PEOPLE v. FELICIANO, JR.

GR 196735
MAY 5, 2014
* APPEAL from the decision of the CA
Infortmation for murder was filed against several members of the Scintilla Juris Fraternity: (1) Feliciano,
Jr., (2) Medalla, (3) Zingapan, (4) Alvir, (5) Soliva, (6) Ablandia, (7) Magpantay, (8) Morano, (9) Narag ,
(10) Magpantay, (11) Guerrero, and (12) Penalosa, Jr.
RTC QC accused-appellants attacked, assaulted and employed personal violence upon the person of
Dennis Venturina which were the direct and immediate cause of his death
Separate informations were also filed attempted and frustrated murder of Sigma Rho Fraternity
members
FACTS:
December 8, 1994 around 12:30 to 1 pm 7 members of the Sigma Rho Fraternity were eating lunch
at the Beach House Canteen, near the main library of UP, Diliman when they were attacked by
several masked men armed with baseball bats and lead pipes
SR Lachica
o He looked around when Venturina shouted and saw about 10 men charging toward them
o Men were armed and their faces were covered with handkerchiefs or shirts
o 5 men started attacking him and hitting him with lead pipes
o Recognized 1 of the attackers as Alvir because his mask fell of
o Sufered scratches and contrusions
o Able to run to the nearby College of Education
o Looked back and saw Zingapan and Medalla both did not have masks on
o Attack lasted about 30 to 45 minutes
o Upon reaching the COE, rode a jeepney to the COL to wait for other frat brothers and one of
them received an information that the members of the SJ were seen in the west wing of the
main library and were regrouping in SM North
o Upon arriving at SM North, pillboxes and stones were thrown at them
o Saw Alvir, Zipangan , and a certain Taparan
o Proceeded to UP where the SR members held a meeting
SR Natalicio
o Looked to his left when Venturina shouted
o Saw about 15 to 20 men wearing masks
o Stunned and started running and stumbled upon the roots of a tree
o Attackers came after him and beat him up until he fell down
o While being attacked, recognized Zipangan and Soliva not wearing masks
o Another group of 4 to 5 persons came towards him and beat him
o He did not move until another group also beat him up
o He was lying on the ground when bystanders brought him to the UP Infirmary
SR Mangrobang, Jr.
o Looked back when Venturina shouted and saw a group of masked men with baseball bats and
lead pipes
o Ran when armed men attacked but 2 men blocked him and hit him
o Recognized Magpantay and Fajardo masks fell of
o Evaded attackers and ran to the main library
o Decided to help frat brothers went back to the canteen saw Venturina lying on the ground
being beat up by Feliciano and Narag
o Feliciano and Narag went toward him and was about to hit him when somebody shouted that
policemen were coming and both ran away
o Saw Fortes and accompanied him to his car to bring Venturina in the infirmary but bystanders
already loading Venturina in another vehicle and stayed in the infirmary until the following
morning
SR Gaston, Jr.
o Immediately stood up upon hearing Venturina
o Saw a group of men charging toward them carrying lead pipes and baseball bats, most had
covers in their faces
o About to run when 2 of the attackers approached him - struck him with a heavy pipe and
stabbed him with a bladed instrument
o Sustained stab wounds on the chest and left forearm
o Able to run away
o Looked back and saw Feliciano, Jr., Zingapan and Morano
o Went to their hang-out to meet other frat brothers
o Proceeded to the college of law where the rest of the frat was already discussing the incident
SR Fortes
o Ran when he saw the attackers coming toward them

