458 Phil. 195
FIRST DIVISION
[ G.R. No. 152604. September 18, 2003 |
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, APPELLEE, VS. LEONCIO PEDRIGA|I
Y SIMBALLANA @ "BAKLA", APPELLANT.
DECISION
YNARES-SANTIAGO, J.:
In Criminal Case No. 5247-G, appellant Leoncio Pedrigal y Simballana @ "Bakla" was charged
before the Regional Trial Court of Gumaca, Quezon, Branch 61, with murder in an
information|") which reads
That on or about the 18" day of December 1995, at Sitio Badajos, Barangay
Butanyog, Municipality of Mulanay, Province of Quezon, Philippines, and within
the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the abovenamed accused, with intent to kill,
armed with a small bolo (itak-itakan), with treachery, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and stab with the said weapon one Richard
Napeiias, thereby inflicting upon the latter wounds on different parts of his body
which directly caused his death,
That the accused attacked and stabbed said Richard Napefias suddenly and
unexpectedly without giving the latter any opportunity to defend himself or to
escape
Appellant pleaded "not guilty”. Trial on the merits then ensued.
At around 5:30 in the afternoon of December 18, 1995, in Barangay Butanyog, Mulanay,
Quezon, Crisanta Carsola overheard Juana Pedrigal telling her son, appellant Leoncio Pedrigal,
"Bakla, parang awa mo na, tulungan mo si Pepe at nilolooban ni Ricky." Appellant allegedly
told his mother not to worry as he will take care of the matter. Carsola relayed what she heard to
Felino Rosas, a barangay captain. Later in the afternoon, she joined the victim, Ricky Napefias,
and Leonora Rejano in front of their houses where they partook of coffee and engaged in small
talk, Appellant suddenly appeared from out of the dark and repeatedly stabbed Napefias,
Carsola immediately reported the matter to Rosas, and together they rushed to the scene where
they saw appellant holding a small bolo while astride Napefias. They disarmed appellant and
brought Napefias to the hospital, but he expired on the way.
Dr. Heriberto Morales, Municipal Health Officer of Mulanay, Quezon, conducted the autopsy
and concluded that Napefias died of hemorrhagic shock due to multifarious wounds. Theabdominal wound which caused the small intestine to spill out, was the most fatal.(?]
Appellant denied the charge against him, He claimed that he was on his way to Barangay
Butanyog when Napeiias stabbed him with a tres cantos ice-pick, He drew his small bolo and
engaged the victim in a fight. After about thirty minutes, they both fell down in exhaustion,
Brgy. Capt. Rosas arrived and disarmed them. He was brought to a hospital in Catanauan for
medical treatment. He was issued a medical certificate by the hospital but the same was in his
parents’ possession.
The trial court gave credence to the prosecution's evidence and rendered a decision,!*! the
dispositive portion of which reads:
WHEREFORE, based on the foregoing premises, the Court finds the accused guilty
beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder punished and defined under Art.
248 of the Revised Penal Code and therefore sentences him to suffer the penalty of
RECLUSION PERPETUA and to pay the heirs of the victim Ricky Napefias
50,000.00 as indemnity for damages and to pay P20,000.00 as actual damages, plus
costs of the suit.
Hence, this appeal. Appellant insists that he killed Napefias in self-defense.!4] Nonetheless,
even assuming that he is found guilty, he submits that he should only be held liable for homicide
and not murder.|5]
In invoking self-defens
, appellant is deemed to have admitted that he killed the victim, and the
burden of evidence is shifted on him to prove that he did not commit unlawful aggression{°
The question of whether appellant acted in self-defense is essentially a question of fact. In self-
defense, unlawful aggression is a primordial element.!7]
When the accused interposes self-defense, he must prove that: (1) he is not the unlawful
aggressor; (2) there was lack of sufficient provocation on his part; and (3) he employed
reasonable means to prevent or repel the aggression.!*! Appellant failed to prove these elements.
Appellant alleges that he attacked Napeias because the latter was suspected of robbing Pepe
Briones, his brother-in-law. This, however, fails to qualify as unlawful aggression committed
against appellant.
Significantly, the most telling proof that appellant did not act in self-defense was the number of
wounds he inflicted on Napefias. Napefias suffered seven (7) stab wounds, one of which proved
to be fatal. ‘The nature, number and location of the wounds sustained by the victim belie the
assertion of self-defense since the gravity of said wounds is indicative of a determined effort to
kill and not just to defend.!°!
