FIRST DIVISION
[G.R. No. 142430.
September 13, 2001]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RONNIE QUINICIO @ “Galon” and RAFAEL QUINICIO, JR. @ “Raffy,” accused-appellants.
D E C I S I O N
DAVIDE, JR., C.J.:
This is an appeal from the
decision[1] of 8 November 1999 of the Regional Trial Court of
Kalibo, Aklan, Branch 2, in Criminal Case No. 5341, finding accused-appellants
Ronnie Quinicio alias Galon (hereafter RONNIE) and Rafael Quinicio, Jr.
alias “Raffy” (hereafter RAFAEL) guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of
murder for the death of Ritchie E. Bantigue (hereafter RITCHIE), sentencing
each of them to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, and ordering
them to jointly and severally indemnify the heirs of the victim the amount of P50,000,
and pay the costs of suit.
An Information[2] for murder was filed on 12 February 1999 charging
RONNIE and RAFAEL with murder, committed as follows:
That on or about the 22nd day of November, 1998, in the afternoon, in Barangay Morales, Municipality of Balete, Province of Aklan, Republic of the Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, conspiring, confederating and helping one another, with the use of superior strength, with treachery, evident premeditation and with intent to kill, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault, and stab one RITCHIE E. BANTIGUE with a knife, thereby inflicting upon the latter mortal injuries, to wit:
“1. Stab wound 1 inch in length 0.5 inch in width at the base of the anterior aspect of the neck.
2. Stab wound 1 inch in length 0.5 inch in width at the left hypochondriac region coursing posteriorly.
3. Stab wound 1 inch in length 0.5 inch in width just below the right nipple coursing posteriorly and injuring the lung.
4. Stab wound 1.5 inch in length 0.5 inch in width just below the left scapula coursing slightly downward and anteriorly.
5. Incised wound 1.5 inch in length right palm.”
as per Medical Certificate issued by Dr. Alfredo B. Villaruel, Rural Health Physician, Rural Health Unit, Balete, Aklan, hereby attached as Annex “A,” which injuries directly caused the death of RITCHIE E. BANTIGUE.
That as a result of the unlawful acts of the accused, the heirs of
the deceased suffered actual and compensatory damages in the amount of P50,000.00.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
At their arraignment[3] on 14 April 1999, RONNIE and RAFAEL each pleaded not
guilty to the crime charged.
Trial on the merits ensued after
pre-trial was terminated on 1 June 1999.[4] The witnesses presented by the prosecution were
Rommel Revesencio, Rolly Revesencio, SPO3 Rex delos Reyes, and Dr. Alfredo B.
Villaruel. Their testimonies are
hereafter summarized.
Rommel Revesencio testified that
on 22 November 1998, at around 5:30 in the afternoon, he and his brother Rolly
were in Barangay Morales, Balete, Aklan, riding in a tricycle driven by the
victim, RITCHIE. Rommel and Rolly were
on their way from a cassava plantation to Barangay Arcangel in the same
municipality. Their way was blocked by
RAFAEL who was standing in the middle of the road with his arms
outstretched. RAFAEL boxed RITCHIE and
the two fought for about ten minutes.
Rommel and Rolly tried to pacify them to no avail. RONNIE then stabbed RITCHIE several
times. RITCHIE fell on a nearby
ricefield. RAFAEL then took the knife
from RONNIE and stabbed RITCHIE in the neck.
