View full case

PEOPLE v. FERDINAND T. BALUNTONG

FACTS:

The case involves the appeal of Ferdinand T. Baluntong (appellant) from the decision of the Court of Appeals affirming his conviction for Double Murder with Frustrated Murder by the Regional Trial Court of Roxas, Oriental Mindoro. The appellant was accused of setting fire to the house of Celerina Solangon, which resulted in the death of Celerina and Alvin Savarez, as well as serious injuries to Josua Savarez. Witnesses testified that they saw the appellant near the burning house and fleeing the scene when he saw them. Celerina and Alvin suffered fatal burns, while Joshua endured second-degree burns. The appellant argued that he was in Caloocan City during the incident, invoking alibi. Initially, the trial court sentenced the appellant to death, which was later reduced to reclusion perpetua by the appellate court. The court also awarded damages to the victims' heirs. The appellant questioned the credibility of the witnesses' identification of him as the perpetrator, but the court found that both the trial court and the appellate court did not err in convicting him.

ISSUES:

  1. Whether the prosecution was able to prove the guilt of the appellant beyond reasonable doubt.

  2. Whether the penalty imposed on the appellant is proper.

  3. Whether the award of damages to the heirs of the victims is proper.

RULING:

  1. The court finds that the trial court and the appellate court did not err in finding the appellant guilty. The positive identification of the appellant by the prosecution witnesses, Felicitas and Jovelyn, was deemed credible. The appellant's defense of alibi was not enough to overcome the positive identification.

  2. The penalty imposed on the appellant was modified by the appellate court in accordance with Republic Act No. 9346, reducing it to reclusion perpetua. This is proper considering the circumstances of the case.

  3. The award of damages to the heirs of the victims and to Joshua for hospitalization and recuperation was deemed proper by the appellate court.

PRINCIPLES:

  • Proof beyond reasonable doubt is required for a conviction. Positive identification of the accused may suffice to establish guilt.

  • The penalty imposed should be in accordance with the law and the circumstances of the case.

  • Damages may be awarded to the heirs of the victims and to the victim for hospitalization and recuperation, depending on the circumstances of the case.