Republic of the Philippines

SUPREME COURT
Manila
EN BANC
G.R. No. 136267 July 10, 2001
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
FIDEL ARENICA CUCUIN, JR., accused-appellant.
MENDO!A, J.:
This case is here on automatic revie of the decision,! dated "ctober #, !$$%, of the Re&ional Trial Court, Branch %%,
Cavite Cit', findin& accused-appellant (idel Abrenica Cubcubin, )r. &uilt' of murder and sentencin& him to suffer the
penalt' of death.
The information a&ainst accused-appellant alle&ed*
That on or about Au&ust +,, !$$-, in the Cit' of Cavite, Republic of the Philippines and ithin the
.urisdiction of this /onorable Court, the abovenamed accused, armed ith an unlicensed homemade 0palti12
3mith and 4esson caliber .5% revolver, ith no serial number, ith intent to 1ill, actin& ith treacher' and
evident premeditation and ta1in& advanta&e of the dar1ness of 6the7 ni&ht, did, then and there, illfull',
unlafull', and feloniousl', assault, attac1 and shoot ith the aforesaid unlicensed firearm a certain /ENR8
PEC/" P9AM"NTE, hittin& and inflictin& upon the latter &unshot ounds in the head hich caused the
latter:s instantaneous death.
C"NTRAR8 T" ;A4.+
Accused-appellant pleaded not &uilt' to the char&e, hereupon trial on the merits ensued.
Ei&ht itnesses ere presented b' the prosecution* police officers (lorentino M. Malinao, )r., Enrico A. Rosal,
Ra'mundo <. Esto', )r., and =ir&ilio ;. Pilapil, all of hom belon& to the Cavite Cit' Police <epartment> National
Bureau of 9nvesti&ation ballistician 9sabelo <. 3ilvestre, )r.> NB9 (orensic Chemist 99 )uliet ?elacio-Mahilum> <r.
Re&alado <. 3osa, Cit' /ealth "fficer 99 and Cit' Medico-;e&al "fficer of the <epartment of /ealth 0<"/2 in
Cavite Cit'> and <anet <. ?arcellano, a food server at the 3tin& Cafe in 3an Antonio, Cavite Cit'. The testimon' of
Police Chief 9nspector Edin ?. Nemen@o, Chief of the Records, (irearms and EAplosives <ivision of the Philippine
National Police 0PNP2 in Camp Crame, Bue@on Cit', as dispensed ith in vie of his certification, dated "ctober -,
!$$- 0EAh. N2,5 that accused-appellant is not a licensedCre&istered holder of firearm of an' 1ind and caliber.
The prosecution evidence is to the folloin& effect*
At about 5*5D in the mornin& of Au&ust +,, !$$-, 3&t. Ro&el, des1 officer of the Cavite Cit' police station, received a
telephone call that a person had been shot near the cemeter' alon& )ulian (elipe Boulevard in 3an Antonio, Cavite
Cit'. (or this reason, a police team, composed of 3P"! Malinao, )r., P"5 Rosal, P"5 Esto', )r., P"5 Manicio, and
3P"5 Manalo, responded to the call and found /enr' P. Piamonte slumped dead on his tric'cle hich as then
par1ed on the road. Police photo&rapher (red A&ana too1 pictures of the crime scene 0EAhs. A, A-!, A-+, and A-
52E shoin& the victim slumped on the handle of the tric'cle.# P"5 Rosal testified that a tric'cle driver, ho refused
to divul&e his name, told him that accused-appellant and the victim ere last seen to&ether comin& out of the 3tin&
Cafe, located in 3an Antonio near the &ate of 3an&le' Point, Cavite Cit', about a 1ilometer and a half aa' from the
crime scene. (orthith, P"5 Rosal and 3P"! Malinao, )r. ent to the cafe and tal1ed to <anet ?arcellano, a food
serverCaitress in 3tin& Cafe., The other policemen at the police station called up Cit' Prosecutor A&apito ;u ho
also proceeded to 3tin& Cafe. ?arcellano told the police investi&ators that she had seen accused-appellant arrive at
3tin& Cafe at about !+*DD midni&ht and drin1 beer> that at about +*5D a.m., the victim arrived and .oined accused-
appellant> that the to sta'ed in the cafe until 5*5D a.m.> and that she did not 1no if the' left to&ether as she as
servin& other customers. ?arcellano described accused-appellant as a lean, dar1-compleAioned, and mustachioed man
ho had on a hite t-shirt and bron short pants.-
Armando Plata, another tric'cle driver, told P"5 Rosal and 3P"! Malinao, )r. that ?arcellano:s description fitted a
person 1non as alias F)un <ulce.F Armando Plata, ho 1ne here accused-appellant lived, led P"5 Rosal, 3P"!
Malinao, )r., and Prosecutor ;u to accused-appellant:s house in ?arcia EAtension, Cavite Cit'. The policemen 1noc1ed
on the door for about three minutes before it as opened b' a man ho ansered the description &iven b' <anet
?arcellano and ho turned out to be accused-appellant. The police operatives identified themselves and informed him
that he as bein& sou&ht in connection ith the shootin& near the cemeter'. Accused-appellant denied involvement in
the incident. P"5 Rosal and 3P"! Malinao, )r. then as1ed permission to enter and loo1 around the house.%
3P"! Malinao, )r. said that upon enterin& the house, he noticed a hite t-shirt, bearin& the brand name F/anesF 0EAh.
/2$ and the name F<henvherF ritten in the inner portion of the shirt:s hemline, placed over a divider near the
1itchen. Gpon close eAamination, he said that he found it to be Fbloodied.F 4hen he pic1ed up the t-shirt, to spent .
5% caliber shells fell from it. P"5 Rosal sta'ed ith accused-appellant hile he conducted a search. The' then too1
the t-shirt and the to bullet shells. 3P"! Malinao, )r. then as1ed accused-appellant to &o ith them to 3tin& Cafe for
purposes of identification. There, accused-appellant as positivel' identified b' <anet ?arcellano as the victim:s
companion. The police investi&ators as1ed accused-appellant here the fatal &un as. 3P"! Malinao, )r. said
accused-appellant refused to tell him here he hid the &un so he sou&ht his 0accused-appellant:s2 permission to &o
bac1 to his house to conduct a further search. Thereupon, 3P"! Malinao, )r., accompanied b' Prosecutor ;u, P"5
Esto', )r., P"5 Manicio, 3P"5 Manalo, and P"5 Rosal, proceeded thereto.!D 9nside the house, the' sa accused-
appellant:s !!-'ear old son )humar. P"5 Esto', )r. found on top of a plastic ater container 0drum2 outside the
bathroom a homemade 3mith and 4esson caliber .5% revolver 0siA shooter2, ithout a serial number 0EAh. (2. /e
found the &un loaded ith five live bullets 0EAhs. M, M-!, M-+, M-5, and M-E2. P"5 Esto', )r. said that he inscribed
his initials FR<EF 0for Ra'mundo <. Esto'2 on the c'linder of the &un ith the use of a sharp ob.ect. 4hile P"5
Esto', )r. as conductin& the search, 3P"! Malinao, )r. and P"5 Rosal sta'ed ith accused-appellant in the
sala.!! The .5% caliber &un 0EAhs. B, B-!2,!+ the hite F/anesF t-shirt 0EAhs. B-+, B-+-A, B-+-B2,!5 and the to spent
.5% caliber shells 0EAhs. B-+, B-+-B2!E ere all photo&raphed. Accused-appellant as then ta1en to the police station,
here he as photo&raphed 0EAh. B-52!#alon& ith the thin&s sei@ed from him.