After stabbing RITCHIE, RAFAEL and RONNIE chased the Revesencio
brothers. The latter were able to
outrun their pursuers and they proceeded to Rolly’s house.[5]
Rolly Revesencio corroborated
Rommel’s testimony that they were on board RITCHIE’s tricycle when it was
blocked by RAFAEL, who was standing in the middle of the road. RAFAEL boxed RITCHIE hard on the left side
of the face. The latter alighted from
the tricycle and the two engaged in a fistfight for ten minutes. RONNIE then stabbed RITCHIE three times, the
first time on the back. RITCHIE and
RAFAEL were still boxing when RONNIE stabbed him. RITCHIE fell and RAFAEL took the knife from RONNIE and stabbed
RITCHIE in the neck. RAFAEL and RONNIE
then chased Rolly and Rommel, although they were unable to catch the latter.[6]
SPO3 Rex delos Reyes, police
investigator of the Balete Police Station, testified that on 22 November 1998,
at 5:35 p.m., he received information that a stabbing incident had occurred in
Barangay Morales, Balete, Aklan. He
proceeded to the crime scene with a photographer who took pictures of the dead
body. He also interviewed some people
present during the incident and was told that a certain “Galon” (RONNIE’s
nickname) Quinicio stabbed the victim and that he was accompanied by another
person. Delos Reyes observed that the
windshield and headlight of the motorcycle driven by RITCHIE had been damaged
by a bladed instrument. He was informed
that the person who inflicted the damage was RAFAEL. The following day, RONNIE surrendered himself and his knife to
the police.[7]
Dr. Alfredo B. Villaruel, a Rural
Health Physician of the Rural Health Unit of Balete, Aklan, conducted a post
mortem examination of RITCHIE’s body on 23 November 1998 at Barangay Arcangel,
Balete, Aklan. The body sustained four
stab wounds and an incised wound. The
cause of death was “hemorrhagic shock secondary to stab wounds.” He issued a
death certificate, Exhibit “D,” and prepared a sketch, Exhibit “F,” of the
wounds showing that the stab wound identified as number 4 is on the victim’s
back, which indicates that the assailant was behind the victim when the former
inflicted the wound.[8]
The witnesses for the defense were
Dr. Alfredo Villaruel, Arnaldo Ruiz, RAFAEL, RONNIE and Joseph de Pablo.
Dr. Alfredo Villaruel testified
that when he examined RAFAEL on 23 November 1998, he found that he had a lacerated
wound on the upper lip and injuries on his fingers. The injuries could have been caused by a blunt instrument, like
the back of a bolo, or blows due to boxing or kicking.[9]
Arnaldo Ruiz declared that he knew
RITCHIE, RAFAEL, RONNIE and prosecution witnesses Rolly and Rommel Revesencio
because they are residents of Barangay Morales, Balete, Aklan. The Revesencio brothers were close friends
of RITCHIE and called each other “kumpare.”
On 22 November 1998, at around
5:30 p.m., while he was on his way home from his ricefield, Arnaldo saw
RITCHIE, Rommel Revesencio and RAFAEL fighting each other near the store of
Pacita Patricio and a waiting shed. He
was about 30 meters from them and he was asked by Rolly Revesencio to help
pacify the fighters. With the help of
another bystander, Joseph de Pablo, they pulled RAFAEL and brought him to the
side of the road. RONNIE arrived and
confronted RITCHIE. He stabbed RITCHIE
in the stomach. RITCHIE ran and jumped
into the rice field and RONNIE followed him and stabbed him in the back causing
him to fall down. Even after RITCHIE
had fallen, RONNIE continued to stab him.
RONNIE left and the barangay tanods arrived a little later and
pulled RITCHIE’s body to the side of the road.
The policemen arrived about thirty minutes later and took pictures of
the body. Arnaldo identified the
pictures[10] as those of the dead RITCHIE.[11]
RAFAEL denied any participation in
the killing. It was only his brother
RONNIE who killed RITCHIE. On 22
November 1998, he was at the store of Pacita Patricio buying cigarettes and
candies. He was about to leave the
store when RITCHIE arrived riding a tricycle together with Rommel and Rolly
Revesencio. RITCHIE challenged him to a
fistfight. He was surprised with the
challenge because he had no previous quarrel or misunderstanding with any of
them. The three men alighted from the
tricycle and Rommel punched RAFAEL in the mouth. Rolly apologized to him for what Rommel had done, but RITCHIE also
punched him, hitting his right jaw. The
two exchanged blows. Arnaldo Ruiz
arrived and pulled RAFAEL away, but RITCHIE continued punching him. Joseph de Pablo, who was at the waiting
shed, came to help stop the fight.
RITCHIE and the Revesencio brothers followed them across the road.
RAFAEL claimed that he was groggy
from the beatings that he suffered and only came to know from Arnaldo Ruiz that
RONNIE had stabbed RITCHIE. RAFAEL then
went home with RONNIE and decided to report the incident to the barangay
captain. On his way to the barangay captain
he passed by the place where the incident happened and saw the body of RITCHIE
by the side of the road lying face up.
He had noticed RONNIE with a stainless steel knife at home, the same
knife RONNIE used to stab RICHIE.
