THIRD DIVISION
PEOPLE OF THE
PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
G.R.
No.
134121
March 6, 2003
-versus-
EDWIN ALCODIA Y
SIMON,
Accused-Appellant.
D E C I S I O N
SANDOVAL-GUTIERREZ,
J.:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary
Death, like a thief in
the night, strikes at the most unexpected time. Ryan Feria,
a 17-year old engineering student of the University of Baguio, was
bound
for home at San Felipe, Zambales when he boarded Victory Liner Bus No.
729 on October 3, 1996. It was to be his last journey.
Assailed in this appeal
is the Decision[1]
dated January 20, 1998 of the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 65,
Tarlac,
Tarlac in Criminal Case No. 9396 finding accused-appellant Edwin
Alcodia
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder and sentencing
him
to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to indemnify the heirs
of deceased Feria the amount of P50,000.00 as moral damages,
P119,700.00
as actual damages, P25,000.00 as exemplary damages and costs.cralaw:red
In the Information[2]
dated November 5, 1996, accused-appellant was charged with the crime of
murder committed as follows:
"That on or about October
3, 1996 at around 10:15 in the morning, in the Municipality of Tarlac,
Province of Tarlac, Philippines and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable
Court, the said accused did then and there, with malice aforethought
and
with deliberate intent to take the life of Ryan V. Feria, willfully,
unlawfully
and feloniously, suddenly unexpectedly and treacherously attack the
latter
with a knife (balisong 29) wounding him several times on his chest and
was brought to the Tarlac Provincial Hospital, Tarlac, Tarlac, for
treatment
but later on pronounced dead by the hospital authorities.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
"CONTRARY TO LAW."
Upon arraignment, accused-appellant
pleaded not guilty.[3]
Thereafter, trial on the merits ensued. The prosecution presented
as its witnesses Arnold Salvador, Dominador Sarmiento, Dr. Benjamin
Fabie,
Esminda Feria and SPO2 Reynaldo Jarabejo. Accused-appellant,
alone,
took the witness stand for the defense.cralaw:red
Salvador testified that
on October 3, 1996, at around 10:15 o'clock in the morning, he was
selling
chicharon inside Victory Liner Bus No. 729, then parked at the Siesta
Bus
Stop, San Roque, Tarlac, Tarlac.[4]
Within his view was accused-appellant who was seated at the 4th row of
the bus.[5]
He tarried while waiting for the other passengers to board the
vehicle.
Thereupon, he noticed Feria boarding the bus. While Feria was
still
at the first rung of the bus' doorsteps, he suddenly stood up, held
Feria's
neck and stabbed him three (3) times with a balisong.[6]
Feria managed to get off the bus and ran towards the parking space
where
he fell down.[7]
Accused-appellant chased Feria but Sarmiento, a security guard, stopped
him, ordered him to raise his hand and took the balisong.[8]
Sarmiento corroborated
Salvador's testimony. He recounted that on the said date and
time,
he was making rounds at the Siesta Victory Liner Terminal.[9]
He posted himself three (3) meters away from Bus No. 729 to inform the
passengers that it would be leaving soon.[10]
He then saw accused-appellant. The latter approached Feria and
stabbed
him.[11]
Feria fell from the bus when accused-appellant released him.
Somehow
Feria was able to run a few meters away from accused-appellant but he
collapsed
on the concrete pavement. When he (Sarmiento) saw
accused-appellant
chasing the victim, he blocked his path.[12]
While aiming his gun at accused-appellant, Sarmiento ordered him to
raise
his hand and thereafter took the balisong from him. He gave the
balisong
to SPO2 Jarabejo who brought accused-appellant to the police station
for
investigation.[13]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
SPO2 Jarabejo testified
that on October 3, 1996, at around 10:15 o'clock in the morning, he was
directing traffic at San Roque Junction, Tarlac, Tarlac.[14]
A tricycle driver informed him that there was a commotion at the
Victory
Liner Terminal, prompting him to rush to the place.[15]
When he reached the terminal, Sarmiento turned over to him
accused-appellant
as well as the balisong he used.[16]
Jarabejo brought accused-appellant to the Police Station.[17]
Feria was rushed to
the Tarlac Provincial Hospital. Dr. Fabie, a resident pathologist
of the Tarlac Provincial Hospital, testified that he performed an
autopsy
on Feria's cadaver. His Autopsy Report shows that the victim
sustained
three (3) stab wounds on the chest and left shoulder, thus:
"1. 3 ½
x 2 cms. (stab wound) at the supra aspect of glenoid left shoulder
(non-penetrating
wound);
2. 3 x 2 ½
cms, 3 cms. (stab wound) below stab wound No. 1;
3. 3 x 2 cms.