3P"E =ir&ilio Pilapil, Chief 9nvesti&ator of the Criminal 9nvesti&ation <ivision, testified that on Au&ust +,, !$$-, the
case involvin& the 1illin& of /enr' Pecho Piamonte as forarded to him b' P"5 Rosal to&ether ith the evidence
consistin& of a bloodstained hite F/anesF t-shirt, a .5% revolver ith five live ammunitions, and to deformed slu&s.
After an evaluation of the evidence, he formall' filed a criminal complaint for murder a&ainst accused-appellant. /e
too1 blood samples of the victim and submitted the same to the NB9 for laborator' eAamination.!,
<r. Re&alado 3osa, Cit' /ealth "fficer 99 and Cit' Medico-;e&al "fficer of the <epartment of /ealth in Cavite Cit',
conducted a postmortem eAamination of the cadaver and prepared an autops' report 0EAh. "2 !- hich shoed the
folloin& findin&s*
AGT"P38 REP"RT
EHTERNA; (9N<9N?3*
A medium built fair compleAioned male adult human bod' in its cadaveric state ith &unshot ounds
. . . described as follos*
I ?unshot ound, !.# cm. A D.# cm., oval in shape ith poder burns more on top of the ound to
+.# cms. elevationChei&ht located at the an&le of the ri&ht .a andCor # cms. belo the inferior level
of the ri&ht ear. The ound has irre&ular and inverted borders. 9t is directed inards fracturin& the
loer ed&e of the an&le of the ri&ht mandible and the lead slu& is embedded at the ri&ht lateral
portion of the first 0!st2 cervical vertebrae hence eAtracted.
I ?unshot ound, ! cm. in d6iameter7 ith inverted irre&ular borders located at the left frontal re&ion
# cms. above the temporal end of the left e'ebro. 9t is directed inards and donards fracturin&
the bone 0frontal2 underneath into 6the7 intracranial cavit'.
9NTERNA; (9N<9N?3*
I Presence of circular complete fracture, D.% cm. in d6iameter7 at the left frontal re&ion.
I The left frontal lobe of the brain is perforated and the frontal lobe is enveloped ith liJuid and
clotted blood.
I The lead slu& is found at the inner surface of the left frontal lobe.
I The ri&ht mandibular re&ion as incised near the &unshot ound and the area is severel'
hematomatous and eAplored until a lead slu& 6as7 found at the !st cervical vertebrae at the ri&ht
side.
I 3tomach contains liJuid and little rice and ith alcoholic 0beer2 smell.
I "ther internal or&ans are si&nificantl' normal.
3lu&s eAtracted*
!. D., cm. in d6iameter7 lead slu& ith one end is mar1edl' deformed. The len&th of the slu& is !.,
cms.
Note* "ne dia&onal incised line as mar1ed on the slu&.
+. A D.- cm. in d6iameter7 lead slu& . . . roundl'Covall' deformed 6on7 one end. The len&th of the slu&
is !.% cm.
Note* To dia&onal incised lines 6ere7 mar1ed on the said slu&.
<r. 3osa testified that the victim sustained to &unshot ounds 0EAh. R2,!% the first one located on the ri&ht .a
belo the ear hile the second ound located at the left temporal side above the left e'ebro. The slu& from the first
&unshot ound remained at the base of the nec1, near the spinal column. There ere poder burns, called Ftatooin&,F
surroundin& the first ound hich shoed that the victim as shot point-blan1. The second slu& as also embedded
at the front lobe of the brain.!$ <r. 3osa indicated in the Certificate of <eath 0EAh. B2 that the victim died of Fshoc1
secondar' to severe intracranial hemorrha&e due to multiple &unshot ounds.F+D
Gpon ritten reJuest 0EAh. C2+! of Prosecutor ;u, the NB9 conducted a ballistics eAamination to determine hether
the to slu&s ta1en from the bod' of the victim ere fired from the firearm recovered from accused-appellant.
9sabelo <. 3ilvestre, )r., an NB9 ballistician, conducted on 3eptember !D, !$$- a comparative eAamination of the to
Fevidence bullets,F mar1ed as F/PP-!F 0EAh. E2 and F/PP-+F 0EAh. E-!2, hich had been recovered from the victim:s
head and the three Ftest bulletsF 0EAhs. ?, ?-!, ?-+2 fired from the sei@ed .5% caliber firearm. The tests shoed that
the Fevidence bulletsF ere fired from the sub.ect firearm.++ The empt' shells from the three Ftest bulletsF fired ere
dul' mar1ed 0EAhs. ?-5, ?-E, ?-#2. No photo&raphs ere ta1en. 3ilvestre:s findin&s ere confirmed b' four other
NB9 ballisticians* Chief Ballistician Ro&elio Munar, 3upervisin& Ballistician Ernie Ma&tiba', 3enior Ballistician
Elmer Pieded, and, (lor ;andicho, another ballistician. The to .5% caliber empt' shells recovered from accused-
appellant ere no lon&er eAamined.+5
Prosecutor ;u also made a ritten reJuest 0EAh. )2+E for a laborator' eAamination of the bloodstains on the hite
F/anesF t-shirt of accused-appellant to determine hether such ere identical to the blood of the victim.
)uliet ?elacio-Mahilum, NB9 (orensic Chemist 99, testified that on 3eptember +,, !$$-, she conducted three 1inds of
laborator' eAaminations, namel', 0a2 ben@idine test, to determine the presence of blood> 0b2 precipitin test, to
determine if the bloodstains came from human or animal blood> and 0c2 AB" &roupin& test, to determine the blood
&roup. 4hen tested and matched to&ether, the bloodstained hite F/anesF t-shirt and the blood sample of the victim
'ielded positive results for human blood belon&in& to blood t'pe F"F 0EAh. K2.+#
(or its part, the defense presented accused-appellant himself, his son )humar, and his sister 8olanda Cubcubin Padua.
