Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME
COURT
Manila
SECOND DIVISION
G.R. Nos.
L-66917-18 September 24, 1986
THE PEOPLE OF
THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff and appellee,
vs.
ADRIANO
AMONCIO y OLANTIGUE, EMEGDIO AMONCIO y OLANTIGUE and SILVESTRE
AMONCIO y TAGLE, accused, ADRIANO AMONCIO y OLANTIGUE & EMEGDIO
AMONCIO y OLANTIGUE, accused-appellants.
PARAS, J.:
Two separate informations
were filed against the accused-appellants, namely: Criminal Case No.
CCC-XIV-361, charging Adriano Amoncio y Olantigue and Emigdio Amoncio
y Olantigue with the offense of Murder; and Criminal Case No. 3025,
charging Silvestre Amoncio y Tagle and Adriano Amoncio y Olantigue
with the crime of Frustrated Murder,
The aforesaid criminal
cases refer to the same incident.
After a joint trial on
the merits, the trial court rendered a decision, the dispositive
portion of which reads:
WHEREFORE, the Court
finds accused Adriano Amoncio and Emigdio Amoncio GUILTY beyond doubt
of murder for killing Pablito Perocho and accused Adriano Amoncio and
Silvestre Amoncio GUILTY of frustrated murder for stabbing Jose
Aboabo. Consequently, accused Adriano Amoncio is hereby sentenced to
the penalty of reclusion perpetua for murder in Criminal Case
No. CCXIV-361-Bohol and the indeterminate penalty of imprisonment
from EIGHT (8) YEARS and TWENTY (20) DAYS to FOURTEEN (14) YEARS for
frustrated murder in Criminal Case No. 3025. Accused Emigdio Amoncio
is hereby sentenced to the penalty of reclusion perpetua for
murder in said Criminal Case No. CCC-XIV-361-Bohol. Accused Silvestre
Amoncio is hereby sentenced to undergo the indeterminate penalty of
imprisonment from EIGHT (8) YEARS and TWENTY (20) DAYS to FOURTEEN
(14) YEARS. He is entitled to credit for his preventive imprisonment.
Each accused is to serve the accessory penalties inherent in their
sentences.
Accused Adriano Amoncio
and Emigdio Amoncio are ordered solidarity to indemnify the heirs of
Pablito Perocho the sum of P12,000.00. Accused Adriano Amoncio and
Silvestre Amoncio are ordered to solidarily indemnify Jose Aboabo the
sum of P4, 734.00 as actual damages and P2,000.00 as moral damages.
All the accused shall pay the costs.
SO ORDERED.
City of Tagbilaran,
January 20, 1984. (p. 7, Rollo).
The case is now before Us
on appeal.
The facts of the case, as
found by the trial court, are briefly as follows:
About 6:00 in the evening
of November 29, 1981, people started leaving the cockpit, at
Bagumbayan, Pilar, Bohol, bound for their respective homes.
The first group leaving
the cockpit was composed of Godofredo Perocho, Segundino Butron,
Bienvenido Espina and Jose Acgang. About ten (10) meters behind was
the second group composed of Jose Aboabo, Adriano Amoncio and Pablito
Perocho. A little behind was the third group composed of Hilario
Espina, Sesino Escobal and an unidentified person.
The second group of Jose
Aboabo, Adriano Amoncio and Pablito Perocho were singing in trio,
placing their arms over each other's shoulders. When the three
reached near the scene of the incident, Adriano Amoncio shouted
"Bagdoki do Teban!" meaning "Hit me, Teban."
Suddenly, the aforesaid Adriano separated himself from his
companions, pulled out his dagger and stabbed Pablito from the back.
Acting on Adriano's loud remark, Emigdio (brother of Adriano) and
Silvestre (nephew of Adriano and Emigdio emerged from behind the tree
at the side of the road, and rushed at Pablito and Jose. Emigdio
stabbed Pablito at the back below the nape, while Silvestre stabbed
Jose on the left side of the chest. Thereafter, Adriano reached Jose
and stabbed the latter in the left armpit. Jose ran away, but Adriano
chased him.
Meanwhile, Godofredo
Perocho having heard the commotion, turned back and walked towards
the second group. He saw Jose running towards him, pursued by
Adriano. Adriano on seeing Godofredo backed out and ran away.
Thereafter, Godofredo heard Pablito (his brother) shouting for help.
Godofredo came upon
Pablito, already prostrate on the ground and seriously wounded, and
asked Pablito who stabbed him. The latter managed to declare: "Sila
si Adring Amoncio may nagdengab ako", meaning: "They,
Adring Amoncio stabbed me." (Adriano Amoncio was commonly known
by his nickname Adring). Quiliano Butron and HilarioEspina tried to
look for a vehicle but the others decided to carry Pablito. On the
way to the hospital, Pablito died. Meanwhile, Quiliano came upon
Jose, slumped on the ground unconscious. Jose was brought to the
hospital where he was confined for treatment for eighteen days.
According to Dr. David
Indino, he found one stab wound on Jose, located on the
hyponchrondriac region, which punctured and perforated the liver and
the lungs. (pp. 2-7, t.s.n.) Dra. Lourdes Tan, who conducted the
post-mortem examination of the cadaver of Pablito, found two stab
wounds: one located at the right shoulder, and the other at the right
lumbar region posterior, which was fatal. (pp. 3-7, t.s.n.)
