ATIZADO and MONREAL vs.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES

G.R. No. 173822; October 13, 2010; Bersamin, J.

SUMMARY:

In 1994, petitioners were charged with the murder of Rogelio Llona. The RTC convicted them of murder. CA
affirmed the conviction. Before the Supreme Court, petitioners assailed the credibility of the witnesses. The
Court affirmed the conviction of the petitioners but modified the penalty imposed on Monreal because the
RTC and the CA did not duly appreciate his minority at the time of the commission of the crime. The amounts
and kinds of damages were also modified.

DOCTRINE #1 (Remedial Law): The trial judges evaluation of the credibility of a witness and of the witness
testimony is accorded the highest respect because the trial judges unique opportunity to observe directly the
demeanor of the witness enables him to determine whether the witness is telling the truth or not. Such
evaluation, when affirmed by the CA, is binding on the Court unless facts or circumstances of weight have
been overlooked, misapprehended, or misinterpreted that, if considered, would materially affect the
disposition of the case.

DOCTRINE #2 (Criminal Law): Pursuant to Art. 68 (2) of the RPC, when the offender is over 15 and under
18 years of age, the penalty next lower than that prescribed by law is imposed.

DOCTRINE #3 (Criminal Law): Relative to the civil aspect of the case, an aggravating circumstance, whether
ordinary or qualifying, should entitle the offended party to an award of exemplary damages within the
unbrindled meaning of Art. 2230 of the Civil Code.