Accused-appellant (idel Abrenica Cubcubin, )r. testified that he enlisted in the Philippine Constabular' as a soldier in
!$-E but as dischar&ed in !$-- for bein& A4";. /e said he left for 3audi Arabia here he or1ed as a driver and
came bac1 in !$-$. /e as later emplo'ed as a driver b' a friend, ho oned a .un1 shop in Cavite Cit'. /e admitted
1noin& the victim hom he addressed as FKuya.F Accused-appellant testified that from !D*DD in the evenin& to !+*DD
midni&ht of Au&ust +#, !$$-, he and some friends pla'ed a card &ame called Ftong-itsF on Molina 3treet, Cavite Cit'.
Afterards, he proceeded to the 3tin& Cafe here he had some drin1s hile aitin& for food to be served. /enr'
Piamonte, a tric'cle driver, arrived and had drin1s ith him. After a hile, the victim left as a passen&er as aitin&
to be &iven a ride. The victim came bac1 to the restaurant before !*DD a.m. and had another bottle of beer ith
accused-appellant. At about !*5D a.m., the victim a&ain left to transport another passen&er. After that, the victim did
not come bac1 an'more.+,
Accused-appellant said he left 3tin& Cafe at about +*DD a.m. and too1 a tric'cle home to !!#! ?arcia EAtension, 3an
Antonio, Cavite Cit'. /e as sleepin& on the sofa in his bedroom hen he as aa1ened b' the arrival of three
policemen, to of them he reco&ni@ed as 3P"! Malinao, )r. and P"5 Esto', )r., ho pointed their &uns at him and
told him to lie face don. /e said he as handcuffed hile the policemen searched his room, turnin& the sala set
upside don and openin& the cabinets. /is son, )humar, stood beside him. Before leavin&, the policemen too1 from
the clothes stand a hite t-shirt belon&in& to his son <enver. Accused-appellant said that he did not as1 them h' the'
ere searchin& the place as he as afraid the' ould maltreat him. /e denied the claim of the policemen that the
hite t-shirt had blood stains. /e claimed that the policemen did not have an' search arrant nor a arrant of arrest
hen the' too1 him into custod'. Nor did the' inform him of his constitutional ri&ht to remain silent and to be assisted
b' counsel. /e also said that he as made to sta' in a police patrol car for almost to hours before he as brou&ht
inside the police station. /e denied onin& the .5% caliber revolver presented to him b' Prosecutor ;u and 3P"E
Pilapil or that the same had been recovered from his house. /e also denied the prosecution:s claim that he as ta1en
to the 3tin& Cafe here he as alle&edl' identified b' <anet ?arcellano as the person last seen ith the victim before
the latter as 1illed.+-
)humar Cubcubin, son of accused-appellant, testified that at about E*DD in the mornin& of Au&ust +,, !$$-, he as
sleepin& on the second floor of the house hen he as roused from his sleep b' loud 1noc1s on the door. 4hen he
opened the door, he sa three policemen ho ere loo1in& for his father. /e told them that his father as not around,
but he as shoved aa'. The' proceeded upstairs to the room of his father here the' too1 from the clothes stand a
hite F/anesF t-shirt belon&in& to his brother <enver. The' put his father in a police patrol car aitin& outside.
)humar immediatel' ent to his aunt, 8olanda Cubcubin Padua, and reported to her hat had happened. /e ent bac1
to the house and sa some policemen still conductin& a search. As the policemen ere about to leave, a van ith
some other policemen on board arrived. The' as1ed him here the ater container as located. The' ent inside the
house and, hen the' came out, one of them announced that he had found a &un, hich as then photo&raphed.
)humar said that hile his father as inside the police patrol car, his aunt as ar&uin& ith the policemen. At that
instance, 3P"! Malinao, )r. spread the t-shirt and told )humar:s aunt FEto, puro dugo damit niya,F althou&h the t-shirt
had no bloodstains. /e said that he and his father never &ave permission to the policemen to search their house.+%
8olanda Cubcubin Padua, accused-appellant:s sister, testified that at about #*5D in the mornin& of Au&ust +,, !$$-,
she as told b' her nephe, )humar, that accused-appellant had been apprehended b' some policemen. 3he and
)humar then ent to the police patrol car here she sa her brother in handcuffs. 3he said she protested to the
policemen that there as no evidence that accused-appellant had 1illed the victim. 8olanda said she sa the
confiscated hite /anes t-shirt, but she claimed the same did not have an' bloodstain on it. 3he ent bac1 to her
house to call up her mother in ?en. Trias, Cavite to let her 1no hat had happened. 3he then ent out to see
accused-appellant and sa )humar, ho told her that some policemen ere searchin& accused-appellant:s house and
found a &un.+$
"n "ctober #, !$$%, the trial court rendered its decision findin& accused-appellant &uilt' of murder. 9t based its
findin& on circumstantial evidence, to it* 0!2 That <anet ?arcellano, a aitress at the 3tin& Cafe, sa accused-
appellant arrive at about !+*DD midni&ht of Au&ust +#, !$$- and drin1 beer, hile the victim arrived at about +*5D
a.m. of Au&ust +,, !$$- and .oined accused-appellant in drin1in& beer at the bar. 3he said that she served them beer
and the' sta'ed for about an hour, that the to later had an ar&ument as accused-appellant anted to have to more
bottles of beer hich the victim paid for, and that at about 5*5D a.m., the victim and accused-appellant left and
boarded the victim:s tric'cle> 0+2 That P"5 Rosal and 3P"! Malinao, )r. testified that the' sa the lifeless bod' of the
victim, ith bullet ounds on his head, slumped on the handle of his tric'cle, that the crime scene as about #D
meters aa' from the house of accused-appellant, and that hen the' ere told b' an unidentified tric'cle driver that
the victim and accused-appellant ere seen leavin& the 3tin& Cafe to&ether, the' ent to 3tin& Cafe and intervieed
<anet ?arcellano ho described the appearance of the victim:s companion. Armando Plata, another tric'cle driver
ho 1ne accused-appellant as the person bein& described b' ?arcellano, accompanied the policemen to the house of
accused-appellant> 052 That after 3P"! Malinao, )r. as alloed to enter the house, he found a hite F/anesF t-shirt
ith bloodstains on it and also recovered to spent .5% caliber shells> 0E2 That hen accused-appellant as ta1en to
the 3tin& Cafe, he as positivel' identified b' <anet ?arcellano as the victim:s companion moments prior to his
death> 0#2 That hen the investi&ators returned to the house of accused-appellant, P"5 Esto', )r. found a .5% caliber
revolver placed on top of a plastic ater container located outside the bathroom> 0,2 That laborator' eAamination
conducted b' the forensic chemist, )uliet ?elacio-Mahilum, shoed that the bloodstains on the hite F/anesF t-shirt
ere human blood, t'pe F",F hich matched the blood t'pe of the victim> and 0-2 That per ballistic eAamination of
NB9 ballistician, 9sabelo <. 3ilvestre, )r., the to slu&s recovered from the head of the victim ere fired from the .5%
caliber revolver sei@ed from accused-appellant:s house.