(stab wound) left side of the sternum second intercostal space."
Dr. Fabie affirmed the
Medico-Legal Certificate dated October 4, 1986 stating that the cause
of
Feria's death was "Hypovolemic shock due to acute blood loss" and
"cardiac
tamponade resulting from stab wounds of the thorax, lungs and heart."
Esminda Feria testified
that her son was 17 years of age and a second year Electronics and
Communication
Engineering student at the University of Baguio. She said she
spent
P119,700.00 for his hospitalization, wake and burial, including
miscellaneous
expenses.[18]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Accused-appellant presented
a different story. He testified that he was one of the passengers of
Victory
Liner Bus No. 729 on October 3, 1996.[19]
He was occupying the 2nd to the last seat of the bus, together with his
live-in partner, Cristina Abad, and her sister-in-law, Grace Abad.[20]
When the bus stopped at the Victory Liner Terminal in Tarlac, he stood
up to alight from the vehicle but Feria who was from the front side of
the bus approached him and attempted to stab him.[21]
He evaded the thrust and grappled with Feria for the possession of the
knife. After wrestling the knife from Feria, he stabbed
him.
However, he could no longer remember how many times he stabbed the
victim.[22]
He did not suffer any bruises or injuries.[23]
Thereafter, he alighted from the bus and surrendered himself to
Sarmiento.
He also surrendered the knife he used in stabbing the victim.[24]
Sarmiento turned him over, together with the knife, to SPO2 Jarabejo
who
arrived at the scene of the incident. The latter brought him to the
Police
Station but he did not give any written statement about what happened.[25]
Accused-appellant further claimed that he did not know the person whom
he stabbed. He averred, however, that while boarding the bus at
its
terminal in Baguio City in the morning of October 3, 1996, he and the
victim
accidentally bumped each other. The latter stared at him with a
"dagger
look."[26]
On January 20, 1998,
the trial court rendered its Decision, the dispositive portion of which
reads:
"WHEREFORE, this Court
finds the accused Edwin Alcodia y Simon GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt
of the crime of Murder as defined and penalized in Article 248 of the
Revised
Penal Code, as amended, and hereby sentences him to suffer a jail
penalty
of Reclusion Perpetua, with the accessory penalties of the law and to
pay
the heirs of Ryan Feria y Verona the amount of P50,000.00 as moral
indemnity,
to pay his heirs the amount of P119,700.00 as actual damages, to pay
P25,000.00
as exemplary damages and to pay the costs.cralaw:red
"SO ORDERED."
In appreciating the
qualifying circumstance of treachery, the RTC ratiocinated:
"The Court is convinced
that Alcodia fatally stabbed Feria. But was the killing of the victim a
case of murder as charged? As shown by the evidence spread on the
record, Alcodia fatally attacked Feria with a knife suddenly,
unexpectedly
and without any warning as the latter was boarding Bus No. 729 bound
for
Olongapo City. Feria then was unarmed and unaware of the evil
design
of accused Alcodia when the latter attacked Feria. Accused gave
the
victim no chance to defend himself or repel the assault against him,
considering
the sudden and unexpected attack on his person, thereby ensuring its
accomplishment."
