FACTS:

A criminal complaint for murder was filed against the

accused appellants

Accordingly, in the evening, the above-named accused,

armed with stones and a bladed weapon conspiring with one
another, with intent to kill with treachery and evident
premeditation did, then and there wilfully, unlawfully and
feloniously hurl with stones, attack and stab Fernando
Abaoag which caused his instant death, to the damage and
prejudice of his heirs.

Thereafter, accused Sion and Disu were arrested. And since

only the two were caught, the case proceeded against them
alone.

The prosecution's witnesses were: Cesar and Felicitas

Abaoag, the brother and the wife of the victim, respectively;
Dr. Leopoldo Manalo, San Fabian Municipal Health Officer;
Rosendo Imuslan, barangay captain of Barangay Binday; and
SPO1 Ricardo Abrio. On the other hand, the defense
presented as its witnesses appellant Disu; appellant Sion;
Corazon Sion, wife of appellant Sion; and Dr. Leopoldo
Manalo.

The evidence for the prosecution as established by the

testimonies of its witnesses is partly summarized by the
Office of the Solicitor General in the Brief for the Appellee, as
follows:

On or about 7:00 o'clock in the evening of October 16, 1991,

Cesar Abaoag was at the barangay road in front of his house
situated in Binday, San Fabian, Pangasinan. He was with his
elder brother Carlos Abaoag and Ricardo Manuel (p.6, TSN,
August 20, 1992) when all of a sudden, Ronnie Manuel
arrived coming from the west complaining that he was being
chased by Felipe Sion and Johnny Juguilon (p.7, TSN, id.). On
that same occasion, Fernando Abaoag also arrived at the
scene. He said to Ronnie, "why Ronnie, you are making
trouble again." The latter answered, "I am not making
trouble uncle because while I was inside the house of Eling
Alcantara, Felipe Sion and Johnny Juguilon were trying to
stab me. (p.8, TSN, id.). Seconds later, Felipe Sion and
Johnny Juguilon appeared and started throwing stones.
Fernando Abaoag told them to stop throwing stones but
before they desisted and left, one of them uttered "even you
Andong, you are interfering, you will also have your day,
vulva of your mother, you Abaoag[s]" (pp. 9-10, id.)
Apparently, the utterance was directed against Fernando
Abaoag whose nickname is Andong.

Subsequently thereafter, at about 9:00 o'clock on that same

evening, Cesar Abaoag while inside his house lying down on
his bed heard the sound of stone throwing at the nearby
house of his brother Fernando. He went out to see who were
throwing stones (p.14, TSN,  id.). When already near the
house of Lolly Galdones, Cesar Abaoag saw his brother
Fernando already outside his house. He also saw Johnny
Juguilon, one of the members of the group of stone
throwers, hurl a big stone against Fernando. Upon being hit
on the left eyebrow, Fernando turned his back towards Felix
Sion, Edong Sion and Miguel Disu who were also throwing
stones towards his direction. On the other hand, appellant
Felipe Sion, who was near the victim, with a very sharp
double bladed dagger, stabbed Fernando, first on the left
side just below the armpit, then on the left waistline and
finally on the right side of the neck below the jaw (pp. 18-19,
TSN,  id.).

Cesar tried to extend help to his brother but Miguel Disu

hurled a stone on him which landed on his right side below
the armpit. When he heard Felipe Sion shouting to his
companions saying, "we will also kill Cesar," Cesar desisted
in helping his brother (pp. 22-23, TSN, id.). Instead, he ran
to his brother's house and informed Felicitas, the wife, about
the helpless condition of Fernando (pp. 22-23, TSN, id.) Upon
being informed, Felicitas, accompanied by Carlos Abaoag,
went to the place of the incident. The assailants were no
longer there. She only saw her husband lying prostate on the
ground very weak in the state of dying. When she inquired
what happened, Fernando answered "naalaak" which in
English means "I was hit" (pp. 4-5, TSN, July 27, 1992).
Fernando told his wife that his assailants were Felipe Sion,
Miguel Disu, Edong Sion, Johnny Juguilon and Felix Sion (p.6,
TSN, id.)

The victim was rushed to St. Blaise Hospital in San Fabian

but he was pronounced dead on arrival (pp. 24-25, TSN,
August 20, 1992).

