People v. Adriano
People v. Adriano
People v. Adriano
l\.epubltc of tbe
QI:ourt
100anila
FIRST DIVISION
Present:
SERENO, C. J.,
- versus - Chairperson,
LEONARDO-DE CASTRO,
BERSAMIN,
PEREZ, and
PERLAS-BERNABE, JJ.
DECISION
PEREZ, J.:
Penned by Associate Justice Normandie B. Pizarro with Associate Justices Amelita G. Tolentino
and Rodi! V. Zalameda, concurring; CA rollo, pp. 142-161.
Penned by Presiding Judge Arturo M. Bernardo; records, pp. 267-281.
Decision 2 G.R. No. 205228
Rolly Adriano y Santos (Adriano) for the crime of Homicide (Crim. Case
No. 13159-07) for the killing of Ofelia Bulanan (Bulanan) and for the crime
of Murder (Crim. Case No. 13160-07) for the killing of Danilo Cabiedes
(Cabiedes) in People of the Philippines v. Rolly Adriano y Sales.
Adriano was charged with two (2) counts of Murder. The two (2) sets
of Information read:
3
CA rollo, pp. 143-144.
4
Id. at 144.
5
Records, p. 271.
6
Id.
Decision 3 G.R. No. 205228
When the Corolla reached alongside the CRV, the passenger on the
front seat of the Corolla shot the CRV and caused the CRV to swerve and
fall in the canal in the road embankment. Four (4) armed men then suddenly
alighted the Corolla and started shooting at the driver of the CRV, who was
later identified as Cabiedes. During the shooting, a bystander, Bulanan, who
was standing near the road embankment, was hit by a stray bullet. The four
armed men hurried back to the Corolla and immediately left the crime scene.
PO1 Garabiles and PO2 Santos followed the Corolla but lost track of the
latter.7
Later, both Cabiedes and Bulanan died from fatal gunshot wounds:
Cabiedes was pronounced dead on arrival (DOA) at the Good Samaritan
General Hospital due to three (3) gunshot wounds on the left side of his
chest while Bulanan died on the spot after being shot in the head.
During the investigation, the police learned that the Corolla was
registered under the name of Antonio V. Rivera (Rivera). Upon inquiry,
Rivera admitted that he is the owner of the Corolla but clarified that the
Corolla is one of the several cars he owns in his car rental business, which
he leased to Adriano. Later that day, Adriano arrived at Riveras shop with
the Corolla, where he was identified by PO2 Santos and PO1 Garabiles as
one of the four assailants who alighted from the passengers seat beside the
driver of the Corolla and shot Cabiedes. He was immediately arrested and
brought to the Provincial Special Operations Group (PSOG) headquarters in
Cabanatuan City.8
7
Id.
8
Id. at 271-272.
9
Exhibit W, id. at 157.
10
Id. at 277.
Decision 4 G.R. No. 205228
At about 8:00 a.m., Adriano went to the house of his friend, Ruben
Mallari (Mallari), to ask for a lighter spring needed to repair his motorcycle.
After having coffee in Mallaris house, Adriano went home and brought his
child to his mother. On his way to his mothers house, he met his brother-in-
law, Felix Aguilar Sunga (Sunga). After leaving his child at his mothers
house, Adriano went to the cockpit arena to watch cockfights, where he saw
his friend, Danilo Dizon (Dizon). After the fights, he left the cockpit at about
2:00 p.m. and went home and took a rest.11
At 8:00 p.m., he met with Garcia to get the Corolla back. After
dropping Garcia off, Adriano went to Rivera to return the Corolla, where he
was arrested by police officers, thrown inside the Corollas trunk, and
brought to a place where he was tortured.13
When arraigned, Adriano pleaded not guilty. The other accused, Lean
Adriano alias Denden, Abba Santiago y Adriano, John Doe, and Peter Doe
remained at large.
During trial, the prosecution presented eight (8) witnesses: (1) PO1
Garabiles, (2) PO2 Santos, (3) Police Senior Inspector Roger V. Sebastian,
(4) SPO2 Alejandro Eduardo, (5) PO2 Jay Cabrera, (6) PO3 Antonio dela
Cruz, (7) Adelaida Cabiedes, widow of Cabiedes, and (8) Ricky Flores.
11
Id.
12
Id. at 277-278.
13
Memorandum for the Accused; id. at 232.
14
Id. at 294-295.
Decision 5 G.R. No. 205228
After trial, the RTC convicted Adriano. The RTC rejected Adrianos
defense of alibi on the ground that it was not supported by clear and
convincing evidence. According to the RTC, Adrianos alibi cannot prevail
over the testimonies of credible witnesses, who positively identified Adriano
as one of the perpetrators of the crime. Also, contrary to the allegations of
the defense, the RTC gave full credence to the testimony of prosecution
witnesses, PO1 Garabiles and PO2 Santos. The RTC determined that the
defense failed to show proof that will show or indicate that PO1 Garabiles
and PO2 Santos were impelled by improper motives to testify against
Adriano.
