February 28, 1985
FACTS:
Samama Buat heard gunshots coming from the bank of a river south of his house. He and his brother proceeded to that place where they found a man lying on the sand, his two hands tied on his back.
Samama Buat asked the man who he was, and the man said, “I am Pablo Remonde.” Samama Buat then asked “who shot you?” and Pablo Remonde said that it was Gregorio Laquinon.
Samama Buat then took the ante-mortem statement of Pablo Remonde.
Pablo Remonde was brought to the hospital, but unfortunately he died.
Gregorio Laquinon was charged with and convicted for murder by the Court of First Instance.
Gregorio Laquinon appealed arguing that, first, the CFI erred in finding him guilty of the crime charged on the basis of the statement attributed to the deceased Pablo Remonde; second, that the foregoing statement is inadmissible in evidence as an ante-mortem declaration because it was not executed under a consciousness of an impending death; and third, the deceased was not a competent witness.
Hence, the instant petition.
ISSUE:
Whether the dying declaration of the deceased was admissible as ante-mortem declaration. – NO.
HELD:
The declaration fails to show that the deceased believed himself in extremis, or 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.
Despite this, the Supreme Court still affirmed the conviction. It ruled that although the dying declaration was inadmissible as ante-mortem declaration, it may still be admitted as part of the res gestae.
The Supreme Court also said that on the whole, it was satisfied with the findings of the trial court that the accused was responsible for the killing of Pablo Remonde.