PEOPLE vs.

LIGON 152 SCRA 419 July 29, 1987

Facts: Accused-appellant, Fernando Gabat was convicted of the crime of Robbery with homicide and was sentenced to reclusion perpetua. Gabat allegedly robbed Jose Rosales Ortiz, a 17 year old working student, who was a cigarette vendor. According to Prudencio Castillo, a taxi driver, who allegedly saw the incident that transpired on the night Ortiz died. According to Castillo, he was at a distance of about 3 meters travelling on the same lane and was behind the Kombi driven by Rogelio Ligon together with Gabat. Castillo, in his testimony, said that Gabat grabbed the box of cigarettes from Rosales. That while waiting for the traffic light to change from red to green, Castillo idly watched the Volkswagon Kombi and saw Gabat signal to Ortiz. While Ortiz was handling the cigarettes to Gabat, the traffic light changed to green and as the Kombi moved forward, Gabat grabbed the box from Ortiz. Ortiz ran beside the Jombi and was able to hold on to the windowsill with his right hand. Howeverm as the Kombi continued to speed towards the C.M. Rector underpass, Gabat forcibly remove the hand of Rosales from the said windowsill and as a result fell face down on the ground. On the other hand, according to Gabat, after Ortiz handed the two sticks cigarettes Gabat in turn paid him a 5 peso bill. In order to change the said bill, Ortiz placed his box between the arm of Gabat and the window frame. When the traffic light changed to green, Ligon moved the vehicle forward. That in spite of Gabats order to stop the vehicle, Ligon said that it could not be done due the the moving vehicular traffic. When Ortiz fell down, Gabat shouted at Ligon but the latter replied that they should go on to Las Pinas and report the incident to the parents of Gabat and that later they would come back to the scene of the incident. At this point, the Kombi was blocked by Castillos taxi and the jeep driven by the policeman. The trial court gave full credence to Castillos testimony and dismissed Gabats testimony on the ground that it is of common knowledge that cigarette vendors do not let go of their cigarette. Gabat was convicted by the trial court; Hence, this appeal. Issue: Whether a person who is not criminally liable is also free from civil liability. Held: According to the Court of Appeals, although Castillo is a disinterested witness, his testimony even if not tainted with bias is not entirely free from doubt because his observation of the event could have been faulty. Castillos taxi was

driving a car lower in height compared to the Kombi. The windshield of the Kombi (1978 model) is occupying approximately 1/3 of the rear end of the vehicle making it visually difficult for Castillo to observe what clearly transpired. Also, Castillos statement given to the police on the evening of the incident did not mention that he saw Gabat forcibly prying off the hand of Rosales from the windowsill though such appeared in the police report. Given the circumstances, the Court is not convinced with moral certainty that the guilt of Gabat was established beyond reasonable doubt. As such he is acquitted. However, such does not necessarily exempt him from civil liability as such only requires a preponderance of evidence and such evidence is sufficient to establish Gabats liability. The Court finds Gabats act and omission with fault and negligence caused damage to Ortiz. That he failed to prevent the driver from moving forward while the purchase was completed; He failed to help Ortiz while the latter clung to the moving vehicle; e did not enforce his order to Ligon to stop; and that he acquiesced in the drivers act of speeding away instead of stopping and picking up Ortiz. His acquittal in the criminal prosecution does not bar the heirs of Ortiz from recovering damages. The judgment of acquittal extinguishes the civil liability only when it includes a declaration that the facts from which the civil liability might arise did not exist. Wherefore, Gabat is sentenced to indemnify the heirs of Ortiz the amount of P15,000 for the latters death, P1,733 for hospital and medical expenses, 4,100 for funeral expenses, and the alleged loss of income amounting to P20,000.