Accused-appellant anchors
his appeal on this assignment of error:
THE COURT A QUO
GRAVELY
ERRED IN RELYING SOLELY ON THE PROSECUTION'S EVIDENCE AND DISREGARDING
COMPLETELY HIS TESTIMONY THAT HE WAS PREVIOUSLY ATTACKED BY THE VICTIM
AND HE MERELY ACTED IN SELF-DEFENSE.[27]
Accused-appellant invokes
several Decisions of this Court sustaining self-defense. However,
without expounding how these Decisions apply to his case, he concludes
that his plea of self-defense is proper, thus, he should be acquitted.cralaw:red
In its Appellee's Brief,
the Solicitor General contends that as between the version of the
prosecution
and that of the defense, the former deserves more weight because first,
the RTC found the prosecution witnesses credible, they having testified
with sincerity and candor; and second, no ill motive was shown why the
prosecution witnesses would falsely testify against accused-appellant.cralaw:red
The appeal is bereft
of merit.cralaw:red
Accused-appellant's
lone assignment of error borders on the matter of credibility of
witnesses.cralaw:red
Time and again, this
Court has pronounced that matters affecting credibility are best left
to
the trial court because of its unique opportunity of having observed
that
elusive and incommunicable evidence of the witness' deportment on the
stand
while testifying.[28]
The brazen face of the liar, the glibness of the schooled witness in
reciting
a lesson, or the itching over-eagerness of the swift witness, as well
as
the honest face of the truthful one, are alone seen by the trial judge.[29]
Thus, the appellate court will not disturb the findings of the lower
court,[30]
unless there appears in the record some facts or circumstances of
weight
and influence which has been overlooked or the significance of which
have
been misinterpreted.[31]
Upon a careful evaluation
of the evidence, we find that the RTC is justified in giving full faith
and credit to the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. With
marked relevance is the fact that there appears to be no motive on the
part of Salvador and Sarmiento to falsely testify against
accused-appellant
other than their sincere desire to disclose the truth about Feria's
death.
As a matter of fact, accused-appellant did not even attempt to show why
these two disinterested witnesses would concoct an inculpatory story
against
him. It must therefore be presumed that they were not moved by
wicked
intentions.[32]
We quote their clear and straightforward accounts of the
incident.
Salvador testified as follows:
"ATTY. FARINAS:
Q
What particular portion of the bus were you when Ryan Feria boarded the
same?
A
I was at the middle of the bus.cralaw:red
Q
And how about the accused, where was he at that time?
A
He was seated at the fourth seat.cralaw:red
x x
x
x x x
Q
What was he doing when you saw the accused?
A
He was looking down.cralaw:red
Q
After that, what did he do if he did anything?
A
When Ryan Feria boarded the bus, he suddenly stood up, embraced him on
the neck and stabbed him.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Q
You said that accused stabbed Ryan Feria, using yourself and myself as
point of impact, please demonstrate how the accused stabbed victim Ryan
Feria?
INTERPRETER:
Witness demonstrating by holding Atty. Farinas with his left hand by
the
neck and then stabbed him.cralaw:red
ATTY. FARINAS:
Q
How many times?
A
Three times, sir.cralaw:red
Q
How far were you from them when Alcodia stabbed Ryan Feria?
A
I was on the eighth seat of the bus.cralaw:red
Q
After he stabbed Ryan Feria three times, what happened next, if any?
A
Ryan Feria was able to run.cralaw:red
Q
Where did he go?
A
He went to the parking space and then he fell down.cralaw:red
Q
How far from the place where Ryan Feria fell down from the place where
he was stabbed by Edwin Alcodia?
A
More or less 4 meters.cralaw:red
Q
And what did Edwin Alcodia do when Ryan Feria ran away?
A
He chased him.cralaw:red
Q
Was he able to chase him?
A
No more, sir.cralaw:red
Q
Why?chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
A
Because the security guard arrived.cralaw:red
Q
And do you know the name of the security guard you are referring to?
A
I know him by the family name Sarmiento, sir.cralaw:red
Q
What happened when the security guard arrived?
A
He ordered him to raise his hand because he was holding a knife."[33]
Sarmiento corroborated
the foregoing testimony of Salvador, thus:
"ATTY. FARINAS:
Q
On October 3, 1996, at 10:15 a.m., do you remember of any unusual
incident
that happened?
A
There was a stabbing incident, sir.cralaw:red
Q
And who were involved in that stabbing incident, if you know?