Dr. Leopoldo Manalo, a Municipal Health Officer of San

Fabian, Pangasinan conducted post mortem examination
(Exh. A) on the body of the victim. The result of his findings
showed that Fernando Abaoag sustained the following
injuries, to wit:

"1) stab wound 1 inches in width, 9 inches in depth

between 10-11, ICS, mid axillary area slanting
upwards hitting the left lobe of the lung

2) stab wound right lateral side of the neck 1 inches

in width, 1- inch in depth

3) stab wound 1 inches in width, 1 in depth mid

scapular area, left

4) contusion superimposed abrasion left

eyebrow."14 chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

Dr. Manalo further testified that the stab wounds were

caused by a sharp-pointed instrument, possibly a dagger,
with the first wound hitting the lower lobe of the left lung
causing severe bleeding and its eventual collapse. He
determined the cause of death to be hemorrhagic shock
secondary to multiple stab wounds.15 chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

Barangay Captain Imuslan testified that he and Kagawad

Fernando Gatchalian, on the night of the incident, found a
small bolo and a bloodied double-bladed weapon (dagger)
near the scene of the crime.16 Cesar Abaoag recognized this
weapon as the one used by appellant Sion in stabbing the
victim.17 On her part, Felicitas Abaoag declared that she
spent more than P11,000.00 for the wake and burial of her
husband whose death saddened her, she being left alone to
take care of their children.18
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

In his defense, appellant Sion, brother and cousin of accused

Edong19 Sion and Felix Sion alias "Ellet," respectively,
admitted that on the night in question, he participated in a
stone-throwing incident and "free-for-all rumble" between
his group (the Sions and Johnny Juguilon) on one hand, and
the Abaoags and Manuels, on the other. However, he
professed his innocence, claiming that it was his brother
Edong Sion and Johnny Juguilon who stabbed the
victim.20 His version of the incident was summarized by the
trial court, thus:

On October 16, 1991 at about 7:00 p.m., he, together with

Johnny Juguilon went to the house of Eling Alcantara as he
wanted to talk with his son, his friend. Ronnie Manuel was
already there when they arrived. While at the place, Johnny
Juguilon and Ronnie Manuel came out and started fighting
with each other. Ronnie Manuel ran and proceeded to the
place of his cousin. He was pacifying Johnny Juguilon and
Ronnie Manuel but Johnny Juguilon threw stones at Ronnie
Manuel. At this point, Fernando Abaoag intervened in the
quarrel saying, "vulva of your mother Johnny, you are too
much, you will also have your day." Johnny Juguilon
answered "vulva of your mother Andoy, do not interfere
because you are not our enemy." After the verbal exchange,
he took Johnny Juguilon to their (Sion's) house....At about
9:00 p.m., that same evening, they stoned their house, its
sides and the stairs. He and Idong and Johnny Juguilon
looked for Cesar Abaoag, Ronnie Manuel, Ricky Manuel,
Andong Abaoag and two (2) other companions. They were at
the place of Marta Soriano. After that, they still threw stones
towards them. There was a free for all rumble between
Ronnie Manuel, Ricky Manuel, the Abaoags and Idong Sion,
Johnny Juguilon, Ellet Sion and himself, in front of the house
of Loly Galdones. He denied the testimony of Cesar Abaoag
that he stabbed Fernando Abaoag three times and before he
was stabbed Johnny Juguilon stoned him (Fernando
Abaoag). It was Idong Sion and Johnny Juguilon who
stabbed Fernando Abaoag. After Fernando Abaoag was
stabbed, they ran away. His group also ran away. He went
home and rushed towards Johnny Juguilon because he was
stabbed. He brought Juguilon to the St. Blaise Clinic and
Hospital. He did not report the incident to Barangay Captain
Rosendo Imuslan. On October 17, 1:00 p.m., he presented
himself to Kagawad Lagman who brought him to the Police
Station....21
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

In his defense, appellant Disu offered denial and alibi. He

declared that he had no participation in the killing of
Fernando Abaoag, and during the whole night of 16 October
1991, while the quarrel, stoning and stabbing incidents in
question were taking place, he was resting and sleeping in
the house of his employer, Felicidad Gatchalian, after driving
the latter's jeepney the entire day. However, before
proceeding home from work that afternoon, he went to the
store of Oping Juguilon to buy cigarettes and dropped by the
house of appellant Sion where he stayed for about five
minutes. He only learned about the killing the following
morning when he was told that he was one of the suspects.
He was arrested about a month after the incident.22 chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

On rebuttal, Cesar Abaoag refuted the testimony of appellant

Sion. Cesar asserted that neither his brothers, the Manuels
nor himself threw stones at Sion's house; there was no free-
for-all fight between the Sions and the Abaoags; Johnny
Juguilon and Edong Sion merely threw stones at, but did not
stab Fernando Abaoag; and it was only appellant Sion who
stabbed Fernando Abaoag.23 chanresvirtuallawlibrary

After the conclusion trial, the court granted appellants'

motion to file a memorandum within fifteen days. Despite
the extension given, appellants' counsel did not file the
memorandum. Thus, in its order of 11 December 1992, the
trial court declared the case submitted for decision.24
chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

On 8 February 1993, the trial court promulgated its

decision,25 the dispositive portion quoted in the introductory
paragraph of this ponencia.