o Looked back and saw Feliciano, Jr. hitting Venturina, as well as Zipangan and Morano
Night of December 8, 1994 officers of SR Fraternity advised the victims to lodge their complaint with
the NBI
Counsel of the victims informed the UP police that the victims would be giving their statements to the
NB, promising to give the UP police copies of it
December 8, 1994 - Venturina was transferred to St. Lukes Hospital and died on December 10, 1994
December 11, 1994 autopsy was conducted by Dr. Rolando Victoria on the cadaver of Venturina and
found several contrusions, lacerated wounds, and fractures Ventuina died of traumatic head injuries
December 12, 1994 Lachica, Natalicio, Mangrobang, Fortes, and Gaston executed their respective
affidavits before the NBO and underwent medico-legal examinations with Dr. Villena (lacerated
wounds, abrasions, and contrusions)
September 19, 1997 after the prosecution presented its evidence-in-chief, court granted the demurrer
to evidece filed by Penalosa, Jr. on the ground that he was not among those identified by the
prosecutions witnesses and that he was not mentioned in any of the documentary evidence
** Defense introduced their own facts:
Romeo Cabrera & Oscar Salvador (UP police)
o When they heard someone shouted Rumble!, rushed and saw bystanders helping those
injured
o Helped Natilicio board the service vehicle and asked him who hit him, and Natilicio answered
that the attackers were wearing masks
Benjamin Lato (utility worker of the beach house canteen)
o Identities of the attackers were unrecognizable because of their masks
Frisco Capilo (utility worker of UP main library)
o Buying a cigarette when he allegedly saw the whole incident
o Testified that 10 men wearing masks came from a red car parked nearby
o Saw attackers ran away and saw students helping those injured
o Helped in carrying Fortes
Eda Panganiban, Luz Perez, and Bathalani Tiamzon (Sigma Alpha Nu Sorority members)
o In line to order at the beach house canteen when the incident happened
o Saw around 15 to 18 armed men with masks unrecognizable
o Saw a person lying on the ground being beat up
o Did not see any mask fall of the faces of the armed men
** Alibis of the accused-appellants:
Feliciana Feliciano (Feliciano, Jr.s mother)
o Feliciano, Jr. was in Pampanga to visit his sick grandfather
Alvir
o Not feeling well since December 5 could not have possibly been in UP on December 8
o He was even absent from work
Medalla
o He and a classmate, Michael Vibas, were working on a group project
o Claimed that he couldnt have participated in the rumble due to his previous injury afecting
his balance
Soliva & Anna Cabahug (girlfriend)
o Eating lunch with his girlfriend and another friend in Jollibee Philcoa and went back to UP
before 1 pm, heading straight to their hang-out where he was told of the incident
o Girlfriend corroborated his story
Zipangan
o Testified that he was not in UP and have gone to SM North to buy a gift for a friends wedding
but ran into a frat brother
o Alleged that some SR attacked them in SM North that day
February 28. 2002 TC rendered its decision:
o
finding Alvir, Feliciano, Jr., Medalla and Zipangan guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder
and attempted murder sentenced to reclusion perpetua
o acquitting Ablanida, Fajardo, Magpantay, Morano and Narag
o case against Guerrero was ordered archived by the court until his apprehension
Because one of the penalties was reclusion perpetua, the case was brought on to the SC on AUTOMATIC
APPEAL due to the amendment on Rules on Appeal, the case was REMANDED to CA
December 26, 2010 CA affirmed RTC decision
CA decision was then brought to SC for review
ISSUE: WHETHER THE PROSECUTION WAS ABLE TO PROVE BEYOND REASONABLE F+DOUBT THAT THE
ACCUSED-APPELLANTS ATTACKED PRIVATE COMPLAINANTS AND CAUSED THE DEATH OF DENNIS VENTURINA
Further refined:

(1) Whether the accused-appellants constitutional rights were violated when the information against
them contained in the aggravating circumstance of the use of masks despite the prosecution
presenting witnesses to prove that the masks fell of; and
(2) Whether the RTC and CA correctly rules, on the basis of the evidence that accused-appellants
were sufficiently identified
HELD:

CA decision is AFFIRMED insofar as Feliciano Jr., Medalla, Soliva, Zipangan, and Alvir are found guilty
beyond reasonable doubt for murder
o With the modification that they be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of attempted
murder for the separate information filed
RATIONALE:
An information is sufficient when the accused is fully appraised of the charge against him to enable him
to prepare his defense
o No person shall be held to answer for a criminal ofense without the due process of law
o Rule 110, Sec. 1, Par. 1 of Rules on Criminal Procedure a complaint or information is
sufficient if it states the:

name of the accused

designation of the ofense given by the statute

acts or omissions complained of

name of the ofended party

approximate date of the commission of the ofense

place where the ofense was committed

** ALL OF WHICH ARE PRESENT IN THE CASE AT BAR
o Test of sufficiency of Information: whether it enables a person of common understanding to
know the charge against him
o Inclusion of the phrase wearing masks and/or other forms of disguise in the information
does not violate their constitutional rights -> every aggravating circumstance must be stated
in the information
o Inclusion of disguise in the information was enough to sufficiently appraise the accused that
in the commission of the ofense, they tried to conceal their identity

Findings of the TC, when affirmed by the appellate court, are entitled to great weight and credence
(General Rule)
o Exception: where such findings are clearly arbitrary or erroneous as when they are tainted
with bias or hostility or are lacking in basis to suggest that they were reached without careful
study and perceptiveness that should characterize a judicial decision
o In the case, a total of 11 witnesses for the prosecution and 42 witnesses for the defense were
put in stand TC acquitted 6 and convicted 5 of the accused

It cannot be said that the TC acted arbitrarily or that its decision was so lacking in
basis that it was arrived without exhaustive study of the evidence

