PEOPLE v.

LAQUINON (1985) Doctrine: A dying declaration not admissible as an ante-mortem declaration sif the deceased was in doubt as to whether he would die or not. The declaration would fail to show that the deceased believed himself in extremist, "at the point of death when every hope of recovery is extinct, which is the sole basis for admitting this kind of declarations as an exception to the hearsay rule." It may be admitted, however, as part of the res gestae (Secondhand statements considered trustworthy for the purpose of admission as evidence in a lawsuit when repeated by a witness because they were made spontaneously and concurrently with an event). Facts: - Gregorio Laquinon was charged with the crime of murder for killing Pablo Remonde with a gun in Davao del Sur. TC found him guilty and imposed upon him the penalty of reclusion perpetua. He appealed. The Peoples version: o At about 11:30 o'clock in the evening, Samama Buat, barrio captain of Clib, Hagonoy was at his residence. He heard gunshots coming from the bank of a river some three hundred meters to the south of his house. His brother, Leocario Buat, arrived and told him that a man was shouting for help from the riverbank. Samama Buat found a man with his hands tied lying on the sand. The man identified himself as Pablo Remonde. Samama Buat took the ante-mortem statement of Pablo Remonde. Remonde said Gregorio Laquinon shot him. Buat reported the shooting to Vice Mayor Antonio Biran. Vice Mayor Biran went to the scene of the incident and asked the victim who shot him to which the latter answered again that he was shot by Gregorio Laquinon. Remonde later died in the hospital.

Laquinons defense: o He was a KM member (The case doesnt say what KM means) and was ordered by one Noli Cabardo to fetch Pablo Remonde. Cabardo asked Remonde why, having been commanded to buy some provisions in Matanao, he never returned. Remonde answered that he spent the money 'in drinking and gambling. Cabardo got mad and as Remonde attempted to escape, Laquinon heard a shot which must have been fired by Cabardo as he was holding a .38 cal. revolver. The lower court erred in finding him guilty of the crime charged on the basis of the statement attributed to the deceased Pablo Remonde, as the foregoing statement is inadmissible in evidence as an ante-mortem declaration because it was not executed under a consciousness of an impending death.

Issue/s: WON Remondes dying declaration is admissible as an ante-mortem declaratiom Held: No, it is not. Still, accused is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder qualified by treachery. The dying declaration of Pablo Remonde is not admissible as an ante-mortem declaration since the deceased was in doubt as to whether he would die or not. The declaration fails to show that the deceased believed himself in extremist, "at the point of death when every hope of recovery is extinct, which is the sole basis for admitting this kind of declarations as an exception to the hearsay rule."

o It may be admitted, however, as part of the res gestae (Secondhand statements

considered trustworthy for the purpose of admission as evidence in a lawsuit when

repeated by a witness because they were made spontaneously and concurrently with an event) since the statement was made immediately after the incident and the deceased Pablo Remonde had no sufficient time to concoct a charge against the accused. The Court cannot believe that Cabardo did the killing. When the deceased was allegedly delivered to Cabardo, he was already hand-tied at his back and Cabardo was with ten men excluding the accused. Under these circumstances, it is hard to believe that the deceased would attempt to flee. Also, if the deceased truly tried to flee, the logical thing to do would be to flee away from and not towards Cabardo. In doing the former he would turn to his right or to his left or towards his back. The evidence however, shows that the deceased had only one would which was in the abdomen. This shows he was fired upon frontally, contradicting the accuseds testimony. Most important to remember on this point is that at the time the deceased gave his "dying" statement, Cabardo was still alive and had no previous differences with the deceased or with the barrio captain. It is hard to believe that the deceased would name the accused with whom he had no quarrel if that was really not the truth.

Digest by: P.M.R. Gairanod (A2015)