As to the culpability of appellants Sion and Disu, the trial

court found:

The defense of accused Federico Disu alias Miguel Disu and

Felipe Rodriguez Sion, Jr. deserve scant consideration. Cesar
Abaoag narrated in detail how his brother Fernando Abaoag
was stoned by accused Johnny Juguilon, Federico Disu and
Felix Sion and how accused Felipe Sion stabbed Fernando
Abaoag three times. Cesar Abaoag saw Johnny Juguilon
throw stone hitting the left eyebrow of Fernando Abaoag,
and when his brother (Fernando Abaoag) turned left,
accused Federico Disu alias Miguel Disu, Idong Sion and Felix
Sion simultaneously threw stones toward him (Fernando
Abaoag). Then, at a distance of two (2) meters, Cesar
Abaoag saw accused Felipe Sion stab Fernando Abaoag three
times, hitting the left side below the armpit, then on the left
waistline and the right side of the neck below the jaw of the
deceased with the use of a sharp double bladed dagger.

Cesar Abaoag could not be mistaken in the identification

because he was two meters away when he saw the accused
Felipe Sion stab his brother, and, moreover, there was a light
illuminating the place of the incident coming from the houses
of Marta Soriano and Loly Caldones. Cesar Abaoag identified
the dagger (Exhibit D).

The narrations of Cesar Abaoag are bolstered by the

testimony of Dr. Leopoldo Manalo, the doctor who conducted
the postmortem examination on the cadaver of Fernando
Abaoag. Dr. Manalo stated that stab wound 1 inches in width,
9 inches in depth between 10-11 ICS, mid-axillary area
slanting upwards hitting the left lobe of the lung is located
below the left armpit. The second stab wound, stab wound
right lateral side of the neck 1 inches in width, 1 in depth, is
located at the right side of the nec[k] at the back. The doctor
stated that the wounds were caused possibly by a dagger.

Finally, it is well to quote the statement uttered by Fernando

Abaoag in the presence of Felicitas Abaoag, to wit: naalaak,
which means, I was hit, take note of this because I cannot
survive these injuries of mine. Fernando Abaoag told
Felicitas Abaoag, Felipe Sion, Miguel Disu, Idong Sion,
Johnny Juguilon and Felix Sion stabbed him. (2-12 tsn July
27, 1992). This is a dying declaration because it was made
under a consciousness of impending death (Section 37, Rule
130, Rules of Court).26chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

The trial court found them guilty. On appeal, they pleaded for
their acquittal, contending that the trial court erred in
convicting them of murder. Contending that the Alleged
dying declaration was "not specific" as far as the assailants'
identities were concerned because the victim merely said
"naalaak" ("I was hit"), without identifying appellant Sion as
the one who stabbed him; and, her claim that her husband
identified all the five (5) accused as the ones who "stabbed"
him is "an impossibility."

On the other hand, the Office of the Solicitor General, in its

Brief for the Appellee, supports the trial court's findings and
conclusions, except as to the appreciation of cruelty, which it
concedes to be erroneous.

Our careful review of the record of the evidence adduced by

the parties convinces us that prosecution witness Cesar
Abaoag positively identified appellants as being present
during the incident in question and saw appellant Sion stab
the victim thrice. As correctly found by the trial court:

Cesar Abaoag could not be mistaken in the identification

because he was two meters away when he saw the accused
Felipe Sion stab his brother, and, moreover, there was a light
illuminating the place of the incident coming from the houses
of Marta Soriano and Loly Caldones. Cesar Abaoag identified
the dagger (Exhibit D).

Cesar Abaoag also saw the rest of the accused, including

appellant Disu, throwing stones at the victim. He was
definite, however, that it was only accused Johnny Juguilon
who was able to hit the victim at the left eyebrow. The three
stab wounds inflicted by appellant Sion and the injury at the
left eyebrow caused by the stone thrown by Juguilon jibed
with the post mortem findings of Dr. Manalo as he described
the injury on the left eyebrow as contusion superimposed
abrasion left eyebrow.33 If Cesar had any ulterior motive to
testify against appellant Disu, he could have declared that it
was Disu, and not Juguilon, who hit the victim with a stone.
Cesar then honestly narrated what he observed.

