ROSE AOAS V. PEOPLE (EVIDENCE)

Considering that there is no direct evidence pointing to Aoas as the perpetrator of the crime, the trial court relied solely on circumstantial evidence.

CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE is that evidence which proves a fact or series of facts from which the facts in issue may be established by inference. It is founded on experience, observed facts, and coincidences establishing a connection between the known and proven facts and the facts sought to be proved.

In order that conviction be had, the following must concur:

1. There is more than one circumstance;
2. The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
3. The combination of the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond reasonable doubt.

To uphold a conviction based on circumstantial evidence, it is essential that the circumstantial evidence presented must constitute an unbroken chain which leads one to a fair and reasonable conclusion pointing to the accused, to the exclusion of the others, as the guilty person.

The test to determine whether or not the circumstantial evidence on record is sufficient to convict the accused is that the series of circumstances duly proven must be consistent with one other and that each and every circumstance must be consistent with the accused's guilt and inconsistent with his innocence. The circumstances must be proved, and not themselves presumed. The circumstantial evidence must exclude the possibility that some other person has committed the offense.

Prosecution has failed to show that the circumstances invoked completely discount the possibility that persons other than Aoas could have perpetrated the crime. Thus, where the proven facts and circumstances are capable of two or more explanations, one of which is consistent with innocence and the other with guilt, the evidence does not fulfill the test of moral certainty ans is not sufficient to convict the accused.

We find that the conviction of Aoas does not pass the test of moral certainty. when inadequate and uncorroborated, circumstantial evidence cannot sustain a conviction.