camp .etachment at .oa /oreta, )udtol, Apayao, testified# Tallongwas also adopted as a prosecution witness# Appellant, a itchen aide serving at the camp, testified that on Fe(ruary 10, 1$$&, while heand Tallong were in their camp at Barangay .oa /oreta, )udtol, Apayao, the victim arrived comingfrom Centro, )udtol, Apayao# +hen (ngayan went to the itchen to get a drin, he was irritatedto discover the water container empty# 2opping mad, (ngayan rushed to appellant and (o3edhim three times in the stomach and uttered* Vulva of your mother, it is better that I will kill you #(ngayan proceeded to his (uner, got his 4%1! rifle and aimed it at appellant, prompting thelatter to shoot the victim once# After the first shot, the victim managed to stand and aim his gun atappellant prompting the latter to fire his 4%1!# But since the 4%1! malfunctioned, appellantgra((ed the garand rifle of Artemio Tallong and shot the victim once more# 5mmediately after theshooting, appellant escaped with Tallong and proceeded to 6uan, )udtol, Apayao# Two days later,(oth surrendered to 'overnor Batara )# /aoat, who advised them to surrender to the police# ART745 TA// ' was presented (y the defense to show unlawful aggression on the partof the victim# [8]  As one of the CAF'-s on duty at the time of the incident, he said he witnessed theincident from the time Cpl# (ngayan arrived at the detachment until he was shot#Tallong narrated that on Fe(ruary 10, 1$$&, around *99 )#4#, Cpl# (ngayan arrived at the)hilippine Army detachment in Brgy# .oa /oreta, )udtol, Apayao where he was then thecommanding officer# [:]  6till perspiring and thirsty from an operation in Centro, )udtol, Apayao, Cpl#  (ngayan hurriedly proceeded to the camps itchen for a drin# 5ncensed that all of the water containers were empty, (ngayan confronted appellant whose duty it was to maintain the campsitchen# 2e gave appellant a ;a( in the a(domen, then slowly waled away towards his (uner#5nfuriated, appellant without warning, piced up his 4%18 armalite rifle and strafed the former on the (ac# (ngayan sprawled (loodied on the ground# 6hortly after, appellant too the garandrifle of Artemio Tallong, and unleashed another (arrage of gunshots# (ngayan diedinstantaneously with his (rain splattered and an eye fallen on the ground#The prosecutor adopted the testimony of defense witness Artemio Tallong for purposes of theprosecution# ther prosecution witnesses were .r# .an Redel 7droso, the 4unicipal 2ealthfficer of )udtol, Apayao, who conducted a post%mortem e3amination on the victims (ody< /t#+alfrido Feli3 =ueru(in of the )hilippine Army< Cpl# Ro(ert 6alar>on, from the )hilippine Armyassigned at ararragan, Ballesteros, Cagayan< Capt# 7fren )aulino, from the )hilippine Armyassigned at the 2ead?uarters 6ervice Battalion, Camp -pi, 'amu, 5sa(ela< and 4rs# Agnes(ngayan, the victims widow#.R# .A R7.7/ 7.R6 declared that on Fe(ruary 18, 1$$&, he conducted an autopsy [!]  onthe victims remains which revealed nine gunshot wounds# From his e3amination of the wounds,.r# 7droso opined that two were inflicted from the (ac of the victim while five were inflicted whilethe victim was already lying down with his face up# [@]   2e said, the multiple shots on the victimshead caused his immediate death#/T# +A/FR5. F7/5 =-7R-B5 , the )latoon /eader of the 2ead?uarters Company of the)hilippine Army in Capagaypayan, /una, Apayao, testified that he arrived at the scene of the crimeafter (ngayan was slain# [&]  According to him, he found the victim lying up, his left eye fallen and(rains scattered on the ground# [$]  6hortly after his arrival, /t# =ueru(in inventoried the firearmsissued to the detachment and found the firearms all intact in the ca(inet e3cept an 4%18 and agarand rifle [19] % the weapons used (y appellant#C)/# RB7RT 6A/AR and CA)T# 7FR7 )A-/5  from the )hilippine Armycorro(orated the testimony of /t# =ueru(in as to the position of the victims (ody when they arrivedat the scene of the crime for investigation# [11] 4R6# A' 76 B 'AA testified that her hus(and was the sole (readwinner of the familyand was earning )$,999 monthly, more or less# [1]    According to her, Cpl# (ngayan was 0: yearsold when he died, leaving her with their two children# As a result of Fidels death, the (ngayansincurred e3penses amounting to thirty thousand pesos more or less# [10] n Dune 1:, 1$$$, the trial court rendered its decision finding appellant guilty (eyondreasona(le dou(t of the murder of his commander and sentencing him as follows* 4'55F5, &orego#ng all con%#dered, and &#nd#ng the accu%ed 675L 76 y 6 %#c- gu#lty beyond rea%onable doubt &or the cr#+e o& Murder co++#tted under rt#cle 28 !aragra!h one 1- o& the e)#%ed Penal (ode o& the Ph#l#!!#ne% a% charged #n the #n&or+at#on #th the %!ec#al aggra)at#ng c#rcu+%tance o& #th #n%ult or #n d#%regard o& the re%!ect due the o&&ended !arty on account o& h#% rank under rt#cle 1 !aragra!h 3 o& the %a+e  Penal (ode, th#% (ourt hereby %entence% %a#d accu%ed 6abr#el nn#bong y ngao to %u&&er the u!re+e !enalty o& D5T'.ccu%ed #% &urther ordered to #nde+n#&y the %ur)#)#ng %!ou%e o& the )#ct#+, (!l. F#del bngayan, #n the a+ount o& FFT T';D P5 P<0,000.00-, &or %uch death, #n add#t#on to the !ay+ent o& T45T T';D P5 P20,000.00- &or +oral da+age%, T5 T';D P5 P10,000.00- a% and &or e=e+!lary da+age%, T45T F>5 T';D P5 P2<,000.00- &or actual e=!en%e% and F>5 ';D5D T';D P5 P<00,000.00- &or the lo%t earn#ng% o& the )#ct#+ and the co%t% o& the %u#t.The 7?MP, Luna, !ayao #% ordered to #++ed#ately %h#&t the !er%on o& the accu%ed to the 7ureau o& Pr#%on%, Munt#nlu!a (#ty &or detent#on thereat to a a#t the auto+at#c re)#e o& th#% dec#%#on. D55D. /1 By reason of the death sentence imposed upon appellant, the decision is now (efore us for automatic review#5n his (rief, appellant ascri(es to the trial court the following errors* .  