RAFAEL denied stabbing RITCHIE in the neck because he was unable to do
much, being already weak from the injuries he had earlier sustained.[12]
RONNIE admitted stabbing RITCHIE
on 22 November 1998. When he went to
the waiting shed on that day, he saw Joseph de Pablo and Arnaldo Ruiz holding
RAFAEL while RITCHIE and Rommel were kicking him. He thought that RAFAEL had been stabbed because his mouth was
bleeding and there was much blood on his shirt. When RITCHIE and Rommel saw him, they stood back from
RAFAEL. RONNIE confronted RITCHIE and
asked him why he stabbed RAFAEL.
RITCHIE answered, “You also?”; and tried to box RONNIE. The latter evaded the blow and stabbed
RITCHIE on his left chest, below the breast.
RITCHIE ran towards the ricefield and RONNIE followed him. He stabbed RITCHIE again while he was
chasing him, hitting him in the back, near his left shoulder. RONNIE continued to stab RITCHIE because the
latter was still alive. RONNIE then
went home but decided to proceed to a hut some 250 meters away from his house
for fear of retaliation by RITCHIE’s family.
He thought of spending the night at a cousin’s house far from the area,
and it was there that his father fetched him the next morning to convince him
to surrender. On his way to the police
station, he met the policemen by the road near their house and turned the knife
over to them.[13]
Joseph de Pablo testified that he
knew the victim RITCHIE and the accused RAFAEL and RONNIE. He also knew the Revesencio brothers as
RITCHIE’s friends. On 22 November 1998
at about 4:00 p.m., he was in Barangay Morales, Balete, Aklan, standing near
the store of Pacita Patricio. He was
alone at the waiting shed and he did not notice RONNIE in the vicinity although
he saw RAFAEL buying candies and cigarettes at Pacita’s store. While RAFAEL was leaving the gate of the
store, RITCHIE alighted from a tricycle and challenged RAFAEL to a
fistfight. Rolly Revesencio approached
RAFAEL and apologized saying, “Pare, forgive him.”
Joseph refuted the testimonies of
the Revesencio brothers that RAFAEL stood in the middle of the road, extended
his hands and blocked RITCHIE’s tricycle.
It was RITCHIE who first boxed RAFAEL and then Rommel also punched
RAFAEL. A fistfight ensued between the
three of them with RAFAEL fighting back and hitting RITCHIE and Rommel, both of
whom appeared drunk. Joseph saw Rolly
and Arnaldo Ruiz standing on the side of the road. He and Arnaldo pulled
RAFAEL away from RITCHIE and Rommel in an effort to stop the fight. When RONNIE arrived, RITCHIE and Rommel
stopped kicking RAFAEL. RONNIE
confronted RITCHIE and stabbed him.
RITCHIE ran towards the ricefield and RONNIE chased him and stabbed him
in the back. RITCHIE fell down. RONNIE continued to stab RITCHIE, while the
Revesencio brothers stayed by the roadside. Rolly asked Joseph to bring Rommel
to the house of Emiliano Patricio to keep him away from RONNIE who might stab
him. He went to the waiting shed and
when he came back, he saw RONNIE and RAFAEL running towards RONNIE’s house. When the barangay tanods arrived,
they pulled the body of RITCHIE from the ricefield and brought him to the side
of the road.[14]
The prosecution presented as
rebuttal witness one Ex Feliciano, a farmer and resident of Barangay Morales,
Balete, Aklan. He declared that on 22
November 1998, as he was leaving his sister’s house at 6:00 p.m., he heard a
noise coming from outside the house.
The noise turned out to be caused by a fight occurring some 100 meters
away. He went nearer and saw RITCHIE
and RAFAEL fighting each other and Rolly and Rommel Revesencio trying to pacify
them. RONNIE suddenly stabbed RITCHIE
in the back. RITCHIE ran towards the
ricefield to escape his attacker but he fell down. RAFAEL then got the knife from RONNIE and stabbed RITCHIE in the
neck near his throat. RAFAEL and RONNIE
then went home, leaving their victim dead.
RAFAEL returned later with a bolo and hacked RITCHIE’s tricycle.[15]
In its decision[16] the trial court found for the prosecution and
rendered judgment as follows:
WHEREFORE, the Court finds both accused Rafael Quinicio, Jr. alias “Raffy” and Ronnie Quinicio alias “Galon” GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of MURDER defined and penalized under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by RA 7659, and hereby sentences them of [sic] RECLUSION PERPETUA.
The two said accused are also ordered to pay jointly and severally to the heirs of the victim Ritchie Bantigue the amount of P50,000.00 for the loss of the latter’s life in accordance with the present jurisprudence on the matter.
With COSTS against both accused.