The trial court re.ected accused-appellant:s alibi, &ivin& full credence to the testimonies of <anet ?arcellano and the
police investi&ators hom it found to have no motive to falsel' implicate accused-appellant. 9t admitted the
prosecution evidence consistin& of the hite F/anesF t-shirt, to spent shells, and the .5% caliber revolver, on the
&round that these items had been sei@ed as incident to a laful arrest. 9t ruled that since <r. 3osa testified that the
victim as shot point-blan1 hile on his tric'cle and as not in a position to see the assailant, the Jualif'in&
circumstance of treacher' as present, not to mention that the victim as unarmed and thus totall' defenseless. The
trial court theori@ed that hile the victim as on his tric'cle, the assailant ent around and shot him on the left
temple. 9t held that the use of an unlicensed firearm in 1illin& the victim constituted an a&&ravatin& circumstance.
/ence, the trial court found accused-appellant &uilt' of murder and accordin&l' imposed on him the penalt' of death.
/ence, this appeal.
"n April !%, +DDD, the Court received a letter, dated April #, +DDD,5D from =ictoria Abrenica <ulce, mother of
accused-appellant, ith an attached affidavit of desistance entitled FSinumpaang Salaysay ng Pag-Uurong,Fdated
November !E, !$$-,5! eAecuted b' Marilou B. Piamonte, ido of the victim, statin& that accused-appellant had
been mista1enl' identified as the assailant, and, b' reason thereof, sou&ht the dismissal of the criminal case a&ainst
him. 9n her letter, <ulce said that the affidavit of desistance as supposed to be submitted to the trial court prior to the
presentation of the evidence for the prosecution, but, for un1non reasons, the same as not done b' accused-
appellant:s counsel. This affidavit of desistance, hoever, not bein& formall' offered before the trial court, has no
probative value.
4e no consider accused-appellant:s assi&nment of errors.
F"#$%. Accused-appellant contends that his arrest, effected on Au&ust +,, !$$- ithout a arrant, as ille&al. "n this
point, Rule !!5, L#0b2 of the !$%# Rules on Criminal Procedure, as amended, provides*
3ec. #. Arrest without warrant; when lawful. M A peace officer or a private person ma', ithout a arrant,
arrest a person*
0a2 4hen, in his presence, the person to be arrested has committed, is actuall' committin&, or is attemptin& to
commit an offense>
0b2 4hen an offense has in fact .ust been committed, and he has personal 1noled&e of facts indicatin& that
the person to be arrested has committed it>
0c2 4hen the person to be arrested is a prisoner ho has escaped from a penal establishment or place here
he is servin& final .ud&ment or temporaril' confined hile his case is pendin&, or has escaped hile bein&
transferred from one confinement to another.F
Gnder L#0b2, to conditions must concur for a arrantless arrest to be valid* first, the offender has .ust committed an
offense and, second, the arrestin& peace officer or private person has personal 1noled&e of facts indicatin& that the
person to be arrested has committed it. 9t has been held that F:personal 1noled&e of facts: in arrests ithout a arrant
must be based upon probable cause, hich means an actual belief or reasonable &rounds of suspicion.F5+
9n this case, the arrest of accused-appellant as effected shortl' after the victim as 1illed. The Juestion, therefore, is
hether there as Fprobable causeF for P"5 Rosal and 3P"! Malinao, )r., the arrestin& officers, to believe that
accused-appellant committed the crime. 4e hold that there as none. The to did not have Fpersonal 1noled&e of
factsF indicatin& that accused-appellant had committed the crime. Their 1noled&e of the circumstances from hich
the' alle&edl' inferred that accused-appellant as probabl' &uilt' as based entirel' on hat the' had been told b'
others, to it* b' someone ho called the PNP station in 3an Antonio, Cavite Cit' at about 5*5D in the mornin& of
Au&ust +,, !$$- and reported that a man had been 1illed alon& )ulian (elipe Boulevard of the said cit'> b' an alle&ed
itness ho sa accused-appellant and the victim comin& out of the 3tin& Cafe> b' <anet ?arcellano, aitress at the
3tin& Cafe, ho said that the man last seen ith the victim as lean, mustachioed, dar1-compleAioned and as
earin& a hite t-shirt and a pair of bron short pants> b' a tric'cle driver named Armando Plata ho told them that
the ph'sical description &iven b' ?arcellano fitted accused-appellant, alias F)un <ulceF and ho said he 1ne here
accused-appellant lived and accompanied them to accused-appellant:s house. Thus, P"5 Rosal and 3P"! Malinao, )r.
merel' relied on information &iven to them b' others.
9n an analo&ous case,55 the police as informed that the accused as involved in subversive activities. "n the basis of
this information, the police arrested the accused and, in the course of the arrest, alle&edl' recovered an unlicensed
firearm and some subversive materials from the latter. This Court held that the arrestin& officers had no personal
1noled&e since their information came entirel' from an informant. 9t as pointed out that at the time of his arrest,
the accused as not in possession of the firearm nor en&a&ed in subversive activities. /is arrest ithout a arrant
could not be .ustified under L#0b2.
9n another case,5E the accused, in a case of robber' ith rape, ere arrested solel' on the basis of the identification
&iven b' one of the victims. This Court held the arrest to be ille&al for lac1 of personal 1noled&e of the arrestin&
officers. More recentl', in Posadas v. m!udsman,5# this Court, in declarin& the arrest ithout arrant of to
Gniversit' of the Philippines students to be ille&al, held*
There is no Juestion that this case does not fall under para&raphs 0a2 and 0c2. The arrestin& officers in this case
did not itness the crime bein& committed. Neither are the students fu&itives from .ustice nor prisoners ho
had escaped from confinement. The Juestion is hether para&raph 0b2 applies because a crime had .ust been
committed and the NB9 a&ents had personal 1noled&e of facts indicatin& that 6the students7 ere probabl'
&uilt'.
. . . .
6T7he NB9 a&ents in the case at bar tried to arrest 6the students7 four da's after the commission of the crime.
The' had no personal 1noled&e of an' fact hich mi&ht indicate that the to students ere probabl' &uilt'
of the crime. 4hat the' had ere the supposed positive identification of to alle&ed e'eitnesses, hich is
insufficient to .ustif' the arrest ithout a arrant b' the NB9.
9ndeed, at the time 6the victim7 as 1illed, these 6NB97 a&ents ere nohere near the scene of the crime.
4hen 6the NB9 a&ents7 attempted to arrest 6the students7, the latter ere not committin& a crime nor ere
the' doin& an'thin& that ould create the suspicion that the' ere doin& an'thin& ille&al. "n the contrar',
6the'7, under the supervision of the G.P. police, ere ta1in& part in a peace tal1 called to put an end to the
violence on the campus.
