[G.R. No. 133226. December 12, 2000]

PEOPLE vs. LOCSIN FABON

EN BANC

Gentlemen:

Quoted hereunder, for your information, is a resolution of this Court dated DEC 12 2000.

G.R. No. 133226 (People of the Philippines vs. Locsin Fabon.)

Before the Court is a motion for reconsideration of our Decision promulgated on 16 March 2000, convicting accused-appellant Locsin Fabon of the crime of robbery with homicide with the aggravating circumstance of dwelling and sentencing him to suffer the supreme penalty of death.

In his motion, accused-appellant asserts that the circumstantial evidence appreciated by the Court for his conviction was insufficient to establish a finding of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

We are not convinced.

Accused-appellant's conviction by the trial court was anchored on circumstantial evidence which was duly proven during trial. As such, when accused-appellant's case was elevated to this Court on automatic appeal, the issue on whether there is basis in convicting accused-appellant based only on circumstantial evidence was already duly raised and argued in his appeal brief. In response to this core issue, a substantial portion of the now questioned decision had already sufficiently discussed and passed upon this matter. As aptly put by the Solicitor General in its comment to accused-appellant's motion:

The motion for reconsideration raises the issue of whether or not circumstantial evidence are sufficient to establish appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. This is the very same issue raised by appellant in his brief, traversed by plaintiff-appellee in its Brief dated June 28, 1999 and which was duly passed upon by this Honorable Court in its aforesaid decision. 1 Rollo, p.147.

In fact, we pointed out seven (7) circumstances 2 (1) Accused-appellant was present at the scene of the crime; (2) he had blood stains on his body and clothes, had a bolo tucked in his waist and was carrying a plastic bag when he was seen leaving the scene of the crime; (3) he left Brgy. Sta. Cruz for Butuan City on the same day when the victim was killed; (4) he admitted to Mario Vinculado that he killed the victim; (5) he did not even bother to inform Roberto Lasquite of his alleged innocence despite having learned that he was being made accountable for the death of Bonifacia Lasquite; (6) he could not think of any reason as to why Benjamin Milano, his nephew, would lie in testifying against him; and (7) he escaped from incarceration during the pendency of this case before the lower court which, when taken together, are as convincing as direct evidence to establish accused-appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, we find that the instant motion does not raise any new issue to merit a disturbance of our findings in the questioned decision.

However, despite this, and in order to put to rest any reservation regarding accused-appellant's conviction, we again carefully perused over the records of the case and have arrived at the same conclusion that the conviction is amply supported by the evidence on record. Consequently, accused-appellant's conviction must remain

WHEREFORE, the motion for reconsideration is hereby DENIED for lack of merit.

Very truly yours,

LUZVIMINDA D. PUNO

Clerk of Court

(Sgd.) MA. LUISA D. VILLARAMA

Asst. Clerk of Court


Back to Home | Back to Main

 

CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST SUPREME COURT JURISPRUDENCE

PHILIPPINE SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

 







chanrobles.com





ChanRobles Legal Resources:

ChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com

ChanRobles MCLE On-line

ChanRobles Lawnet Inc. - ChanRobles MCLE On-line : www.chanroblesmcleonline.com