A
Edwin Alcodia, sir.cralaw:red
Q
You said that there was a stabbing incident that happened, how did it
happen?
A
When I was making a round, I approached the passengers of Bus No. 729
to
board their bus because the bus will be leaving. When Ryan Feria
was about to board the bus, he was met by a person who came from inside
the bus, embraced him and then stabbed him.cralaw:red
Q
You mentioned Bus No. 729, how far were you from the said bus when the
incident happened?
A
About three meters away from the bus.cralaw:red
x x
x
x x x
Q
What weapon did Edwin Alcodia use in stabbing Ryan Feria, if you know?
A
A knife (balisong), sir.cralaw:red
Q
How long is that balisong you are referring to?
A
About eight inches.cralaw:red
Q
After you saw Edwin Alcodia stabbed Ryan Feria, what did you do, if any?chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
A
Being a security guard, I pulled my gun and pointed at him. I let him
raised
his hand and that was the time I got the knife from him.cralaw:red
Q
Why did you aim your gun to accused Edwin Alcodia?chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
A
Because Edwin Alcodia wanted to go after Ryan Feria.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Q
Why, what did Ryan Feria do after he was stabbed?chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
A
He fell on the pavement, then he was able to run and he fell again."[34]
Notwithstanding the
searching cross-examination by the defense counsel, both witnesses were
able to survive the ordeal without deviating from their direct
testimonies.
And like a chain that derives strength from being interconnected, their
testimonies meet the test of credibility because of their being
corroborated
on material points. For one, Salvador's testimony that Feria was
stabbed three times at the shoulder was corroborated not only by
Sarmiento
but also by Dr. Fabie who testified that Feria suffered three stab
wounds
at the chest, with the second wound penetrating the "sternum and the
right
thoracic cavity."[35]
For another, Salvador and Sarmiento are one in saying that (a)
accused-appellant
stabbed Feria without any provocation on the latter's part; (b) the
weapon
used was a balisong; and (c) accused-appellant chased Feria after he
had
stabbed him.cralaw:red
In an attempt to discredit
the testimony of Salvador, the defense tried to show that as a
chicharon
vendor, he has no business observing the passengers. This is a
very
flimsy deduction. Extraordinary events jolt the mind to
attention.
The stabbing of a person does not happen everyday such that it can just
be brushed aside as a normal incident unworthy of observation.
The
taking of a person's life is so shocking that for anyone who witnesses
it, time stands still and a moment of undivided awareness ensues.
Besides, Salvador was able to establish during cross-examination that
he
had reason to observe the passengers. He testified that he was an
informer of the Philippine National Police and a member of the
Philippine
Watchman tasked to identify the "Salisi Gang."
But more than anything
else, what convinces us to affirm the trial court's finding is the
presence
of certain badges of guilt that renders accused-appellant's claim of
self-defense
improbable and unworthy of belief. First, the physical evidence
shows
that Feria suffered three stab wounds on the chest. Dr. Fabie
testified
that even if Feria was given proper and timely medication, he would not
have survived.[36]
The cause of his death was "cardiac tamponade resulting from stab
wounds
of the thorax, lungs and heart." The nature, location, and number of
the
wounds inflicted on Feria thus belie and negate the claim of
self-defense.[37]
It certainly defies reason why accused-appellant had to inflict such
injuries
on Feria if he were only defending himself. The number of wounds,
by itself, negates self-defense and demonstrates a criminal mind
resolved
to end the life of the victim.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Second, despite accused-appellant's
assertions that Feria was the aggressor and he (accused-appellant)
engaged
in a struggle for possession of the balisong, he did not sustain any
injury.
Surely, a plea of self-defense cannot be justifiably appreciated when
it
is extremely doubtful by itself. Not only this,
accused-appellant's
testimony was uncorroborated by any separate and competent
evidence.