Nor can it be ar&ued that the arrestin& officers had probable cause to believe accused-appellant to be &uilt' of the
1illin& of the victim because the' found a bloodstained t-shirt, a .5% caliber revolver, and to spent .5% caliber shells
in his house. At the time accused-appellant as arrested, he as not doin& an'thin& overtl' criminal. The alle&ed
discover' of the &un came after his arrest. Moreover, as ill presentl' be eAplained, the ob.ects alle&edl' sei@ed from
accused-appellant ere ille&all' obtained ithout a search arrant.
Be that as it ma', accused-appellant cannot no Juestion the validit' of his arrest ithout a arrant. The records sho
that he pleaded not &uilt' to the char&e hen arrai&ned on November !!, !$$-. 9t is true that on Au&ust +%, !$$-, he
filed a petition for reinvesti&ation in hich he alle&ed that he had been ille&all' detained ithout the benefit of a
arrant of arrest. 9n its order, dated 3eptember $, !$$-, the trial court &ranted his motion and ordered the Cit'
Prosecutor to conduct a preliminar' investi&ation and submit his findin&s ithin thirt' 05D2 da's thereof. 5, "n
"ctober -, !$$-, Cit' Prosecutor A&apito 3. ;u moved for the resettin& of accused-appellant:s arrai&nment from
"ctober %, !$$- to the first ee1 of November, !$$- on the &round that the findin&s on the laborator' and ballistics
eAaminations had not 'et been received from the NB9.5- Accused-appellant did not ob.ect to the arrai&nment. The
Cit' Prosecutor:s reJuest as, therefore, &ranted and the arrai&nment as reset to November !!, !$$-. 5% Nor did
accused-appellant move to Juash the information on the &round that his arrest as ille&al and, therefore, the trial court
had no .urisdiction over his person. 9nstead, on November !!, !$$-, at the scheduled arrai&nment, accused-appellant,
ith the assistance of counsel, pleaded not &uilt' to the char&e.5$"n the same da', the trial court issued an order
statin& that, as a result of accused-appellant:s arrai&nment, his motion for preliminar' investi&ation had become moot
and academic and, accordin&l', set the case for trial.EDAccused-appellant thus aived the ri&ht to ob.ect to the le&alit'
of his arrest.E!
S&'o(). Accused-appellant contends that neither he nor his son &ave permission to the arrestin& police officers to
search his house and, therefore, the F/anesF t-shirt, the to spent slu&s, and the .5% caliber revolver alle&edl' found in
his house are inadmissible in evidence. The prosecution, on the other hand, insists that accused-appellant consented to
the search of his house.
To be sure, the ri&ht a&ainst unreasonable searches and sei@ures is a personal ri&ht hich ma' be aived eApressl' or
impliedl'. But a aiver b' implication cannot be presumed. There must be persuasive evidence of an actual intention
to relinJuish the ri&ht. A mere failure on the part of the accused to ob.ect to a search cannot be construed as a aiver
of this privile&e. (or as )ustice ;aurel eAplained in Pasion "da de #arcia v. $ocsin,E+FAs the constitutional &uarant'
is not dependent upon an' affirmative act of the citi@en, the courts do not place the citi@en in the position of either
contestin& an officer:s authorit' b' force, or aivin& his constitutional ri&hts> but instead the' hold that a peaceful
submission to a search or sei@ure is not consent or an invitation thereto, but is merel' a demonstration or re&ard for the
supremac' of the la.F
Because a arrantless search is in dero&ation of a constitutional ri&ht, peace officers ho conduct it cannot invo1e
re&ularit' in the performance of official functions and shift to the accused the burden of provin& that the search as
unconsented. 9t is noteorth' that the testimonies of the to prosecution itnesses, 3P"! Malinao, )r. and P"5
Rosal, on the search sho laborious effort to emphasi@e that accused-appellant &ave them permission to search his
house. At ever' turn, even hen the' ere not bein& as1ed, the' said the search as made ith the consent of the
accused. As 3ha1espeare ould put it, Fthe lad' doth protest too much, methin1s.F 9ndeed, not onl' does accused-
appellant stoutl' den' that he ever consented to the search of his dellin& but the prosecution has not shon an' &ood
reason h' accused-appellant mi&ht have a&reed to the search.
The prosecution sa's the search can be .ustified as incidental to a valid arrest. Even assumin& the arrantless arrest to
be valid, the search cannot be considered an incident thereto. A valid arrest allos onl' the sei@ure of evidence or
dan&erous eapons either in the person of the one arrested or ithin the area of his immediate control. The rationale
for such search and sei@ure is to prevent the person arrested either from destro'in& evidence or from usin& the eapon
a&ainst his captor. 9t is clear that the arrantless search in this case cannot be .ustified on this &round. (or neither the
t-shirt nor the &un as ithin the area of accused-appellant:s immediate control. 9n fact, accordin& to the prosecution,
the police found the &un onl' after &oin& bac1 to the house of accused-appellant.
Nor can the arrantless search in this case be .ustified under the Fplain vieF doctrine. As this Court held inPeople v.
%usa*E5
The Fplain vieF doctrine ma' not, hoever, be used to launch unbridled searches and indiscriminate sei@ures
nor to eAtend a &eneral eAplorator' search made solel' to find evidence of defendant:s &uilt. The Fplain vieF
doctrine is usuall' applied here a police officer is not searchin& for evidence a&ainst the accused, but
nonetheless inadvertentl' comes across an incriminatin& ob.ect. 6Coolid&e v. Ne /ampshire, ED5 G.3. EE5,
+$ ;.Ed. +d #,E 0!$-!27 (urthermore, the G.3. 3upreme Court stated the folloin& limitations on the
application of the doctrine*
4hat the Fplain vieF cases have in common is that the police officer in each of them had a prior
.ustification for an intrusion in the course of hich he came inadvertentl' across a piece of evidence
incriminatin& the accused. The doctrine serves to supplement the prior .ustification N hether it be a
arrant for another ob.ect, hot pursuit, search incident to laful arrest, or some other le&itimate
reason for bein& present unconnected ith a search directed a&ainst the accused N and permits the
arrantless sei@ure. "f course, the eAtension of the ori&inal .ustification is le&itimate onl' here it is
immediatel' apparent to the police that the' have evidence before them> the Fplain vieF doctrine
ma' not be used to eAtend a &eneral eAplorator' search from one ob.ect to another until somethin&
incriminatin& at last emer&es. 6&d., +$ ;.Ed. +d #%5. See also TeAas v. Bron, E,D G.3. -5D, -# ;. Ed.
+d #D+ 0!$%527
/ere, the search of accused-appellant:s house as ille&al and, conseJuentl', the thin&s obtained as a result of the
ille&al search, i.e., the hite F/anesF t-shirt, to spent shells, and the .5% caliber &un, are inadmissible in evidence
a&ainst him. 9t cannot be said that the .5% caliber &un as discovered throu&h inadvertence. After brin&in& accused-
appellant to the 3tin& Cafe here he as positivel' identified b' a aitress named <anet ?arcellano as the victim:s
companion, the arrestin& officers alle&edl' as1ed accused-appellant here he hid the &un used in 1illin& the victim.
Accordin& to 3P"! Malinao, )r., hen accused-appellant refused to anser, he sou&ht accused-appellant:s permission
to &o bac1 to his house and there found the .5% caliber revolver on top of a plastic ater container outside the
bathroom. Thus, the &un as purposel' sou&ht b' the police officers and the' did not merel' stumble upon it.
Nor ere the police officers .ustified in sei@in& the hite F/anesF t-shirt placed on top of the divider Fin plain vieF
as such is not contraband nor is it incriminatin& in nature hich ould lead 3P"! Malinao, )r. to conclude that it
ould constitute evidence of a crime. Contrar' to hat 3P"! Malinao, )r. said, the t-shirt as not FbloodiedF hich
could have directed his attention to ta1e a closer loo1 at it. (rom the photo&raph of the t-shirt 0EAh. B-+2, it is not
visible that there ere bloodstains. The actual t-shirt 0EAh. /2 merel' had some small spec1s of blood at its loer
portion.
Third. There is no evidence to lin1 accused-appellant directl' to the crime. <anet ?arcellano said that accused-
appellant arrived at about midni&ht of Au&ust +#, !$$-> that the victim .oined him at about +*5D a.m.> and that
althou&h both left the 3tin& Cafe at about 5*5D a.m., she reall' did not 1no if the' left to&ether. Thus, <anet testified*
PR"3ECGT"R ;G*
. . . .
B 4ere the' to&ether hen the' left 3tin& Cafe or the' left one after the otherO
A 4hen the' ere alread' brin&in& alon& ith them the to bottles of beer, the' tal1ed and afterards, 9
alread' left them and 9 served the other customers.
B <id 'ou actuall' see /enr' Piamonte leave the 3tin& CafeO
A The' ere about to leave alread' at that time because the' ere alread' brin&in& ith them the to
bottles of beer, 3ir.
B But did 'ou see /enr' Piamonte actuall' leave the 3tin& CafeO
A 4hen /enr' Piamonte left the 3tin& Cafe, /enr' boarded a tric'cle, 3ir.
B /o about Cubcubin, ho did he leave the 3tin& CafeO
A /e folloed /enr', 3ir.
B /o did he follo /enr', on foot, on board a vehicle or hatO
A 9 do not 1no an'more, 3ir, because 9 alread' served the other customers inside.EE
. . . .
"n cross-eAamination, <anet said*
ATT8. BA8BA8*
B 4hen he left, he left aloneO
A 9 do not 1no an'more, 3ir, because 9 alread' served inside.
B Are 'ou sa'in& to us that 'ou did not see him hen he leftO
A No, 3ir, hat 9 1no is that he and Cubcubin ere to&ether because of the to bottles of beer hich
ere paid b' Piamonte inside, 3ir.
. . . .
ATT8. BA8BA8*
B The accused (idel Cubcubin left 3tin& Cafe at 5*5DO
A 8es, 3ir.
B No, ho could 'ou be sure of the time hen 'ou ere servin& other people at that timeO
A That is onl' m' estimation, 3ir.
B 8ou onl' estimatedO
A 8es, 3ir.
B And, hat as the basis of 'our estimationO
A Because at that time there ere onl' fe customers in that place, 3ir.
B 3o, 'ou are not reall' sure hat time (idel Cubcubin leftO
A 8es, 3ir.
B 8ou also did not see him leaveO
A No, 3ir.E#
9n People v. #allarde,E, it as eAplained that positive identification refers essentiall' to proof of identit' and not per
se to that of bein& an e'eitness to the ver' act of commission of the crime. A itness ma' identif' a suspect or
accused in a criminal case as the perpetrator of the crime. This constitutes direct evidence. "r, he ma' not have
actuall' seen the crime committed, but is nevertheless able to identif' a suspect or accused as the perpetrator of the
crime, as hen the latter is the person or one of the persons last seen ith the victim immediatel' before and ri&ht
after the commission of the crime. This is the second t'pe of positive identification, hich, hen ta1en to&ether ith
other pieces of evidence constitutin& an unbro1en chain, leads to a fair and reasonable conclusion that the accused is
the author of the crime to the eAclusion of all others.
This rule, hoever, cannot be applied in the present case because <anet ?arcellano did not actuall' see accused-
appellant and the victim leave the 3tin& Cafe to&ether. There is thus serious doubt as to hether accused-appellant
as reall' the last person seen ith the victim. /er testimon' is insufficient to place accused-appellant in the scene of
the crime so as to form part of the chain of circumstantial evidence to sho that accused-appellant committed the
crime. 3uspicion alone is insufficient, the reJuired Juantum of evidence bein& proof be'ond reasonable doubt.E-
Nor is there adeJuate evidence to prove an' ill motive on the part of accused-appellant. Accused-appellant testified
that he could not have 1illed the victim because the latter as his friend hom he considered his F'uyaF or elder
brother.E% There is no shoin& that the 1illin& of the victim as b' reason of a supposed altercation the' had as to
ho ould pa' for the to bottles of beer ordered hile the' ere at the 3tin& Cafe. The beer as later paid for b'
the victim. Motive is proved b' the acts or statements of the accused before or immediatel' after the commission of
the offense, i.e., b' deeds or ords that ma' eApress the motive or from hich his reason for committin& the offense
ma' be inferred.E$
Rule !55, LE of the Revised Rules on Evidence reJuires the concurrence of the folloin& in order to sustain a
conviction based on circumstantial evidence* 0a2 there is more than one circumstance> 0b2 the facts from hich the
inferences are derived are proven> and 0c2 the combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction
be'ond reasonable doubt.
9n the case at bar, there are serious doubts as to hether the crime as committed b' accused-appellant in vie of the
folloin&* 0!2 As alread' stated, <anet ?arcellano, a aitress at the 3tin& Cafe, did not actuall' see accused-appellant
and the victim leavin& the cafe to&ether at about 5*5D a.m. of Au&ust +,, !$$-> 0+2 P"5 Rosal and 3P"! Malinao, )r.
testified that hen the' arrived at the scene of the crime, the' ere informed b' a tric'cle driver that the victim and
the accused-appellant had earlier left the 3tin& Cafe to&ether, but the tric'cle driver as not presented to confirm this
fact> 052 3P"! Malinao, )r. testified that the hite F/anesF t-shirt as Fbloodied,F but the evidence shos that it had
some bloodstains onl' on its loer portion 0EAh. /2, hile the photo&raph of the t-shirt 0EAhs. B-+, B-+-A, B-+-B2,
supposedl' ta1en at the time of the search, shos that it had no bloodstains and this discrepanc' as not eAplained b'
3P"! Malinao, )r.> 0E2 The fact that the t-shirt as tested positive for t'pe F"F blood does not necessaril' mean that
the bloodstains came from the victim ho also had a t'pe F"F blood> 0#2 Accused-appellant as never &iven a
paraffin test to determine if he as positive for &unpoder nitrates> 0%2 The .5% caliber &un alle&edl' found in his
house as not eAamined for the possible presence of accused-appellant:s fin&erprints> and 0$2 The alle&ation that the
&un as placed on top of a ater container in accused-appellant:s house is unbelievable as it is improbable that
accused-appellant could be so careless as to leave the fatal eapon there hen he could have hidden it or thron it
aa'.