SO ORDERED.[17]
RONNIE and RAFAEL seasonably
appealed the decision.
In their Appellants’ Brief RONNIE
and RAFAEL contend that the trial court erred in (a) convicting RONNIE of
murder although treachery was never established as attending the commission of
the crime; (b) not taking into consideration the mitigating circumstances of
voluntary surrender, plea of guilty and incomplete defense of a relative in
favor of RONNIE; and (c) convicting RAFAEL although his guilt was never proven
beyond reasonable doubt as the evidence against him is patently weak and
insufficient to convict.
RONNIE and RAFAEL maintain that
the testimonies of Rommel Revesencio, Rolly Revesencio and Ex Feliciano are all
materially inconsistent with the findings of the physician who examined the
body of the victim. While these
witnesses were one in stating that RONNIE first stabbed the victim in the back,
the findings of Dr. Villaruel in his medico-legal report show that the back
injury, injury number 4, was actually the fatal blow. They argue that if injury number 4 were the first stab wound
inflicted then the victim should have died then and there, instead of still
being able to flee to the ricefield.
RONNIE’s statement that the first injury he delivered was to RITCHIE’s
lower left chest is thus more consistent with the medical findings.
They state further that RONNIE did
not stab RITCHIE out of any evil motive, but rather from a sincere desire to
rescue his brother RAFAEL from being mauled to death by him and the Revesencio
brothers. There was no treachery in his
action because there was a quarrel and the attack was continuous. Furthermore, the mitigating circumstances of
voluntary surrender, admission of guilt and incomplete defense of relative
should have been appreciated in his favor.
They also assert that RAFAEL
should not be held criminally liable at all because Rolly Revesencio had stated
that RITCHIE was already dead when RAFAEL stabbed him in the neck. But the medical findings indicate that
RITCHIE was still alive when RONNIE stabbed him. Accused-appellants argue that this shows that the prosecution
witnesses’ testimonies are unreliable.
They are also biased as the Revesencios are close friends of RITCHIE.
Another inconsistency pointed out
in the Appellants’ Brief is the declaration by rebuttal witness Ex Feliciano
that RAFAEL stabbed the victim only once.
On the other hand, the Revesencios stated that accused stabbed RITCHIE
several times.
RONNIE and RAFAEL conclude that
these inconsistencies weaken the prosecution’s case for murder. At best, they could be guilty of homicide
only.
RONNIE and RAFAEL further assert
that it took the Revesencios a full week before reporting the incident. The delay raises doubts on their
credibility.
The core issues raised in this
appeal are: (1) the credibility of the prosecution witnesses; (2) the existence
of treachery; and (3) whether or not the mitigating circumstances of plea of
guilt, voluntary surrender and incomplete defense of relative should be
appreciated in favor of RONNIE.
It is well settled that the
credibility of the witnesses is best left to the determination of the trial
court because the latter is in a more advantageous position to determine the
demeanor of the witnesses while testifying.
As a general rule, appellate courts accord the trial court’s evaluation
of the testimony of the witnesses with great respect and finality in the
absence of any indication that it overlooked certain facts or circumstances of
weight and influence, which if considered would alter the result of the case.[18]
In this case, no reason exists to
depart from this rule. The
inconsistencies pointed out by RONNIE and RAFAEL are on minor matters and are
of no consequence. The fact that the
prosecution witnesses thought that the first stab thrust was to the back of
RITCHIE, when Dr. Villaruel called the wound injury number 4, does not affect
their credibility. Dr. Villaruel did
not say that injury number 4 was the first stab wound inflicted on
RITCHIE. The numbering was only for
identification purposes in connection with the examination he conducted; he
made no determination as to which wound was first inflicted.
What is important is that the
prosecution witnesses saw RITCHIE being stabbed repeatedly by RONNIE and
RAFAEL. RITCHIE’s death as a result of
these blows is what gave rise to the criminal liability of RONNIE and RAFAEL.
RONNIE does not deny stabbing
RITCHIE but claims the justifying circumstance of defense of relative to free
him from any criminal liability. For
such a defense to prosper, the following requisites must be present: unlawful
aggression; reasonable necessity of the means employed to repel or prevent it;
and in case the provocation was given by the person attacked, the one making
the defense had no part therein.[19] Having admitted to stabbing RITCHIE, RONNIE stands
criminally liable unless he is able to convince us that he acted in legitimate
defense of his brother.
This he has failed to do.