The dispositive portion of the RTC Decision dated 7 April 2009 reads:
15
Exhibits O, P, Q, and R, respectively, records, pp. 149-152.
16
Id. at 280-281.
Decision 6 G.R. No. 205228
SO ORDERED.18
17
CA rollo, p. 17.
18
Id. at 160.
Decision 7 G.R. No. 205228
Our Ruling
Death of Cabiedes
19
People v. Obosa, 388 Phil. 445, 461 (2000).
20
People v. Dolorido, 654 Phil. 467, 476 (2011), citing People v. Reyes, 350 Phil. 683, 693 (1998).
21
Id. at 476-477, citing People v. Escote, Jr., 448 Phil. 749, 786 (2003).
Decision 8 G.R. No. 205228
Death of Bulanan
We refer back to the settled facts of the case. Bulanan, who was
merely a bystander, was killed by a stray bullet. He was at the wrong place
at the wrong time.
22
People v. Padlan, 352 Phil. 991, 1010 (1998).
23
Art. 4. Criminal liability. Criminal liability shall be incurred:
1. By any person committing a felony (delito) although the wrongful act done be different from
that which he intended.
Decision 9 G.R. No. 205228
Bulanans death caused by the bullet fired by Adriano was the natural and
direct consequence of Adrianos felonious deadly assault against Cabiedes.
24
422 Phil. 830, 857 (2001).
25
407 Phil. 15, 27 (2001).
26
People v. Herrera, supra note 24, citing People v. Ural, 155 Phil. 116, 123 (1974).
27
G.R. No. 184500, 11 September 2012, 680 SCRA 386.
28
Id. at 427.
29
Id., citing People v. Gaffud, Jr., 587 Phil. 521, 534 (2008); People v. Orias, 636 Phil. 427, 447
(2010).
Decision 10 G.R. No. 205228
Bulanan instead. There is thus no complex crime. The felonious acts resulted
in two separate and distinct crimes.
Also, contrary to the defenses allegation that Bulanans death was not
established, a perusal of the records would reveal that Bulanans fact of
death was duly established as the prosecution offered in evidence Bulanans
death certificate.31
On the alibi as defense, time and again, we have ruled alibis like
denials, are inherently weak and unreliable because they can easily be
fabricated.32 For alibi to prosper, the accused must convincingly prove that
he was somewhere else at the time when the crime was committed and that it
was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene.33 In the case at
bar, Adriano claimed he was in Dolores, Magalang, Pampanga at the time of
incident. Adrianos claim failed to persuade. As admitted, Dolores,
Magalang, Pampanga was only less than an hour away from the crime scene,
Barangay Malapit, San Isidro, Nueva Ecija. Hence, it was not physically
impossible for Adriano to be at the crime scene at the time of the incident.
It is likewise uniform holding that denial and alibi will not prevail
when corroborated not by credible witnesses but by the accuseds relatives
and friends. Therefore, the defenses evidence which is composed of
Adrianos relatives and friends cannot prevail over the prosecutions positive
identification of Adriano as one of the perpetrators of the crime.
30
389 Phil. 601 (2000).
31
Exhibit L, Formal Offer of Evidence, records, p. 126.
32
People v. Robles, 573 Phil. 577, 587 (2008).
33
People v. Mosquerra, 414 Phil. 740, 749 (2001).
Decision 11 G.R. No. 205228
The penalty for murder under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code
is reclusion perpetua to death. In the case at bar, as the circumstance of
abuse of superior strength concurs with treachery, the former is absorbed in
the latter. There being no aggravating or mitigating circumstance present,
the lower penalty should be imposed, which is reclusion perpetua, in
accordance with Article 63, paragraph 2 of the Revised Penal Code.
34
PNOC Shipping and Transport Corp. v. CA, 358 Phil. 38, 53-54 (1998).
35
Exhibits O (P100,000.00 as funeral expenses); P (P60,000.00 as expenses for the food served
during the burial); Q (P12,482.00 as groceries used and served during the wake); and R
(P60,000.00 for the parts and service repair of the CRV), amounting to the total sum of
(P232,482.00), records, pp. 149-152.
Decision 12 G.R. No. 205228
All monetary awards shall earn interest at the rate of 6% per annum
from the date of finality until fully paid.
SO ORDERED.
JOS
WE CONCUR:
J. LEONARDO *E CAfTRO
Associate Justice //
/
illMI
ESTELA M: P}:RLAS-BERNABE
Associate Justice
Decision 13 G.R. No. 205228
CERTIFICATION