Nor can e rest eas' on the prosecution:s claim as to here the to empt' shells and the t-shirt ere alle&edl' found.
3P"! Malinao, )r. testified that these ere placed beside the hite F/anesF t-shirt and fell hen he too1 the shirt. "n
direct eAamination, 3P"! Malinao, )r. said*
PR"3ECGT"R ;G*
B 4hat else did 'ou tell Cubcubin at that timeO
A 4e as1ed him to allo us to &o inside the house and he let us &o inside the house, then after enterin&
the same, hile e ere in the sala near the 1itchen e sa the hite /anes t-shirt there, 3ir, that as near
the 1itchen.
B 4here eAactl' as the hite t-shirt placed at that time hen 'ou sa the sameO
A Because after enterin& the house 'ou ill see the entire portion of that house and there is a table there
and that t-shirt as placed on the table.
B 4as that t-shirt visible from the front door of the houseO
A 8es, 3ir.
B Can 'ou describe to us the t-shirt that 'ou saO
A Before 9 &ot the t-shirt, 9 even as1ed his permission for me to be able to &et the t-shirt, 3ir, and he even
&ave me the permission to &et the same, after &ettin& the t-shirt there ere even + empt' shells hich fell, and
9 sa the t-shirt as ith blood stains.
B This hite t-shirt, can 'ou tell us the brand of the t-shirtO
A /anes, 3ir.
B /o about the blood spot or blood stains, can 'ou tell us ho man', if 'ou can rememberO
A 4e ere in a hurr', 9 did not count the blood stains an'more but there ere blood stains on the t-shirt,
3ir.
B /o about these + empt' shells that fell hen 'ou lifted the t-shirt, can 'ou describe to us these +
empt' shellsO
A Empt' shells of .5% cal. bullets, 3ir.
B 4hat did 'ou do ith the empt' shellsO
A 9 &ot the t-shirt as ell as the + empt' shells and 9 shoed them to him, 3ir.#D
/oever, on cross-eAamination, he said he found the empt' shells on top of a cabinet 0to'ador2 in the bedroom on the
second floor of the house. Thus, he testified*
ATT8. BA8BA8*
B 4here as this t-shirt a&ain hen 'ou first sa itO
A 9n the 1itchen area, 3ir.
B 4here in the 1itchen area, on the floor or on the allO
A 9t as immediatel' in front of the door because the house has no divider an'more, 3ir.
B And that t-shirt as immediatel' near the door, on the floorO
A 8es, 3ir.
B 4hat did 'ou do after that, hen 'ou sa the t-shirt thereO
A 9 as1ed his permission so that 9 could ta1e a loo1 at the t-shirt, 3ir.
B And 'ou said, 'ou loo1ed at itO
A 8es, 3ir.
B 4hen 'ou said, 'ou loo1ed at it, ho did 'ou loo1 at itO
A 9 spread it out in front of him, 3ir.
B And hen 'ou spread it out in front of him, did 'ou as1 him hose t-shirt is itO
A 9 as1ed him if that t-shirt belon&s to him, 3ir.
B 4hat did he sa'O
A Accordin& to him, the t-shirt does not belon& to him, 3ir.
B 8ou also testified that 'ou found to empt' shellsO
A 8es, 3ir.
B 4here did 'ou find these to empt' shellsO
A (rom the bedroom upstairs, 3ir.
B Bedroom upstairsO
A 8es, 3ir.
B 8ou mean, it is a to-store' houseO
A 8es, 3ir, there is a bedroom upstairs.
B 8ou found it hen 'ou ent upO
A 9 first as1ed his permission to loo1 around inside the house, 3ir, because 9 as as1in& him also about
the hereabouts of the firearm he had.
B And he alloed 'ouO
A /e alloed me, sir.
B And hen 'ou ent upstairs, 'ou found the to empt' shellsO
A 8es, 3ir, the' ere placed on their to'ador on a place here there is a curtain.
B 9n 'our previous testimon' and this is found on pa&e E! of the T3N, 'ou stated that 'ou &ot the t-shirt
and hen 'ou lifted the t-shirt, to empt' shells fell offO
A After findin& the to empt' shells for a .5% caliber, 3ir, 9 placed them to&ether ith the t-shirt.
B 4hat 'ou are tellin& us no is that 'ou ent upstairs, 'ou found to empt' shells and 'ou put them
to&ether ith the t-shirt, that is hat 'ou are tellin& us noO
A After findin& and ta1in& a loo1 at the t-shirt, 9 put it on the ori&inal place here it as, 3ir, and after
findin& the to empt' shells, it so happened that the investi&ator as behind me so after that, 9 shoed to him
the t-shirt as ell as the empt' shells.#!
. . . .
B Also in 'our previous testimon', 'ou &ot the t-shirt and 'ou as1ed the permission to &et the t-shirt, after
&ettin& the t-shirt, there ere + empt' shells hich fell. The Juestion is, do 'ou remember that this happenedO
A These to empt' shells hich 9 recovered upstairs, sir, 9 placed them on top of the t-shirt.
B 8ou said, hen 'ou &ot the t-shirt, somethin& fell, in 'our direct testimon'O
A 4hile (idel Cubcubin as .ust beside me, 3ir, 9 &ot the t-shirt, 9 spread it out and nothin& fell 'et at that
time, then 9 as1ed him about the firearm that he used.
. . . .
B <o 'ou remember havin& been as1ed this particular Juestion*
FB Can 'ou describe to us the t-shirt that 'ou saO
A Before 9 &ot the t-shirt 9 even as1ed his permission for me to be able to &et the t-shirt, 3ir, and
he even &ave me the permission to &et the same, after &ettin& the t-shirt there ere even + empt'
shells hich fell, and 9 sa the t-shirt as ith blood stains.F
A 8es, 3ir, 9 remember it.
B 9 am .ust referrin& to to empt' shells that fell, hich 'ou said, is that trueO
A 8es, 3ir, there ere empt' shells that fell, but 9 first placed them on top of the t-shirt because 9 as
plannin& to rap these empt' shells in the t-shirt.
B 8ou also testified here on pa&e ED that the t-shirt as visible from the front door of the house, is that
trueO
A 8es, 3ir.
B And 'ou ere referrin& to the time that 'ou entered the houseO
A 8es, 3ir.
