FACTS:

This case involves the appellant Francisco Santos who was charged with murder for allegedly shooting David Ambre, causing his instant death. Several witnesses including Corazon Dayao, Pedro Dayao, Lolita Ambre, and Dr. Teodomiro Hufana Jr. testified on the circumstances of the crime and the autopsy results.

Corazon Dayao testified that she heard gunshots and saw David Ambre fall. Lolita Ambre, the victim's widow, heard a gunshot and her husband cried out. Pedro Dayao Jr., the Ambre spouses' driver, heard the gunshots and escorted Lolita and Corazon back to the house. Dr. Hufana conducted an autopsy and found gunshot wounds that caused the victim's death.

The defense presented expert witness Dr. David Longid, who stated that death due to bullet wounds in the heart or lungs is not instantaneous and the victim could have a few seconds or a minute before dying. The defense also presented witnesses, including Governor Mariano Pimentel, who testified that appellant was not the real assailant. The trial court considered the victim's dying declaration against appellant's alibi defense and convicted him of murder.

The case also discusses the nature of wounds to the heart and their effects on the victim's ability to perform voluntary acts. Dr. Antonio Solis explains that wounds to the heart can be fatal due to its vascularity. However, small and oblique wounds to the ventricle are less dangerous. Dr. Solis also explains that foreign bodies in the myocardium may not cause immediate distress, and a victim with a heart injury may still be capable of performing volitional acts. He mentions the use of dying declarations in court proceedings and the determination of the victim's capacity to perform volitional acts is left to the medical witness. Dr. Solis states that wounds to major blood vessels do not prevent a person from exercising voluntary acts or even running.

ISSUES:

1. Whether the antemortem statement of the deceased identifying the accused constitutes a dying declaration sufficient to sustain the conviction of appellant.

RULING:

1. Antemortem Statement as Dying Declaration

The Supreme Court upheld the trial court's ruling that the victim's utterance of "Pare Pran" constitutes a dying declaration. The victim's statement was made under the consciousness of his impending death, satisfying the requisites for a dying declaration, i.e., awareness of impending death and concerning the cause and circumstances of the death. The credibility and admissibility of the statement as a dying declaration were further substantiated by concurrent expert testimony and witness accounts.

2. Instantaneous Death

The Court found that the victim did not die instantaneously and thereby had the physical capacity to make a dying declaration. Expert witnesses acknowledged that injuries to the heart and lungs do not invariably result in immediate death, making it plausible for the victim to utter the statement before succumbing to his injuries.

3. Credibility of Witnesses

The delay by the prosecution witnesses in reporting the dying declaration did not undermine their credibility. The Court recognized that fear and initial reluctance to disclose such information are common and do not impact the reliability of their testimonies. Both the victim's wife, Lolita, and Corazon provided consistent and credible testimonies.

4. Alibi Defense

The Supreme Court dismissed the appellant's alibi, given the positive identification by witnesses and the dying declaration. Appellant's proximity to the crime scene and failure to prove the physical impossibility of his presence further invalidated his alibi.

5. Treachery

The Court recognized that the manner of the killing, executed suddenly and without warning under the cover of darkness, constituted treachery, thereby qualifying the crime as murder.

PRINCIPLES:

• Dying Declaration For a statement to qualify as a dying declaration, it must be made under the consciousness of impending death and relate directly to the circumstances causing the declarant’s death.

• Res Gestae Statements made spontaneously as part of the events surrounding a startling occurrence are admissible as part of the res gestae.

• Alibi To successfully defend using alibi, the accused must show it was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene at the time of the commission.

• Treachery A killing done with methods that ensure execution without risk to the offender from any defensive or retaliatory acts the victim might make qualifies as treachery.