The killing of Pablito
was due to his illicit relation with Silvestre's wife before she
committed suicide in June, 1981 (p. 18, Appellee's brief).
On the other hand,
appellant Adriano, giving the defense version, testified as follows:
That in that evening of November 29, 1981, he left for home alone
from the Pilar cockpit; that, on his way home, he came upon Jose
Aboabo, Godofredo and Pablito Perocho, Quiliano Butron and Hilario
Espina arguing at the road crossing; that Jose and Pablito engaged in
a fistic fight; that, he went near to pacify, but he was instead
challenged by Godofredo Perocho; that he went to the Poblacion, to
report-the fighting incident to the police; that later he saw
Godofredo and others carrying the dead body of Pablito to the
municipal building and then to Pablito's house. Thus, Adriano denied
having stabbed Pablito and Jose.
The defense presented the
testimonies of Silvestre and witness Urbano Gador to prove that
Silvestre had been working as laborer in Twin A Bakery, located in
Butuan City, from August, 1981 to February, 1982. Emigdio likewise
presented the defense of alibi by declaring that at the time of the
incident, he was at Barangay Inogluban, 6 kilometers from the crime
scene, where he harvested rice.
After trial, the trial
court convicted all the appellants of the crimes they were
respectively charged with.
The issue, therefore,
rests on credibility. After a careful evaluation of the evidence on
record, We find the prosecution's version deserving of more credence
and belief.
Jose's identification of
appellants as the assailants can hardly be doubted. He was not only
an eyewitness to the stabbing incident; he was also a direct victim
thereof. The evidence shows that Jose had known the appellants for a
long time or since they were young (pp. 2-3 t.s.n.).
Adriano's defense that
his actuations were constitutive of clearness of conscience and
innocence is self-serving and unbelievable. There is no plausible
testimonial or documentary evidence in the record which would in the
least confer some semblance of truth on his negative assertion that
he did not stab Pablito Perocho. Certainly, such negative assertion
cannot prevail over the positive testimony of Jose and the dying
declaration of the deceased Pablito to his brother Godofredo that
said appellant stabbed Jose and Pablito. It cannot be doubted that
Pablito made such declaration under the consciousness of an impending
death because of the seriousness of the second wound inflicted on him
by Adriano and of the fact that he died shortly on the way to the
hospital.
Likewise, the alibi
stories of Emigdio and Silvestre are unworthy of credence. While
Emigdio stated that he ate supper at Jose Coquilla's house at 9:00
that fateful night, this was contradicted by the latter who testified
that supper was served at 7:00 p.m. (pp. 6, 7, 15, 16, t.s.n.).
Moreover, witness Faustino Deganso testified that while he was
walking home after fishing at about 6:00 in the evening of November
29, 1981, he saw the said Emigdio with two companions hiding behind
the tree near the scene of the crime and that he was able to identify
Emigdio by means of a flashlight. (p. 5 Appellee's brief). The
defense of alibi presented by appellant Silvestre, besides being
weak, cannot prevail over the positive Identification by Jose which
confirms his presence at the crime scene and his having stabbed Jose.
Being easily fabricated,
the defense of alibi must be established by evidence clear and free
from doubt and bias (People v. Dimatulac, 122 SCRA 47). It may be
credited only if established by convincing and satisfactory proof
(People v. Porcare, 120 SCRA 546).
Appellants point out to
some alleged statements which are "substantially incompatible,
and materially contradictory" to the declarations of Jose, among
them: (1) The Affidavit of Quiliano Butron (Exhibits "6",
"6-A" and "6-B"), stating that Jose told him that
the person who stabbed him (Jose) is "one Hilario Espina"
(p. 7, Appellant's Brief); (2) witness Faustino Deganso's testimony
that Jose told a group of 20 people that "it was Emigdio Amoncio
who stabbed him" (pp. 8-9, Id.); and (3) witness Amado
Bagtasa's testimony that Jose told him that instead of two, all
herein three appellants stabbed him (pp. 9-10, Id.).
As correctly found by the
trial court, the aforesaid "statements" have no probative
value; first because Quiliano, Butron was not presented in court to
confirm his hearsay declaration contained in his affidavit: second,
Faustino Deganso's declaration was only a part of what he heard Jose
tell to about 20 persons inside the public market (pp. 20-22, t.s.n.,
Jan. 25, 1983); and third, Aniado Bagtasa's declaration that Jose
told him that instead of two, all herein three appellants stabbed
him, was qualified in the later portion of his testimony that Jose
was just suspecting that Emigdio Amoncio was one of those who stabbed
him (p. 8, tsn, August 16, 1983).
It is well-settled that
when the issue is one of credibility of witnesses, the trial court's
findings are given great weight on appeal, and We find no cogent
reasons to disturb the same.
WHEREFORE, the judgment
of conviction is hereby AFFIRMED, except that the indemnity of
P12,000.00 for the heirs of Pablito Perocho is hereby increased to
P30,000.00.
SO ORDERED.
Feria
(Chairman), Fernan, Alampay and Gutierrez, Jr., JJ.,concur.
The
Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation