Republ

icofthePhi
li
ppines
Regional
Tri
alCourtBranch1
Tacl
obanCity

PEOPLEOFTHEPHI
LIPPINES, CRI
M.CASENO.2017-
01-
01-
CR
Pl
aint
if
f, FOR:PARRI
CIDE

-
ver
sus-

AKUSADO,
Accused.
x-
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
--
x

DECI
SION
Thisi sacasef orparricidef i
ledbyt hepr osecuti
onsoffi
ce
againstone Aku Sado.The i nformation r
eads thatNaka Ki ta,a
carpenter,a nat i
ve ofBoholwho i s presentl
yr esidi
ng att he
constructionsiteoft heresident i
alhouseofTagBal ay,whichis
sit
uatedj ustatthebackoft hehouseofSarSadol ocatedinBlk.111
Lot222,LawaanSt .,K&KSubdi vi
sion,Tacl
obanCi ty,knowsSar
Sadoast heywouldsomet imest alkwhent helatt
erfeedshi sfi
ghti
ng
cocksl ocatedatt hei
rbacky ar d.NakaKi taisalsof amili
arandcan
recognizeAkuSado,t hesonofSarSado,ashewoul dof t
enseehi m
andhisf ather.
ThatonApr il18,2015atabout5: 30oclocki nt heafternoon,
NakaKi ta,whil
ewor kingatt hepostoft heBalay
sr esi
denti
alhouse
heardanar gumentcomi ngf rom thesaidSado' sresidence.Hewas
notabl et ounder standwhatt hear gumentwasal labout,buthe
recognized the voices ofbot h Sarand Aku.Si nce he and hi s
cowor kerswer e distr
act ed because ofthe v oices.Theyst opped
working and wentdown f rom the post.Few mi nutes l
ater,t he
argumentst oppedandt herewascompl et
esilence.Het houghtt hat
SarandAkuwer eabl et osettl
ewhatt heywerear guingabout .
ThatonApr il19,2015atar ound7:00o' clockint
hemor ning,
Mat i
sTi go,alsoanat iveofBoholandt heforemanoft heon- going
constructionatt hebackoft heSadosresi
dence,sawamal eper son
di
ggingawi deandshal lowhol eofthebackoft heSado'
sresidence.
Heal sosaw t wo( 2)deadchi ckensnearby,whi chhepresumedwi ll
bebur iedi nthehol e.Whent hemal epersonnot i
cedt
hathewas
watching,t hefor merst oppedandf edthepi geons.Thenextdayat
Page1

around7: 30o'clocki nthemor ning,Mati

sTigoobser vedt
hatthehol e
wasf r
eshl ycov ered,buthest il
lsaw thet wodeadchi ckensst i
ll
unbur i
ed.Ataboutnoont i
meoft hatday,heand hi sco-wor kers
smel l
edsomet hingfoulcomi ngf rom t
hecompoundoft heSado s
andt heyinformedt hei
rempl oyerabouti
t.Thef ol
lowingday,Apr i
l21,
theyf oulsmel lgotwor se.Atar ound4:30o'clockint heafternoon,
somepol icemen,bar angaykagawadsandt anodswenti nsi det he
compoundoft heSado sandaccessedi tthrought heconstruction
sit
e.I twast hent hatt hedeadbodyofSarSadowasdi scov ered
buri
edi nt heholet hatwasbei ngdugbyt hemal epersont woday s
earl
ierandwhom hecamet oknowatt hepoli
cest at
ionasAkoSado.
OnApr il21, 2015, PO3XXXandPO1YYYwer eondut yinPol i
ce
Stati
onl .Whi let her eat,t heyr eceived acel l
phonecal lfrom K&K
Poli
ceCommuni t
yPr eci nctr egar dingar epor tofaconcer nedci tizen
ofaf oulsmel lcomi ngf rom Sado' sr esidence.Af t
eri nfor
mi ngt heir
dir
ectsuper visorabouti t,theypr oceededt ot her epor t
edpl ace.Upon
arri
valoutsideofSado' sr esi dence, theyconf irmedt hatthef oulsmel l
wasi ndeedemanat ingf rom sai dpl ace.Theycont actedMar iSado
Kata,thedaught erofSarSado.Af terawhi l
e,Mar i
'
shusband,Bal i
Kataar r
ivedt hereat.Bal iKat ai nfor medt hepol i
ceof fi
cerst hathi s
fart
her-
in-
law SarSadoandhi ssonAkoSadoar el i
vingint hesai d
house,whi l
ehi smot her-in-lawwasi nHongkongf orav acation.Upon
thearri
valofBal iKat a, t
hepol i
ceof fi
cersandt het anodswenti nside
thecompoundoft heSado s.Whent heygoti n,theynot i
cedt hatt here
was no per son i nside.Theywer ei nf
ormed byt he const ruct i
on
workers near byt hatt heynot i
ced a f reshlycov ered hol e att he
backyardoft heSados.Toget herwi thsomebar angayt anods,t hey
dugapor tionoft hehol ef rom whi cht hefoulsmel lwascomi ngf r
om.
Itwast hent hatt heydi scov eredt hedeadbodyofamal eper son
buri
edi nthesai dhol e.Mar iSadoKat a,thev i
ct i
m' sdaught eraswel l
astheconst ruct ionwor ker sident ifi
edt hebodyast hatofSarSado.
Aftergatheri
nginfor
mat i
onfrom theconst
ructi
onwor kerst
hat
theysaw AkuSadodi ggingtheholewher ethedeadbodyoft he
vict
im wasf oundtwoday searli
erandthattheyheardthev i
cti
m and
Akuar guing,thepoli
ceof fi
cer
sconduct edhotpursuitoperat
ionof
Aku Sado.They f ound and arrest
ed him along Ponta St,K&K
Subdiv i
sion,TaclobanCityofaround5:00o'cl
ockintheaf t
ernoonof
April21, 20l5.
MedicoLegalRepor
tNo.A15-61-2015showsinjuri
esinthe
headandneckareaofthevi
cti
m andt hecauseofdeathisdueto
bl
untf
orcetr
aumaoftheheadandi
ncisedwoundoftheneck
TheBir
thCert
if
icat
eofrespondentAkuSadoshowst
hathei
s
t
hesonofthevi
cti
m SarSado.
Page2

Dur
ingar
rai
gnmentt
heaccusedpl
eadednotgui
l
tyt
othecr
ime
ofpar ricidef i
ledagai nsthim byt heprosecuti
onanddeni edallthe
accusat ionsagai nsthi m.Thev ersi
onoft hedefenseasstatedinthe
count er-aff
idav i
toftheaccusedt hatt
heaccusedandhi sfatherwere
arguingont heaf t
ernoonofApr i
l18,2015aboutwhowoul dbuyt he
feedsf ort heirfi
ghtingcocks.Ont heeveningonthatsameday ,aft
er
theywer eabl etocomeupwi t
hanagr eement ,
theaccusedlefttobuy
thef eedsi nSamar ,st ay
edther eatforacoupl eofdaysandonl y
returnedonApr i
l21, 2015inwhi chhewasappr ehendedbyt hepoli
ce
officers.
Inourjuri
sprudence, alt
hought hedef enseofdeni al,l
ikeal ibi
,is
aninherentl
yweakdef ense,t hepr osecutionisnotr eleasedf rom its
burdenofest abli
shingt hegui ltoft heaccusedbey ondr easonabl e
doubt.Mor ei mportantl
y ,bef ore a cour tcan appl yt he r ulet hat
positi
veidenti
fi
cati
onpr evailsov erdenialoral ibi
,iti
snecessar yfi
rst
toestabli
shbey ondquest i
ont hecredibil
ityoft heey ewitnessast o
theident
ifi
cati
onoft heaccused.Thus, t
hedef enseofdeni alandal i
bi
becomesi rrel
evantwhent hepr osecuti
onf ai
l
st oest abli
sht hegui l
t
oft he accused bey ond r easonabl e doubt .I n PEOPLE OF THE
1
PHILIPPINESv s.MELI TOSI NCO,etal .
,t heSUPREMECOURThel d
that:
"Whi l
et hedef ensesofdeni alandal ibiareconcededl y
weak,appel l
ant
sconv ictioncannotbebasedt hereon.It
i
sawel l-
sett
leddoct ri
net hatiti si ncumbentupont he
prosecut i
ontouphol dt hePeopl escausebasedont he
strengthofitsownev i
denceont hegui l
toft heaccused.
Thebur denofpr oofi sont heprosecut i
ont oshowt othe
cour ttot hepoi ntofmor alcertaintyt hatt heaccused
i
ndeedcommi tt
edt heof fensechar ged.I nt hecaseat
hand,t heprosecut ion,ar medwi thev idencesecur edby
policeinvest
igators, fai
ledt odischar gei tsappoi ntedt ask
ofpr ovingthegui ltoft heaccusedbey ondr easonabl e
doubt . Hence, by const it
uti
onal mandat e, appel l
ant
deser v
esexoner ation."
Thus,thepr osecuti
onintheinstantcase,cannotmer el
yrelyon
theconj ect
uret hataccusedal l
egedl
y,intheheatofanger ,harborsa
grudgeagai nstthev i
cti
m,orthatheiscapableofunrulybehaviorand
therebykill
i
ngt hev icti
m whoishisownf atheroverapett
yar gument.
Asi
def r
om thewitnessint hepersonsofNakaKi t
aandMat i
s
Tigo,nootherwit
nesseswerepr esentedbythepr osecut
iont
oprove
thei
rclai
m abouttheinci
dentthatallegedl
ytranspir
ed.Whatismore
i
ncredibl
eisthatabove-menti
onedwi t
nessesonlyheardloudvoi
ces
Page3

1
G.
R.No.131836,
Mar
ch30,
2001;
andcoul dnotunder
standwhattheaccusedandt hev i
cti
m were
tal
king.Asi
defrom t
hem,theonl
yotherwi t
nesspresent
edbyt he
prosecut
ionwer
ethepoli
ceof
fi
cer
sandthemedi col
egaloff
icer
.
Attheoutset,itmustbest atedt hatunl essthepr osecuti
on
provesthegui
ltoftheaccusedi nacr i
mi nalsuitbeyondr easonable
doubt,t
heconstit
utionalpr esumptionofi nnocenceappl i
esandt he
accusedmustbeacqui tt
ed.Ev ent houghanaccusedi nvokesthe
i
nherent
ly weak def ense of deni al, such def ense acqui res
commensuratestrengthwher enoposi ti
v eandpr operidenti
fi
cati
on
hasbeenmadebyt hepr osecuti
onwi tnesses, astheprosecut i
onst i
l
l
hast onuspr
he obandii
nest abli
shi
ngt hegui ltoftheaccused.
Duri
ngthecour seoft het rial,
thepr osecuti
onpresentedasone
ofitswitnesses,Mat isTigo.Heav err
edt hatonApr il19,2015at
about7:00ocl ockint hemor ning,hesaw amal epersondi gginga
wideandshal lowhol eatt hebackoft heSado sresi
denceandwhen
thatmaleper sonnot i
cedt hathewaswat chingtheformerst opped
and fed the pi geons.When t he witness was or dered by t he
prosecut
iontopoi nti fthatmal eper sonwast heaccusedt hefor mer
wasnotabl etot ellthecour tdirectlythattheonehesawdi ggi
ngt he
wideandshal low hol ewasi ndeedt heaccused.Acl oserinspection
ofthestatementoft hesai dwi t
nesswoul drevealt
hatneitherdidhe
seetheaccusedact uall
ydiggi ngt hehole.
The pr osecution also present ed Naka Ki ta as one ofi ts
witnesses.Heav erredt hatonApr il18, 2015atar ound5: 30oclockin
the af t
ernoon he hear d and ar gumentcomi ng f rom t he Sados
residenceandwasabl et orecogni zethev oi
cesoft heaccusedand
thev i
cti
m.Howev er,acl oseri nspect ionofhi sst atement swoul d
revealt hathewasnoti nthepr esenceoft heaccusedwhent he
all
egedi ncidenttranspi r
ed.Infact, heonl yclaimst oknowt hevoices
oft heaccusedandt hev i
cti
m.Foral lweknow,i tcoul dhav ebeen
anot herpersonot hert hantheaccused,whosev oicemayormaynot
have sounded t he same,who was ut ter
ing t hose st atement s.
2
I Peopl
n ev.Faust i
no, t
heCour tst atedt hatt hei dent i
fi
cati
onofan
accusedbyaney ewi t
nessi sav it
alpi eceofev i
denceandmost
decisiveoft hesuccessorf ai
lureoft hecasef orthepr osecuti
on.
I
tbearstost r
essherethatforevi
dencet obebel i
eved,itmust
notonl yproceedf r
om t
hemout hofacr edi
blewitnessbutmustbe
credibl
einitselfsuchasthecommonex peri
enceandobser vati
onof
manki ndcanappr oveofaspr obableundertheci r
cumst ances.The
ti
me- honor
edt esti ndetermi
ningthev alueoft het est
imonyofa
witnessisi t
scompat i
bil
i
t ywit
hhumanknowl edge,observationand
Page4

