Case Digest - People vs. Laciste

People of the Philippines vs. Laciste, G.R. No.
246466, January 26, 2021

Peralta, C.J.
Facts:
On the morning of July 28, 2015, Edgardo Gamboa went inside the Gapan City Public Cemetery,
together with Ivan Perez and John Mark Torres. Upon entering the cemetery, he saw Rose
Yuzon, the victim, went to the old portion of the cemetery. After fifteen minutes, he saw her with
the accused-appellant, who was later on identified as Reymar Masilang.
Watching from a safe distance, Gamboa saw accused-appellant and the girl talking, then
accused-appellant handed the girl a hamburger. Later on, Reymar and Rose went inside a tent as
Gamboa peeped through the hole. The latter saw accused-appellant hacking the girl with a small
bolo. The girl's hands were on both sides of her face, while her eyes were covered with a red
handkerchief. He heard the girl cry for help. Shocked at what he just saw, Gamboa had to lean
against a concrete wall. When he looked again, he saw accused-appellant holding the girl's head
and banging it against the front portion of the tomb. Gamboa and his companion ran away.
The victim, Rose Yuzon, suffered from severe traumatic brain injury secondary to multiple
hacking wounds which thereby directly caused her death.
During the pre-trial, the prosecution and the defense stipulated on these facts: (1) accused
Reymar Masilang's identity; (2) accused Masilang and the victim, Rose Yuzon, were sweethearts
prior to July 26, 2015; (3) out of the three (3) witnesses, namely, Edgardo Gamboa, Marcelo
Perez, and Juanestor Yuzon, accused Masilang only knew Juanestor; and (4) the authenticity and
issuance of the death certificate of Rose Yuzon and her two pictures as well as the picture of the
place where she was found dead.
In the decision of the RTC, it was found that the accused-appellant is guilty beyond reasonable
doubt of the crime of murder qualified by treachery, as the victim could not have defended
herself from the sudden and unexpected attack on her person by accused-appellant.
The trial court did not believe accused-appellant's defense of denial and alibi in light of the
positive testimony of prosecution eyewitness Edgardo Gamboa that accused-appellant was the
person who hacked the victim with a bolo and banged her head against the front portion of a
tomb.
Consequently, the Court of Appeals affirmed the decision of the RTC with modification as it
awarded civil, moral and exemplary damages to the heirs of the victim.
Issue:
WON the Court of Appeals erred in affirming the trial court's decision that accused-appellant is
guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder.
Ruling:
The Court held that the Court of Appeal did not err in affirming the decision of the trial court
that the accused-appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder and
penalized with reclusion perpetua. As explained by the definition of murder under Article 24818
in the Revised Penal Code, it is committed by any person who, not falling within the provisions
of Article 24619 (parricide) of the RPC, shall kill another with any of the attendant
circumstances enumerated in Article 248, which include treachery. The crime of murder is
punishable by reclusion perpetua to death. In the light of the foregoing instances that qualifies
treachery, it is when the offender commits any of the crimes against the person, employing
means, methods, or forms in the execution thereof which tend directly and specially to insure its
execution. Its essence is the sudden and unexpected attack without the slightest provocation on
the part of the person being attacked. As found by the trial court, treachery was established when
the accused lured his victim in a secluded place on a promise that he was giving her a surprise
gift by blindfolding the latter. At this juncture, instead of giving the victim the present, the
accused hacked her with a bolo and banged her head against the concrete tomb which was
evidently an unexpected attack. With this fact, it is well-settled that a sudden attack under
circumstances which render the victim unable and unprepared to defend himself/herself, as in the
case of herein victim Rose Yuzon, constitutes treachery. Wherefore, the Court found the
accused-appellant Reymart Masilang y Laciste guilty of the crime murder and is penalized of
murder and ordered to pay the heirs of the victim civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary
damages.

Case Digest - People vs. Laciste

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Digest - People vs. Laciste

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case Digest - People vs. Laciste

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

People of the Philippines vs. Laciste, G.R. No.

246466, January 26, 2021

You might also like