Prosecution witnesses Rommel and
Ronnie Revesencio both testified that it was RAFAEL who stopped their tricycle
on the road and RAFAEL was the one who boxed RITCHIE first without any
provocation. Even assuming that it was
RITCHIE who initiated the fight, the means that RONNIE used to repel him cannot
be considered reasonable by any definition.
He stabbed the unarmed RITCHIE several times and when RITCHIE fell, any
unlawful aggression had already ceased.
It is a settled rule that when the unlawful aggression ceases, the
defender no longer has any right to assault the former aggressor, otherwise,
retaliation and not self-defense is committed.[20]
As to treachery, RONNIE and RAFAEL
argue that there was no treachery because the stabbing was done during a
quarrel.
We are not persuaded.
For treachery to be appreciated,
two elements must concur, namely: that such means of execution were employed as
to give the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or retaliate; and
that the means of execution were deliberately or consciously employed.[21]
The evidence on record shows that
RITCHIE was unarmed when he was stabbed first by RONNIE, and then by
RAFAEL. Both prosecution and defense
witnesses testified that RITCHIE was merely boxing RAFAEL when RONNIE stabbed
him. Afterwards, when RAFAEL stabbed
RITCHIE in the back, the latter had already fallen to the ground. At no time was RITCHIE, who was weaponless,
able to put up a defense against the knife attack.
The essence of treachery is a
swift and unexpected attack on the unarmed victim without the slightest
provocation on the part of the victim.
Thus, we have ruled that even a frontal attack can be treacherous when
it is sudden and the victim is unarmed.[22]
It must be emphasized that RONNIE
was not involved in the original fracas.
Even the defense witnesses put him at a different place, the waiting
shed, when the fistfight was going on.
RONNIE’s attack thus came without warning, was deliberate and
unexpected, affording the hapless, unarmed and unsuspecting RITCHIE no chance
to resist or escape. Given these
circumstances, we are convinced of the treacherous nature of the assault.[23]
RONNIE argues that the trial court
erred in failing to appreciate the mitigating circumstance of voluntary
surrender and confession of guilt in imposing the penalty against him.
We find no merit in this argument.
The requisites for voluntary
surrender to mitigate criminal liability are: the offender has not been
actually arrested; the offender surrenders himself to a person in authority or
the latter’s agent; and the surrender is voluntary.[24] While the facts show that RONNIE did voluntarily
surrender to the authorities before being arrested, and that it should then be
appreciated in his favor, that mitigating circumstance cannot offset the
qualifying aggravating circumstance of treachery.[25] The trial court thus correctly appreciated the
attendant circumstances.
Neither is there merit in RONNIE’s
claim that he should also be credited for his plea of guilty to the crime of
homicide. The record shows that he
merely proposed to the prosecution that he plead guilty to the crime of
homicide during the pre-trial on 1 June 1999, a proposal which the prosecution
rejected.[26] He was convicted of the crime of murder as
charged. It would have been otherwise
if ultimately he was held guilty of homicide only.
RAFAEL argues that the evidence
against him is weak and insufficient to convict him of murder. On the contrary, we find strong and
convincing the evidence that he used treacherous means to kill RITCHIE, which qualified
the killing to murder. All three
prosecution witnesses saw him stab RITCHIE in the neck as the latter lay in the
rice field. Such act, coupled with the
earlier scuffle between him and RITCHIE showed beyond doubt the existence of
conspiracy between him and RONNIE.
Conspiracy may be inferred from
the acts of the accused before, during, and after the crime, which are
indicative of a common design, concerted action and concurrence of
sentiments. Once conspiracy in action
or action in concert to achieve a criminal design is shown, the act of one is
the act of all the conspirators, and the precise extent or modality of
participation of each of them becomes secondary.[27]
Conspiracy between RONNIE and
RAFAEL was established from the attendant facts: both were at the scene of the
crime; RONNIE stabbed RITCHIE first, then RAFAEL stabbed him from behind with
the same knife after RITCHIE had already fallen down; then the two fled
together. The two were thus united in a
common end -- to assault and kill RITCHIE -- and by their concerted act, they
were also united in the consummation of the evil plan.