2
394Phi
l
.236,
259(
2000)
;
commonexper i
enceofman.Thus,what everisrepugnantt
ot he
standar
ds of human knowledge, observat
ion and exper
ience
becomesincr
edi
bleandmustl
i
eout si
dejudici
alcogni
zance.
Consist
ent
ly,theSupr
emeCour thasrul
edt hatev
idencetobe
beli
evedmustpr oceednotonlyf
rom themout
hofacr edibl
ewitness
butmustbecr edibl
einit
selfastohurdlet
hetestofconfor
mitywith
theknowledgeandcommonexper i
enceofmankind.
Itis oft-
repeated thata f inding ofgui l
tmustr eston t he
evi
denceoft hepr osecutionnotont heweaknessorev enabsenceof
evi
dencef orthedef ense.Thus, i
tisr equi
redthatever
ycircumstance
favor
ing the innocence oft he accused mustbe dul yt aken i
nto
account.Thepr oofagai nsthim mustsur vi
vethetestofreasonand
thestrongestsuspi ci
onmustnotbeper mitt
edtoswayj udgment .
I
n
thecaseatbench,t heev i
dencef ort heprosecuti
onwasunabl eto
passtheexact i
ngt estofmor alcertaintyt
hatthelawdemands.
In PEOPLE OF THE PHI LI
PPI
NES v
s. ERNESTO
3
FERNANDEZ,
thi
sCour
thasapt
lysai
d:
Iti
sbet tertoliberat
eaguilt
ymant hant ounjust l
ykeepin
pri
son one whose gui lthas notbeen pr oved by the
requir
edquant um ofevi
dence.Hence,despitet heCourt'
s
supportofar dentcrusaderswagingal l
-outwaragai nst
fel
onsont hel oose,whent hePeople'
sev idencef ai
lsto
proveindubitablytheaccused'
sauthorshipofthecr i
meof
whicht heystandaccused,itistheCour t
'sduty- -andthe
accused' sri
ght- -toprocl
aimtheirinnocence.Acqui tt
al,
4
theref
or e,i
sinor der
.
I
nl i
ne wi
tht
he r
uli
ng ofthe SUPREME COURT i
nCI
RSE
FRANCI
SCOCHOYTORRALBAvs.PEOPLEOFTHEPHI LI NES5,
PPI t
o
wit
:
Timeandagai n,thisCourthasf ait
hful
lyobservedand
given ef fect to the constit
utional presumpti
on of
i
nnocencewhi chcanonl ybeov er
comebycont r
arypr
oof
bey ond reasonabledoubt onewhi ch requir
esmor al
certaint
y,a cer t
aint
yt hatconv i
nces and sati
sfi
es t
he
reasonandconsci enceofthosewhoar et oactuponit.
Aswehav esostatedinthepast
Accusati
oni
snot
,accor
dingtot
hefundament
all
aw,
synonymous wi
th gui
lt
,t he pr
osecut
ion must
Page5

3
G.R.No.139341-45,
July25,2002;
4
People
v.
Geron,
281SCRA39, Oct
ober17,
1997,
perRomer
o,
J;
5
G.R.No.153699,August22,
2005,467SCRA552;
 overthrowt hepr esumpt i
onofinnocencewi thproof
ofgui l
tbey ond r easonabl
e doubt .To meett his
standar d,t
her eisneedf ort
hemostcar efulscrutiny
of the t est imony of t he State,bot h or aland
document ary ,independent l
yofwhat everdef ensei s
offeredbyt heaccused. Onl
yifthej udgebel owand
theappel lat et ribunalcouldar r
iveataconcl usion
thatthecr imehadbeencommi t
tedpr eci
selybyt he
personont rialundersuchanexact ingt estshoul d
the sent ence be one ofconv i
ction.I ti st hus
required t hat ev ery circumst ance f avor
ing
i
nnocencebedul ytakenintoaccount .Thepr oof
againsthi m mustsur v
ivethet estofr eason;t he
strongestsuspi cionmustnotbeper mi tt
edt osway
6
j
udgment .
Whenacr imei scommi tted,itisthedutyoftheprosecut i
ont o
provet hei
dent i
tyoft heperpetratoroft hecri
mebey ondr easonable
doubtf ortherecanbenoconv i
ctionev enifthecommi ssionoft he
7
crimei sest abl
ished. Indeed,t heSt ate,asidefrom showi ng the
ex i
stenceofacr i
me,hast hebur den ofcor r
ectl
yidentify
ing the
8
authorofsuchcr ime. Bot
hfactsmustbepr ovedbytheStatebeyond
reasonabledoubtont hestrengthofi tsevidenceandwithoutsol ace
9
from theweaknessoft hedefense.
The presumpt ion ofi nnocence,isf ounded upon t he f ir
st
princi
plesofjust i
ce,andi snotamer eform butasubst antialpar tof
the law.I tis notov ercome bymer e suspi cion orconj ecture;a
probabili
tythatt hedef endantcommi tt
edt hecr ime;norbyt hef act
thathehadt heoppor tunit
yt odoso.I tspur posei stobal ancet he
scalesi nwhatwoul dot herwisebeanunev encont estbet weent he
l
onei ndivi
dualpi t
tedagai nstthePeopleandal lt heresourcesatt heir
command.I tsi nexorablemandat ei
st hat,foral ltheaut horit
yand
i
nf l
uenceoft hepr osecut i
on,theaccusedmustbeacqui tt
edandset
freeifhisguiltcannotbepr ovedbeyondt hewhi sperofadoubt .This
i
si nconsonancewi t
ht her ulethatconf l
ictsi nev i
dencemustbe
resolvedupont hetheor yofinnocencer athert hanuponat heoryof
10
guiltwhenitispossi bletodoso.
Wher
et heincul
pator
yfact
sandcir
cumstancesarecapabl
eof
t
wo ormor e expl
anati
ons,one ofwhi
ch i
s consist
entwiththe

6
Id.at567, ci
ting
DelaCruzv.PeopleofthePhil
i
ppi
nes,
supr
anote14,at215;

Peopl
ev.Dr
amay
o,
149Phi l
.107, 114-115(1971)
;
7
Peoplev .Sinco,G.R.No.131836,March30,2001,
355SCRA713,721;
Page6

8
Peoplev .Limpangog, 444Phil
.691,709(2003)
;
9
Id.at709;
10
Peoplev .Godoy, supr
anote70,at726-728;
i
nnocenceoftheaccusedandtheot herconsi
stentwit
hhisgui
lt
,the
evi
dence does notful
fi
llt
he testofmor alcertai
ntyand i
s not
11
suf
fici
entt
osupportaconvi
cti
on.
Beforeanaccusedi sconv i
cted,thereshoul dbemor alcertai
nty
acer taintythatconvincesandsat isf
iest hereasonandconsci ence
ofthosewhoar et oactuponi t
.Absol uteguar ant eeofgui ltisnot
demandedbyt hel aw toconvictaper sonofacr iminalchar gebut
ther
emust ,atleast,bemor alcertai
ntyoneachel ementessent ialto
consti
tutetheof fenseandont her esponsibil
it
yoft heof fender.Proof
beyondr easonabl edoubti smeantt obet hat,allt hingsgiven,t he
12
mindoft hej udgecanr estateaseconcer ningitsv erdict.
Itist hust hepr i
mordialdut
yofthepr osecut
iontopresentit
s
casewi thcl ar
ityandper suasi
on,tot
heendt hatconvi
cti
onbecomes
theonlyl ogicalandi nevit
ableconcl
usi
on.Iftheprosecut
ionfail
sto
dischargei tsbur den,thecour tmustsust ai
nt hepresumptionof
i
nnocenceoft heaccused,whoseexoner at
ionmustt henbegr ant
ed
13
asamat terofr i
ght.
Itisbet t
ert
oli
berat
eagui l
tymanthantounjustl
ykeepin
pri
sononewhoseguil
thasnotbeenpr
ovenbyt
herequir
edquant
um
14
ofevi
dence.
Inourcr iminalsyst
em,t heov err
idingconsi der at
ioniswhet herthe
courtreasonablydoubt s,nott hei nnocence,butt hegui l
toft he
15
accused. Unl essthei dentityoft hecul pri
ti sest ablishedbey ond
reasonabledoubtt otheexcl usionofal lother s,thechar gemustbe
dismissed on the ground t hatt he const i
tutionalpresumpt i
on of
16
i
nnocencehasnotbeenov ercome. Whi lepr oofbey ondr easonable
doubtdoesnotmeanabsol utecer taint
y ,itconnot est hatdegr eeof
proofwhi ch,aft
erani nvesti
gat i
onoft hewhol erecord,pr oducesin
an unpr ej
udiced mind t he mor alcer tai
ntyt hatt he accused i s
17
culpabl
e.
InJUAN A.RUEDA,JR.
,v s.HONORABLESANDI
GANBAYAN &
18
PEOPLEOFTHEPHI LI
PPI
NES, t heSupr
emeCour
thel
dthat
:

The evi
dence against pet
it
ioner i
s not enough t o
engendermoralcer
taint
yofhisguil
t.Thismoralcert
aint
y
i
st hatwhichconvi
ncesandsat isf
iestheconscienceof
11
Peoplev .DelaCr uz, 408Phil.838, 848(2001);
12
Peoplev .Lumibao, 465Phi l
.771, 780( 2004)
;
13
VidePeoplev.Rami r
ez ,
Jr.,
G. R.Nos.150079-80, June10,2004,
431SCRA666,679,
681;
14
VidePeoplev.Per ez,
G.R.No.172875, August15, 2007,
530SCRA376;
15
RuedaJr .v.Sandiganbay an,346SCRA341,Nov ember29,2000;
Peopl
ev.Mal
bog,342SCRA
620, October12, 2000;
Page7

16
Peoplev .Malacura, 346SCRA781, December4, 2000;
17
Peoplev .Mariano, 345SCRA1, Nov ember17,2000;
18
G.R.No.129064, Nov ember29, 000;
 19
t
hosewhoar
etoactuponi
t.

Accor dingly
,t he presumpt ion ofi nnocence which the
Const i
tution guar antees the pet i
ti
oner has r emained
untarnishedi nthiscasef orwantofpr ooftothecont r
ary
.
Iti
ssaf elyent r
enchedi nourj uri
spr udencethatunlessthe
prosecut i
ondi schargesitsbur dent opr ovetheguiltofan
accusedbey ondr easonabledoubt ,thelatterneednot
20
evenof ferevidencei nhisbehal f
.

The pr osecuti
on mustov erthrow t he presumpt i
on of
i
nnocence wi t
h proofofgui ltoft he accused bey ond
reasonabledoubt.Theproofagai nsthim mustsur vi
vethe
testofr eason;the str
ongestsuspi ci
on mustnotbe
21
permi t
tedtoswayj udgment.Eveni fthedefenseisweak,
thecaseagai nsttheaccusedmustf ailift
hepr osecuti
on
i
sev enweaker ,f
ort heconvicti
onoft heaccusedmust
restnoton t heweaknessoft hedef ensebuton t he
22
strengthoftheprosecuti
on.

Inordertoconv
ictanaccused,theci
rcumst
ancesofthe
casemustexcl udeal
landeachandev er
yhypothesi
s
23
consist
entwi
thhisi
nnocence.

I
nconcl usion,wef i
ndt hatthegui l
toft hepeti
ti
onerhas
notbeenpr ovedbey ondr easonabledoubt.Thepet i
tioner
mustbeacqui tted."Everyaccusedi spresumedi nnocent
unti
lthecont raryispr oved;thatpresumptionissolemnl y
guaranteedbyt heBi llofRi ghts.Thecont rar
yr equi r
es
proofbey ondr easonabledoubt ,ort hatdegreeofpr oof,
whichpr oducesconv icti
oni nanunpr ej
udicedmind.Shor t
ofthis,
itisnotonl yther i
ghtoft heaccusedt obef r
eed; i
t
24
i
sev ent heconst i
tut
ional dut
yoft hecourttoacquithim.

WHEREFORE, FOREGOI
NG PREMI SES CONSI
DERED, t
he
prosecut
ionwasnotabletoest
abl
i
shtheGUILToftheACCUSED
BEYOND REASONABLEDOUBTandt her
eforet
hecaseagai
nstt
he
accusedisdi
smi
ssed.

(
SGD)
JUDGEJAKI
ERMULDEZ

19
People
v.Salguero,
198SRA357,367[ 1991];People
v.Aranda,226SCRA562,572[1993]
;
20
People
v.Suli
t,233SCRA117,125[1994];
21
People
v.Austri
a,195SCRA700,709[ 1991];
22
Peopl
ev
.Cruz,215SCRA339,347[ 1992] ;Peopl
ev .Cruz,231SCRA759,771-772[1994]
;See
Page8

alsoPeoplev
.Aniscal,
228SCRA101, 113[1993];
23
People
v.delRosari
o,234SCRA246, 253[1994]
24
People
v.Valeri
ano,226SCRA694,714[ 1993],ci
ti
ngPeopl e
v.Pi
do,200SCRA45,[1991]
;