The defense failed to present anyone who could confirm his story,
specifically
that the victim was the aggressor. This, all the more, renders
his
story dubious.cralaw:red
And third, accused-appellant
failed to inform the police that he acted in self-defense. There
is nothing in the records that his immediate outcry to SPO2 Jarabejo
was
self-defense.[38]
While he tried to convince the trial court that he did not escape nor
evade
arrest after committing the crime, however, Salvador and Sarmiento
testified
that accused-appellant did not voluntarily surrender himself. He
was constrained to do so at a gunpoint.[39]
In a number of cases, this Court ruled that failure to inform the
police
of the unlawful aggression on the part of the victim and to surrender
the
knife used in stabbing him militates against the claim of self-defense.[40]
All told, accused-appellant's
plea of self-defense must fail. His conviction necessarily
follows
on the basis of his admission to the killing. It is a hornbook
doctrine
that where self-defense is invoked, it is incumbent upon the
accused-appellant
to prove by clear and convincing evidence that (1) he is not the
unlawful
aggressor; (2) there was lack of sufficient provocation on his part;
and
(3) he employed reasonable means to prevent and repel an aggression.[41]
At the heart of these is the presence of unlawful aggression.
Without
it, self-defense will not have a leg to stand on and this justifying
circumstance
cannot and will not be appreciated.[42]
Also, the accused-appellant must rely on the strength of his own
evidence
and not on the weakness of that of the prosecution, for even if the
latter
were weak, it would not be disbelieved after his open admission of the
killing.[43]
The trial court also
held that accused-appellant committed the crime of murder, as qualified
by treachery. There is treachery when the offender commits any of
the crimes against persons, employing means, methods or forms in the
execution
thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its execution
without
risk to himself arising from the defense which the offended party might
make.[44]
Treachery is evidently
present in the instant case. Like a beast waiting for his prey,
accused-appellant
stealthily rushed towards Feria, swiftly held him at the neck, and
successively
stabbed him in the chest. By holding Feria at the neck,
accused-appellant
chose a mode of attack intended to facilitate and insure the killing
without
danger to himself. Apparently, Feria who was then boarding the
bus
was not aware of any impending danger to his life. He had no
reason
to suspect that an assailant lurked inside the bus considering that
there
was no prior verbal altercation or heated argument that could have
infuriated
accused-appellant. Undoubtedly, the manner of killing shows the
existence
of treachery. The essence of treachery is that the attack is
deliberate
and without warning done in a swift and unexpected manner of execution
affording the hapless, unarmed and unsuspecting victim no chance to
resist
or escape.[45]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
Under Article 248[46]
of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty for the consummated crime of
murder
is reclusion perpetua to death. The lesser of the two indivisible
penalties shall be imposed, there being neither mitigating nor
aggravating
circumstances attending the crime.[47]chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
In keeping with prevailing
jurisprudence, the heirs of the deceased are entitled to the amount of
P50,000.00 by way of civil indemnity ex delicto.[48]
As regards the actual damages, it appears that the amount of
P119,700.00
was based solely on the personal list prepared by Feria's mother.[49]
To be entitled to such damages, it is necessary to prove the actual
amount
of loss with a reasonable degree of certainty, premised upon competent
proof and on the best evidence obtainable to the injured party.[50]
In the case at bar, the prosecution failed to present any receipt to
prove
the claim for expenses incurred.[51]
Nevertheless, in light of the recent case of People vs. Abrazaldo,[52]
we grant the award of P25,000.00 as temperate damages, in lieu of
actual
damages. The moral damages awarded in the amount of P50,000.00 is
affirmed, there being proofs that because of Feria's death, his heirs
suffered
wounded feelings, mental anguish, anxiety and similar injury.[53]
Finally, we likewise affirm the trial court's award of P25,000.00 as
exemplary
damages.[54]
WHEREFORE, the Decision
dated January 20, 1998 of the Regional Trial Court, Branch 65, Tarlac,
Tarlac, finding accused-appellant Edwin Alcodia y Simon guilty of the
crime
of murder and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion
perpetua,
is hereby AFFIRMED with the MODIFICATION that he is ordered to pay the
heirs of the late Ryan Feria y Verona the amounts of P50,000.00 as
civil
indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages, P25,000.00 as exemplary damages
and P25,000.00 as temperate damages.cralaw:red
Costs de oficio.cralaw:red
SO ORDERED.cralaw:red
Puno, J., (Chairman), Panganiban
and Carpio-Morales, JJ.,
concur.