There is conspiracy when two or
more persons come to an agreement concerning the commission of a felony and
decide to commit it. It is not,
however, necessary that direct proof be adduced to establish such
agreement. It can be inferred from the
acts of the accused which clearly manifest a concurrence of wills, a common
intent or design to commit a crime. If
it is proved that two or more persons aimed by their acts towards the
accomplishment of the same unlawful object, each doing a part so that their
acts, although apparently independent, were in fact connected and cooperative,
indicating a closeness of personal association and concurrence of sentiment,
then a conspiracy may be inferred.[28]
It must be clarified that although
RONNIE was not originally involved in
the fight, and RAFAEL was merely boxing with RITCHIE prior to RONNIE’s
intervention, these circumstances do not preclude the existence of conspiracy. More specifically, the moment RONNIE
intervened and RAFAEL joined him in stabbing RITCHIE, there was a community of
intent against RITCHIE, hence, a conspiracy.
As to appellants’ contention that
the Revesencio brothers were biased witnesses who only reported the crime after
a week, suffice it to say that the defense never presented any evidence to
support this claim. As the Solicitor
General pointed out:
Moreover, despite appellants’ insistence that the prosecution witnesses were good friends and relatives of the victim, the Revesencios categorically denied being close or related to the victim. According to Rommel and Rolly Revesencio, Ritchie Bantigue was merely an acquaintance and not a close friend. At any rate, even assuming that they were good friends and relatives of the victim, the defense failed to show that the Revesencios had any ill-motive which drove them to make false accusations against appellants, and for such a grave crime as murder.
xxx
Their failure to report the crime to the police cannot be taken against the Revesencios. Rommel Revesencio explained that he and Rolly did not immediately report the incident to the police and chose to stay inside their home because they were afraid of appellants.
We have held that delay in making
a criminal accusation does not necessarily impair a witness’ credibility if
such delay is satisfactorily explained.[29]
WHEREFORE, the challenged decision of Branch 2 of the Regional
Trial Court of Aklan in Criminal Case No. 5341 finding accused-appellants
RONNIE QUINICIO, alias “Galon,” and RAFAEL QUINICIO, alias “Raffy,” guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of MURDER under Article 248 of the Revised
Penal Code, as amended, and sentencing each of them to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua, and to pay the heirs of the victim the amount of P50,000.00
for the death of the victim and to pay the costs is hereby affirmed in toto.
Costs de oficio.
SO ORDERED.
Kapunan, Pardo, and Ynares-Santiago, JJ., concur.
Puno, J., on official leave.
[1] Original Record
(OR), 139. Per Judge Tomas R. Romaquin.
[2] OR, 21.
[3] OR, 45.
[4] Id., 57.
[5] TSN, 13 July 1999,
12-23.
[6] TSN, 21 July 1999,
2-25.
[7] TSN, 14 July 1999,
2-24.
[8] TSN, 13 July 1999,
2-12.
[9] TSN, 28 July 1999,
2-9.
[10] Exhibit “E” to
“E-5.”
[11] TSN, 4 August 1999,
2-29.
[12] TSN, 10 August 1999,
2-24; TSN 11 August 1999, 2-12.
[13] TSN, 30 August 1999,
3-16; TSN, 31 August 1999, 2-14.
[14] TSN, 11 August 1999,
13-20; TSN, 20 August 1999, 2-26.
[15] TSN, 27 October
1999, 2-17.
[16] Supra note 1.
[17] Rollo, 75.
[18] People v.
Sualog, GR No. 134310, 15 November 2000; People v. Padilla, 242 SCRA
629, 639-640, [1995]; People v. Malunes, 247 SCRA 317, 324 [1995];
People v. Gomez, 251 SCRA 455, 465 [1995].
[19] People v. Cortes 286
SCRA 295, 300 [1998].
[20] People v.
Cotas, 332 SCRA 627, 639 [2000].
[21] People v.
Estrellanes, Jr., 239 SCRA 235, 249-250 [1994]; People v. Cabodoc, 263 SCRA
187, 203 [1996]; People v. Peñaflorida, 313 SCRA 563 [1999].
[22] People v.
Barellano, 319 SCRA 567, 588 [1999].
[23] People v. Turingan,
282 SCRA 424, [1997]; People v. Jagolingay, 280 SCRA 768 [1997]; People v.
Agunias, 279 SCRA 52 [1997].
[24] People v. Deopante,
263 SCRA 691, [1996].
[25] People v.
Mendoza, 327 SCRA 695, 710, [2000].
[26] TSN, 1 June 1999,
2-3.
[27] People v.
Mendoza, 332 SCRA 485, 496-497 [2000].
[28] People v. Cortes, supra
note 18, at 301.
[29] People v.
Viovicente, 286 SCRA 1, 8 [1998].