Case Digest: JESUS GERALDO and AMADO ARIATE v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES 571 SCRA 420 (2008)

JESUS GERALDO and AMADO ARIATE v. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES 571 SCRA 420 (2008)

At all events, even if the victim’s dying declarations were admissible in evidence, it must identify the assailant with certainty; otherwise it loses its significance. Jesus Geraldo (Geraldo) and Amado Ariate (Ariate) were accused before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) for Homicide, resulting in Arthur U. Ronquillo‘s death. Although gasping for breath, Arthur was able to utter to his daughter and within the hearing distance of his son that he was shot by ―Badjing and Amado‖. Geraldo and Ariate, who were suspected to be ―Badjing‖ and ―Amado‖ were subjected to paraffin tests and were found negative for gunpowder residue. The RTC found the accused guilty based on the dying declaration of Arthur. The Court of Appeals affirmed with modification the RTC‘s decision.

ISSUE:

Whether or not the identities of Jesus and Amado has been established by proof beyond reasonable doubt

HELD:

The trial court relied on the dying declaration of the victim as recounted by his daughter Mirasol and corroborated by his son Arnel. A dying declaration is admissible as evidence if the following circumstances are present: (a) it concerns the cause and the surrounding circumstances of the declarant’s death; (b) it is made when death appears to be imminent and the declarant is under a consciousness of impending death; (c) the declarant would have been competent to testify had he or she survived; and (d) the dying declaration is offered in a case in which the subject of inquiry involves the declarant’s death. At all events, even if the victim’s dying declarations were admissible in evidence, it must identify the assailant with certainty; otherwise it loses its significance.