The accused were sufficiently identified by the witnesses for prosecution

o Considering the swiftness of the incident, there would be slight inconsistencies in their
statements it is natural for diferent witnesses testifying to have varying details because
perfect testimonies would mean that they were fabricated and rehearsed
o The positive identification was due to the fact that the masks fell of and a victim or witness
would find ways to identify the assailant so as to serve justice in the event that he survives

Evidence as part of the res gestae may be admissible but have little persuasive value in this case
o General Rule: a witness can testify only to the facts he knows of his personal knowledge
derived from his own perception
o Exceptions: when the evidence is part of the res gestae
o Pert of the Res Gestae statements made by person while a starting concurrence is taking
place or immediately prior thereto with respect to the circumstances thereof
o Res Gestae the circumstances, facts, and declarations that grow out of the main fact and
serve to illustrate its character and are so spontaneous and contemporaneous with the main
facts as to exclude the idea of deliberation and fabrication
o The statements of the bystanders are admissible as evidence given in res gestae they
were made immediately after the startling occurrence

Belated identification by the victims do not detract from their positive identification of the appellants
o Parties involved belong to rival fraternities there are certain practices
o Consultation within the brotherhood: It is possible that they knew the identities of the
attackers but chose not to disclose it without first consulting with the other frat brothers
o Seniority: it was upon the advice of senior members to execute their sworn statements before
the NBI 4 days after the incident
o There is reason to believe that NBI is better equipped than the UP Police to investigate on the
case victims reliance on NBI is understandable

Alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification of the victim

Positive identification of the appellant by a witness destroys the defense of alibi and denial
Alibi and denial are inherently weak and disfavored by courts because they warrant the least
credibility or none at al for it to prosper, it is not enough to prove that the appellant was
somewhere else at the time of the commission of the crime but he must also demonstrate
that it was physically impossible for him to have been in the scene of the crime
Accused-appellants were correctly charged with murder and there was treachery in the commission if
the crime
o RPC 248 Murder xxx guilty of murder xxx if committed with any of the following
attendant circumstances: (1) with treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the
aid of armed men, or employing means to weaken the defense, or of means or persons to
insure or aford impunity; xxx
o It was impossible for the victims to fight back against the attackers as the latter were armed
with baseball bats and lead pipes they were also at a place where they are not expected to
be on guard for any sudden attack by rival fraternity men
The presence of conspiracy makes all of the accused-appellants liable for murder and attempted
murder
o The act of one, is the act of all, regardless of the extent and character of their respective
active participation in the commission of the crimes
o It is established that the accused-appellants conspired and confederated in the commission
of murder as there was intent to kill on all of the attackers at the moment they took the first
swing on the victims
o
o

MR OF PEOPLE v. FELICIANO, JR.

GR 196735
August 3, 2016
** Resolves the separate motions for reconsideration of the decision dated May 5, 2014, filed by accusedappellants Soliva, Zipangan, and Alvir
May 5, 2014 decision:

CA decision is AFFIRMED insofar as Feliciano Jr., Medalla, Soliva, Zipangan, and Alvir are found guilty
beyond reasonable doubt for murder
o With the modification that they be found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of attempted
murder for the separate information filed
(1) SOLIVA
Argues that his conviction was merely based on Natilicios sole testimony which he alleges was
doubtful and inconsistent
Prosecution witness Tan was able to witness the attack on Natilicio but was unable to identify the
attacker
Argues that Natalicio was not able to identify his attacker since he was seen by Tan lying face down as
he was being attacked
Argues that the May 2014 decision did not apply to those who did not appeal to this Court (Feliciano
and Medalla)
Takes exception on fraternity culture and argued that these have no basis on facts or evidence
A notice of appeal is not necessary in cases where the RTC imposed death penalty and the CA shall
automatically review the judgement Rule 122 section 3(d) and 10 of Rules of Criminal Procedure
Raymond Narag blog outlining the culture and practices of a fraternity
o Fraternity System a big black hole that sucks these young promising men to their graves
o The secrecy that surrounds traditions and practices of fraternity becomes problematic on an
evidentiary level as there are no set standards from which a fraternity-related crime could be
measured
(2) OSG
Argues that Natilicios testimony was sufficient to identify Soliva as the attacker
That Tans testimony is not contradicting since Tan was able to state that he saw the assailants who
were not masked but do not know their names
A testimony of a single witness, as long as it is credible and positive, is enough to prove the guilt of an
accused beyond reasonable doubt
Natalicio and Tans testimonies were consistent with each other (Natalicio explained that he was attacked
twice, that during the first, he was able to stand up and saw the attackers)