That Cesar did not at once inform Felicitas Abaoag that it

was appellant Sion who stabbed her husband, was not proof,
as appellants suggest, that Cesar was absent from the crime
when it was committed. Cesars presence was admitted by
appellant Sion himself on direct examination, thus:

Q Did you see Cesar Abaoag on that occasion anywhere near

Fernando Abaoag when you said he was stabbed by Johnny
Juguilon and Idong Sion?

A Yes, sir.34 chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary

Furthermore, Cesar satisfactorily explained his failure to

forthwith inform Felicitas of this fact. At that time, Cesar
himself was running away from the accused who had hit him
with a stone. His pressing concern then was to get someone
to help his wounded brother; besides, he was scared of
accused Felix Sion, uncle of appellant Sion, who was a
"notorious character in their neighborhood. 35 It is settled
that delay in divulging the name of the perpetrator of a
crime, if sufficiently explained, does not impair the credibility
of the witness nor destroy its probative value. 36 In any event,
in his sworn statement37 which was submitted on 22 October
1991 before Judge Sergio Garcia, he narrated what he had
witnessed and mentioned appellants Sion and Disu as among
the perpetrators of the crime.

The identifications of appellants and their co-accused were

further bolstered by the declaration made by the victim to
his wife, Felicitas Abaoag. The trial court correctly
characterized this as a dying declaration,38 having been made
under the consciousness of impending death.

The victim was already weak when his wife saw him and he
knew that he would not survive the injuries he sustained; he
even died a few minutes later while on the way to the
hospital.39 When Felicitas saw her husband, he told her what
had happened to him, who caused his injuries and that he
did not expect to live, thus:

Q. What happened next after that when you met your

husband?

A. I immediately asked him what happened to him.

Q. And what was the answer of Fernando Abaoag?

A. He said, naalaak, which means, I was hit.

COURT:

Q. Did you ask him why he said naalaak?

A. He said he was stabbed and he was injured.

Q. What do you mean by word naalaak?

A. I was hit.

COURT:
Proceed.

PROSECUTOR DUMLAO:

Q. Do you know the reason why he was hit?

A. What I understand is that in the course of his pacifying

the trouble between his nephew and the rest, he was
stabbed, sir.

Q. Aside from the statement of your husband Fernando

Abaoag that he was hit, what else did he say, if you know?

A. He said, take note of this because I know I cannot survive

with these injuries of mine.

COURT:

Q. What else did he tell you aside from that?

A. He said, remember that in case I cannot survive with the

injuries that I sustained, the men who stabbed me are Felipe
Sion, Miguel Disu, Idong Sion, Johnny Juguilon and Felix
Sion, sir.40 (underscoring supplied)

Issue: Whether or not the dying declaration is admissible

Held: Yes.

We find these statements given by the victim to his wife to

have met the requisites of a dying declaration under Section
37 of Rule 130 of the Rules of Court, viz: (a) death is
imminent and the declarant was conscious of that fact; (b)
the preliminary facts which bring the declaration within its
scope must be made to appear; (c) the declaration relates to
the facts or circumstances pertaining to the fatal injury or
death; and (d) the declarant would have been competent to
testify had he survived.41 Dying declarations are admissible
in evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule because
of necessity and trustworthiness. Necessity, because the
declarants death renders impossible his taking the witness
stand, and it often happens that there is no other equally
satisfactory proof of the crime; and trustworthiness, for it is
made in extremity, when the party is at the point of death
and every hope of this world is gone; when every motive to
falsehood is silenced, and the mind is induced by the most
powerful consideration to speak the truth.42 We find no
ulterior motive on the part of Felicitas to fabricate the
declarations of her husband.

We likewise find to be without basis appellants claim that all

the prosecution witnesses were biased due to their relation
to the victims family. Plainly, witnesses Imuslan (the
barangay captain) and Dr. Manalo were not related to the
victim, while the relationship of witnesses Cesar Abaoag and
Felicitas Abaoag to the victim, as brother and wife,
respectively, neither disqualified them as witnesses nor
rendered their testimony unworthy of belief. It is not to be
lightly supposed that relatives of the deceased would
callously violate their conscience to avenge the death of a
dear one by blaming it on persons whom they believe to be
innocent thereof.43 A witness' relationship to a victim, far
from rendering his testimony biased, would even render the
same more credible as it would be unnatural for a relative
who is interested in vindicating the crime to accuse
somebody other than the real culprit.44chanroblesvirtuallawlibrary