FD6 D 'LD6 T'T T'55 455  ;L4F;L 665  T'5 PT F T'5 >(TM (PL FD5L 766T T'5 ((;5D..  FD6 T'T T'55 4 T'5 @;LF6 ((;MT(5 F T5('5 4'(' 4;LD @;LF T'5 (M5 T M;D5..  FD6 T'T T'5 66>T6 ((;MT(5 F ;LT  D56D T A  P55T  T'5 (5 T 7.>.  FD6 T'5 L5 554T5 T5M TLL6  (5D7L5 D T;T4T' 4T5 T65T'5 4T' ' L T5TM.>.  T FD6 T'T T'5 ((;5D (T5D  5LF*D5F55 4'5 '5ALL5D T'5 >(TM. /1< +e shall now consider the following pertinent issues* E1 whether there was unlawfulaggression on the part of Cpl# (ngayan< E whether the illing was attended (y the ?ualifyingcircumstances of treachery and evident premeditation< and E0 whether the imposition of the deathpenalty on appellant is appropriate# Appellant admits shooting Cpl# (ngayan# But he claims that he did so merely to repel thevictims unlawful aggression# 2e contends that since the victim was the actual aggressor, there can(e no treachery# 2e adds that he had not intended to insult or disregard the ran of the victim# 2einsists that Artemio Tallong was a turncoat whose testimony should, therefore, (e consideredunworthy of credit#  5n his Brief, appellant offers no su(stantial reason, however, why we should overturn the trialcourts appreciation of the evidence presented against him# 5nstead, he merely reiterates in thisappeal his claim of self%defense# 5n cases where the accused admits committing the crime (utinvoes self%defense, the (asic rule that the (urden of proving the guilt of the accused lies on theprosecution is reversed, and the (urden of proof is shifted to the accused to prove the elements of his defense# [1!]   5n our view, the defense has not discharged its (urden successfully#The elements of self%defense are E1 that the victim has committed unlawful aggressionamounting to actual or imminent threat to the life and lim( of the person claiming self%defense< Ethat there is reasona(le necessity in the means employed to prevent or repel the unlawfulaggression< and E0 that there is lac of sufficient provocation on the part of the person claimingself%defense or, at least, that any provocation e3ecuted (y the person claiming self%defense (e notthe pro3imate and immediate cause of the victims aggression# [1@] 'ranting that the initial act of aggression came from the victim when he cursed and thenpunched appellant three times in the stomach, such aggression did not amount to actual or imminent threat to appellants life as the victim already ceased and desisted thereafter# As defensewitness Tallong testified, the victim was already waling slowly away towards his (uner  [1&]  at thetime appellant shot him incessantly# At that point, it was no longer necessary for appellant to shoot(ngayan in order to protect himself# As held in People v. More , [1$]   5n legitimate self%defense theaggression must still (e existing  or continuing   when the person maing the defense attacs or in;ures the aggressor# Thus when the unlawful aggression ceases to e3ist, the one maing thedefense has no more right to ill the former aggressor# Appellants act of shooting the unarmed victim first with an 4%1! and a garand rifle,successively, (elies his claim that he acted in self%preservation and indicates nothing more thanthe desire to ill# Thus, Tallong testified* =* ou said that 'a(riel Anni(ong used the 4%18 rifle in shooting Fidel -(ngayan, how come thatthe garand was also used (y 'a(riel Anni(ong in shooting Fidel -(ngayanG A* 2e used first the 4%18 rifle in shooting Fidel -(ngayan (ut when he was not satisfied he toothe garand and used it again in shooting -(ngayan#  [9] Tallongs recital of the events, in our view, is more in accord with the natural course of thingsand ordinary human e3perience# Further, his testimony is validated (y the evidence on record onall material points# The post%mortem e3amination of .r# 7droso, while negating appellants tale thathe shot the victim only twice, confirmed Tallongs story that there were more shots fired# Tallongsnarration, as to the position of the victim when shot, tallied with the doctors findings that two of thegunshot wounds were inflicted while the assailant was (ehind the victim and that the other fivewere dealt while the victim was lying face up on the ground# [1]  2is account that the victim wasunarmed matched with /t# =ueru(ins testimony that all of the weapons issued to the detachmentwere found intact e3cept the 4%1! and the garand rifle used in perpetrating the crime# [] The credi(ility of prosecution witness Artemio Tallong is not in any way lessened, much lessimpaired, (y the motives imputed to them (y appellant# Appellant claims that Tallong was adefector who fled the scene with him immediately after the incident, and surfaced with appellantonly two days after the shooting# Appellants contention is nothing more than a desperate attemptto discredit said witness# .ifferent people react differently to a given type of situation and there is
Recommended
View more...
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks
SAVE OUR EARTH

We need your sign to support Project to invent "SMART AND CONTROLLABLE REFLECTIVE BALLOONS" to cover the Sun and Save Our Earth.

More details...

Sign Now!

We are very appreciated for your Prompt Action!

x