(3) ALVIR
Argues that Lachica admitted that while he was being attacked, he covered his head with his forearms,
which created doubt that he was able to raise his head while parrying blows
When Lachica ran away and looked back, he was only able to identify Medalla and Zipangan
Court erred in finding conspiracy among all the accused since the TC acquitted those who were
identified by Mangrobang, Jr.
Even while Lachica was parrying blows, he would strive to identify his attackers
Lachica clearly and categorically identified Alvir as one of his attackers (see page 1)
Lachica was able to identify Alvir while he was being attacked and when he ran away and looked back, he
was able to identify 2 more Zipangan and Medalla
The 4 accused was exonerated merely because they were aforded the benefit of the doubt as their
identification by Mangrobang, under tumultuous and chaotic circumstances were not corroborated and their
alibis, not refuted
(4) ZINGAPAN
Argues that the information filed against him was insufficient and that it violated his constitutional right
to be informed of the nature and cause of accusation against him
For information to be sufficient Rule 110 of the Rules of Criminal Procedure (see page 3)
HELD:
Court resolves to DENY with FINALITY the MRs filed by Zingapan & Alvir, DENY the motion for
Modification of Judgement filed by Alvir, and PARTLY GRANT Solivas MR

PEOPLE v. DE GUZMAN
GR 192250
July 11, 2012
** Appeal from the decision of the CA
De Guzman was charged with the crime of murder
April 20, 2002 11pm Occidental Mindoro accused, armed with a sharp bladed instrument (with
intent to kill and with treachery) assault and stab Noriel Rosales Urieta, inflicting upon the latter
serious wounds which caused his untimely death
FACTS:
A. VERSION OF THE PROSECUTION
Urieta and Flores (childhood friends) were drinking in the amusement area near the peryahan
Appellant suddenly approached them and without any provocation, stabbed Urieta with a knife on his
left chest
When victim was kneeling down, appellant proceeded to stab him 3 more times
Appellant then ran away
Flores called for help
Elmer Honato arrived and called for help but did not return
Flore, afraid and uncertain of the condition of Urieta, left the latter and went home
2 days after, the police together with the parents and wife of Urieta went to the house of Flores to get a
sworn statement
De Guzman was arrested
Prosecutor filed appropriate charges against him
B. VERSION OF THE DEFENSE
De Guzman joined a drinking spree at the house of a relative he was there from 8 am to 12 midnight
The following day, he was drying palay when his wife informed him that police officers were looking for
him
De Guzman was told to go with them to the municipal hall for questioning
He was incarcerated because of his alleged involvement in the stabbing incident of Urieta
De Guzman does not personally know Urieta or Flores
De Guzman denied that he stabbed Urieta

RTC

Rejected the unsubstantiated defense of alibi profered by De Guzman in the face of POSITIVE
IDENTIFICATION of Flores pointing him as the perpetrator
Treachery attended the commission of the crime
Finds De Guzman GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder

CA
AFFIRMED the judgment of conviction of De Guzman
The facts established by the unwavering testimony of the witness could not be displaced by the empty
denials and self-serving alibi of De Guzman
Appeal is dismissed
ISSUE:
W/N THERE IS SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE TO CONVICT DE GUZMAN OF THE CRIME OF MURDER
HELD: NO
Appeal is GRANTED. CA decision is REVERSED and SET ASIDE. De Guzman is hereby ACQUITTED and
ordered immediately RELEASED
RATIONALE:
Flores testimony is riddled with inconsistencies and contradictions erodes his credibility and raises
doubt on the veracity of the prosecution evidence
The prosecution failed to show any ill motive on the part of De Guzman
Since the prosecution evidence is weak, De Guzmans alibi assumes importance and can efectively
negate his criminal liability
The case of the prosecution was woven basically on the testimony of Flores
Condition of visibility at the time of the stabbing incident did not favor Flores crime happened during
night time in a remote barangay with no electric lighting in the surroundings and theres only the
illumination of a moron coming from the peryahan
Flores testimony that a certain Honato came to help and supposedly to seek a physician at a barangay
hall does not make sense because given the serious injuries obtained by Urieta, the very first act to
be done is to bring him to a hospital for immediate treatment and not seek for the help of the
barangay hall
The reaction of Flores upon leaving Urieta given his condition unnatural and contrary to human
experience and if he was a childhood friend, he would not have second thoughts upon bringing Urieta
to the hospital himself
The testimony of Flores does not bear earmarks of truth NOT CREDIBLE
Police officers already had a suspect - De Guzman- in the killing of Urieta even before Flores could give
his statement

It is a mystery on how the alleged murder weapon came into the possession of the prosecution