B And that as the time that 'ou lift6ed7 the t-shirt hen 'ou sa it and 'ou &ot itO
A 4hat 9 said before as that, 9 &ot the t-shirt, 9 lifted it, after that, 9 placed it on its ori&inal place, 3ir,
and 9 as1ed him about the firearm but he as not commentin& an'thin& on that, so 9 as1ed permission from
him to &o upstairs to loo1 around.
B 4hen 'ou said 'ou placed that from the place here 'ou found it, ho did 'ou put it on the place
here 'ou found itO
A 9 placed it there the a' 9 sa it before, the a' it as previousl' placed there, 3ir, because 9 as
plannin& to brin& the t-shirt.#+
Thus, cau&ht in his on contradiction, 3P"! Malinao, )r. prevaricated but in the process committed more
contradictions. /e said he found the empt' shells on top of the to'ador on the second floor of the house, brou&ht them
donstairs, and then placed them on the t-shirt. 4hen he &ot the t-shirt, the empt' shells fell on the floor. But ho
could he have &otten the shells from the second floor if, accordin& to him, he found them b' accident hen the' fell
from the t-shirt hich he found immediatel' after enterin& accused-appellant:s house and before &oin& up to the
second store'O 9t is also noteorth' that hereas at first 3P"! Malinao, )r. said he found the t-shirt placed on the
table near the 1itchen, he later said he found it on the floor.
4/ERE("RE, the decision of the Re&ional Trial Court, Branch %%, Cavite Cit', findin& accused-appellant (idel
Abrenica Cubcubin, )r. &uilt' of the crime of murder, is RE=ER3E< and accused-appellant is hereb' ACBG9TTE<
on the &round of reasonable doubt.
Accused-appellant is ordered immediatel' released from custod' unless he is bein& held for some other laful cause.
The <irector of Prisons is directed to implement this <ecision and to report to the Court the action ta1en hereon
ithin five 0#2 da's from receipt hereof.
3" "R<ERE<.!Pphi!.nQt
(avide, )r., *.)., +ellosillo, %elo, Puno, "itug, Kapunan, Pangani!an, Pardo, +uena, ,nares-Santiago, (e $eon, )r.,
Sandoval-#utierre-, ))., concur.
.uisum!ing, )., abroad on official business.
#on-aga-/eyes, )., on leave.
Foo%(o%&$
! Per )ud&e Christopher ". ;oc1.
+ Rollo, p. !D.
5 Records, p. $,.
E &d., pp. %#-%,.
# T3N 03P"! (lorentino M. Malinao, )r.2, pp. !5-55, <ec. !D, !$$-.
, T3N 0P"5 Ra'mundo <. Esto', )r.2, pp. 5--EE, )an. 5D, !$$%> T3N 03P"! (lorentino M. Malinao, )r.2, pp.
5E-5,, <ec.!D, !$$-> T3N 0P"5 Enrico A. Rosal2, pp. ,-!$, March !%, !$$%.
- T3N 0<anet ?arcellano2, pp. E-+$, April +D, !$$%> Sinumpaang Salaysay of <anet <. ?arcellano, dated
Au&ust +,, !$$- 0EAh. 32, Records, p. !D5.
% T3N 0P"5 Enrico A. Rosal2, pp. !$-++, 5-, March !%, !$$%.
$ Contained in a separate envelope. "ther eAhibits, to it* EAhs. E, E-!, (, ?, ?-!, ?-+, ?-5, ?-E, and ?-#,
M, M-!, M-+, M-5, and M-E ere also placed in separate envelopes.
!D T3N 0P"5 Enrico A. Rosal2, pp. +5-+#, E,-#5, March !%, !$$%.
!! T3N 03P"! (lorentino M. Malinao, )r.2, pp. 5,-E%, #!-#%, <ec. !D, !$$-> T3N 0P"5 Ra'mundo <. Esto',
)r.2, pp. EE--,, )an. 5D, !$$%> T3N 0P"5 Enrico A. Rosal2, pp. +#-5D, March !%, !$$%> Sinumpaang
Salaysay of 3P"! (lorentino M. Malinao, )r., dated Au&ust +,, !$$- 0EAh. 92, Records, p. $+> Sinumpaang
Salaysay of P"5 Ra'mundo <. Esto', )r., dated Au&ust +,, !$$- 0EAh. ;2, Records, p. $#.
!+ Records, p. %-.
!5 &d., p. %%.
!E &d.
!# &d.
!, T3N, pp. 5-!E, April -, !$$%.
!- Records, pp. $%-$$.
!% &d., p. !D+.
!$ T3N, pp. ,-++, (eb. ,, !$$%.
+D Records, p. !D!.
+! &d., p. $D.
++ &d., p. $!.
+5 T3N, pp. E-#, !!-+5, 5E-5,, E+-EE, )an. +5. !$$%> T3N, pp. -#---, )an. 5D, !$$%.
+E Records, p. $5.
+# &d., p. $E> T3N, pp. %-!,, )an. 5D, !$$%.
+, T3N, pp. ,#--#, )une +5, !$$%.
+- &d., pp. 5$-,E, -#---.
+% T3N, pp. E-5#, )une $, !$$%.
+$ T3N, pp. 5-+D, )une +5, !$$%.
5D Rollo, p. !5$.
5! &d., p. !E!.
5+ People v. Mahusa', +%+ 3CRA %D 0!$$-2> See also Posadas v. "mbudsman, ?.R. No. !5!E$+, 3eptember
+$, +DDD> Cadua v. Court of Appeals, 5!+ 3CRA -D5 0!$$$2> People v. <oria, 5D! 3CRA ,,% 0!$$$2.
55 People v. Bur&os, !EE 3CRA ! 0!$%,2.
5E People v. Mahusa', supra.
5# Supra at #--.
5, Records, p. !!
5- &d., p. !+.
5% &d., p. !E.
5$ &d., p. !-.
ED &d., p. !%.
E! People v. Meris, ?.R. Nos. !!-!E#-#D and !!-EE-, March +%, +DDD> People v. EreRo, 5+, 3CRA !#-
0+DDD2> People v. ?allarde, 5+# 3CRA %5# 0+DDD2.
E+ ,# Phil. ,%$, ,$# 0!$5%2.
E5 +!- 3CRA #$-, ,!! 0!$$52.
EE T3N, pp. !#-!-, April +D, !$$% 0emphasis added2.
E# &d., pp. +%, 5+ 0emphasis added2.
E, 5+# 3CRA %5# 0+DDD2.
E- People v. ?ar&ar, 5DD 3CRA #E+ 0!$$%2.
E% T3N, p. #%, )une +5, !$$%.
E$ People v. Melchor, 5D- 3CRA !-- 0!$$$2.
#D T3N, pp. 5$-E!, <ec. !D, !$$- 0emphasis added2.
#! T3N, pp. ---%D, )an. +5, !$$% 0emphasis added2.
#+ &d., pp. %,-$D 0emphasis added2.
The ;aphil Pro.ect - Arellano ;a (oundatio