People of the Philippines vs. Marcelino Dadao, et al.
- Amator Iustitiae
- May 18, 2022
- 2 min read
G.R. No. 201860, January 22, 2014; per Leonardo-De Castro, J.
Facts
On or about the 11th day of July 1993, at 7:30 in the evening, the above-named accused, conspiring, confederating and mutually helping with one another, with intent to kill, by means of treachery, armed with guns and bolos, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and criminally attack, assault and shot Pionio Yacapin, hitting his back and left leg, inflicting wounds that caused his death thereafter.
Prosecution’s first witness, Ronie Dacion, a 14-year old stepson of the victim, Pionio Yacapin, testified that on July 11, 1993 at about 7:30 in the evening he saw accused Marcelino Dadao, Antonio Sulindao, Eddie Malogsi and Alfemio Malogsi helping each other and with the use of firearms and bolos, shot to death the victim, Pionio Yacapin in their house at Barangay Salucot, Talakag, Bukidnon. The testimony of the second witness for the prosecution, Edgar Dacion, a 12-year old stepson of the victim, corroborates the testimony of his older brother Ronie Dacion.
After trial was concluded, a guilty verdict was handed down by the trial court finding appellants guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murdering Pionio Yacapin.
Issue
Whether the court a quo gravely erred in convicting the appellants of the crime charged despite the failure of the prosecution to prove their guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Ruling
The Supreme Court ruled that the eyewitness testimonies presented by the prosecution, specifically that of the two stepsons (Ronie and Edgar Dacion) and the widow (Nenita Yacapin) of the deceased victim, Pionio Yacapin, are credible enough to be worthy of belief.
Jurisprudence also tells us that where there is no evidence that the witnesses of the prosecution were actuated by ill motive, it is presumed that they were not so actuated and their testimony is entitled to full faith and credit. In the case at bar, no imputation of improper motive on the part of the prosecution witnesses was ever made by appellants.
Comments