THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINE ISLANDS, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. ANDRES R. SERRANO, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Court of First Instance of
Ilocos Sur, finding the appellant guilty of the crime of homicide and
sentencing him to suffer fourteen years, eight months and one day of reclusion temporal, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased in the sum of P1,000, and to pay the costs.

In seeking a reversal of said judgment, counsel for the appellant has
assigned four errors, all of which relate to the sufficiency of the
evidence presented by the prosecution to sustain the judgment of
conviction.

In convicting the appellant, the lower court relied mainly on the ante-mortem
statements of the deceased Eduardo Savellano and on the testimony of
Cirilo Serrano. Appellant contends that Exhibit A was not admissible as
an ante-mortem statement, for the reason that Eduardo
Savellano did not expressly state therein that he expected to die. The
circumstances under which the statement was made, however, justified
the lower court in taking it into consideration as a dying declaration.
In People vs. Ancasan (53 Phil., 779, 781), this court said:
“Under the second assignment of error, counsel argues that the
statements made by the deceased to his wife very shortly before his
death could not be regarded as a dying declaration inasmuch as the
deceased did not directly state that he at that time believed that
death was impending. A sufficient answer to this contention is that it
is not necessary to the validity or admissibility of a dying
declaration that the declarant expressly state that he has lost all
hope of recovery; it is sufficient that the circumstances are such as
to lead inevitably to the conclusion that at the time the declaration
was made, the declarant did not expect to survive the injury from which
he actually died.”

As to the theory of the defense that the
deceased, Eduardo Savellano, might have been accidentally wounded by
Cirilo Serrano, it is sufficient to say that the facts disclosed by the
record fails to sustain such a theory. On the other hand, the evidence
clearly points to the appellant as the author of the death of Eduardo
Savellano.

The judgment appealed from is, therefore, affirmed with costs against the appellant. So ordered.

Street, Hull, Vickers, and Butte, JJ., concur.