Corona, J., on leave.
____________________________
Endnotes:
[1]
Rollo at 56-63.
[2]
Id. at 1.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[3]
Records at 14.
[4]
TSN, April 17, 1997, at 4-5.
[5]
Id. at 6.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[6]
Id. at 7.
[7]
Id. at 8.
[8]
Id. at 9-10.
[9]
TSN, June 5, 1997, at 15-16.
[10]
Id. at 17.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[11]
Id. at 16.
[12]
Id. at 18-19.
[13]
Id. at 20.
[14]
TSN, June 18, 1997, at 4.
[15]
Id. at 6.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[16]
Id. at 7.
[17]
Id. at 9.
[18]
TSN, July 30, 1997, at 6-7.
[19]
TSN, November 5, 1997, at 4.
[20]
Id. at 5.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[21]
Id. at 6.
[22]
Id. at 7.
[23]
Id. at 17.
[24]
Id. at 8.
[25]
Id.
[26]
Id. at 19.
[27]
Rollo at 52.
[28]
People vs. Castillo, 335 SCRA 100 (2000).
[29]
People vs. Del Rosario, 344 SCRA 382 (2000).
[30]
Cueme vs. People, 334 SCRA 795 (2000).
[31]
People vs. Pascual, 331 SCRA 252 (2000).
[32]
People vs. Meneque, 339 SCRA 200, 209 (2000).
[33]
TSN, April 17, 1997, at 7-9.
[34]
TSN, June 5, 1997, at 17-19.
[35]
Id. at 8-9.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[36]
Id. at 12.
[37]
People vs. Camahalan, 241 SCRA 558 (1995); People vs. Tanduyan, 236
SCRA
433 (1994); People vs. Amaro, 235 SCRA 8 (1994); People vs. Gregorio,
255
SCRA 380 (1996); People vs. Layam, 234 SCRA 424 (1994).chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[38]
TSN, June 18, 1997, at 1-10.
[39]
TSN, April 17, 1997, at 23-24; TSN, June 5, 1997, at 18-19.
[40]
People vs. Figuracion, G.R. No. 129162, August 10, 2001; Ingles vs.
Court
of Appeals, G.R. No. 117161, March 3, 1997.
[41]
People vs. Rabanal, 349 SCRA 655 (2001).chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[42]
People vs. Saure, G.R. No. 135848, March 12, 2002.
[43]
People vs. Abrazaldo, G.R. No. 124392, February 6, 2003.
[44]
People vs. Almendras, G.R. No. 137277, December 20, 2001.
[45]
People vs. Galano, 327 SCRA 462 (2000).chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[46]
Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code provides:chanroblesvirtuallawlibrarychanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
"ART.
248. Murder. - Any person who, not falling within the provisions of
Article
246 shall kill another, shall be guilty of murder and shall be punished
by reclusion perpetua, to death x x x."
[47]
Article 63 (2) of the Revised Penal Code; People vs. Piedad, G.R. No.
131923,
December 5, 2002.
[48]
People vs. Ilo, G.R. No. 140731, November 21, 2002.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[49]
TSN, July 30, 1997, at 6-7.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[50]
People vs. Acosta, G.R. No. 140386, November 29, 2001; People vs.
Suelto,
325 SCRA 41 (2000); People vs. Samolde, 336 SCRA 632 (2000).
[51]
People vs. Manlansing, G.R. No. 131736, March 11, 2002.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[52]
This Court held: "Thus, we now hold that where the amount of the actual
damages cannot be determined because of the absence of receipts to
prove
the same, but it is shown that the heirs are entitled thereto,
temperate
damages may be awarded. Such temperate damages, taking into
account
the current jurisprudence fixing the indemnity for death at P
50,000.00,
should be one-half thereof, or P25,000.00. This makes
temperate
damages equal to the award of exemplary damages, which is likewise
fixed
at P25,000.00 in cases where its award is justified." Supra.
[53]
TSN, July 30, 1997, at 7-8.chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred
[54]
People vs. Catubig, 363 SCRA 636 (2001).
chanrobles virtuallaw libraryred |