In the alternative, appellant claims that he should have been convicted only of homicide, instead
of murder, because of the absence of the qualifying circumstance of treachery. He argues that it
is not sufficient to show that the attack was sudden to establish treachery. He cites People v:
[10]
Recepcion!'"l where it
held that for treachery to be appreciated, it must also be proved thatthe malefactor must have employed means, method or manner of execution that would ensure
his safety from retaliatory act of the victim; and that such means, method or form of execution
are consciously and deliberately adopted by the malefactor.
In the case at bar, it was shown that appellant suddenly appeared from the dark and surprised the
unsuspecting Napefias, who was not in a position to defend himself as he was not expecting an
attack on him. He was simply sitting down, having a conversation with two other persons and
enjoying a cup of coffee.
From all indications, appellant adopted this manner of executing his attack in a way that would
ensure its success. In this regard, the trial court found:
From the testimony of Dr. Heriberto Morales, that the victim sustained seven (7)
wounds located at the parietal area above the left ear, left elbow, left forearm, right
chest, right lower abdomen, left shoulder, left scapular area, right paravertebral area,
the most fatal of which is the wound on the abdomen which caused the coming out
of the small intestine and caused the instantaneous death of the victim, it can be
reasonably presumed that accused chose his manner and mode of attack to ensure
that there is no risk to himself that may arise from the defense that the victim may
undertake.
Another observation of the Court which confirms the presence of treachery is the
fact that Barangay Captain found difficulty in removing the itak-itakan from the
accused as it was tied with the sleeve of his jacket wrapped around his hand and
which the Court sees also as the reason why Barangay Kagawad Carsula did not
notice the weapon held by the accused when he suddenly appeared before them and
attacked the victim. Without any visible weapon in his hand when he suddenly
appeared, the victim failed to undertake any move to defend himself!!!
The harshness of appellant's acts indicate a calculated pursuit of decision to kill, thus suggesting
treachery.('2] More importantly, appellant did not sustain any wound, thus indicating that the
suddenness of his attack on Napefias ensured his safety from retaliatory attack from the latter.
‘The essence of treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack on the victim which renders the
latter unable and unprepared to defend himself by reason of the suddenness and severity of the
attack.!'5] Even if the attack was frontal, it does not negate the finding of treachery. A frontal
attack can be treacherous if sudden and unexpected and the victim is unarmed.!!4)
Appellant admits that he attacked Napefias because the latter allegedly robbed Briones, his
brother-in-law, Plainly, this provides the motive for appellant to avenge whatever wrongdoing,
imagined or otherwise, was committed by Napefias.
All told, the trial court gave full faith and credence to the prosecution witnesses who testified in
a positive and straightforward manner, when they identified appellant, and who were not found
to have been ill-motivated. Furthermore, the said witnesses were all public officials who
enjoyed the presumption of regularity in the performance of their official duties.(!°] Where there
is nothing to indicate that a witness was actuated by improper motive, his positive andcategorical declarations on the witness stand under solemn oath deserve full faith and credence
16]
Case law dictates that the findings of facts of the trial court, its calibration of the collective
testimonies of the witnesses, its assessment of the probative weight of the evidence of the
parties as well as its conclusions anchored on said findings are accorded by the appellate court
high respect, if not conclusive effect, because of the unique advantage of the trial court of
observing at close range the conduct, demeanor and deportment of the witnesses as they regale
the trial court with their testimonies unless the trial court ignored, misunderstood or
misinterpreted cogent facts and circumstances of substance, which if considered, would alter the
outcome of the case.!!7] We see no reason to overturn the findings of the trial court.
Thus, we find that the trial court was correct in convicting appellant of the crime of Murder, and
imposed on him the penalty of reclusion perpetua. Under Article 248 of the Revised Penal
Code, murder is punished by reclusion perpetua to death. Considering that no aggravating or
mitigating circumstance attended the killing, the lesser of the two indivisible penalties shall be
imposed, pursuant to Article 63(2) of the Revised Penal Code,
The trial court correctly awarded PS0,000.00 as civil indemnity. It however, failed to award
moral damages and exemplary damages. An award of moral damages in the amount of
50,000.00 is in line with current jurisprudence. In cases of violent death, moral damages are
awarded even in the absence of proof because an untimely and violent death invariably brings
about emotional pain and anguish on the part of the victim's family.!'®! Considering the
presence of qualifying aggravating circumstance of treachery, exemplary damages in the sum of
P25,000.00 are likewise awarded. 19)
The trial court, likewise, awarded P20,000.00 only as actual damages. Ordinarily, receipts
should support claims of actual damages, but where the defense does not contest the claim, it
should be granted.!2°) In this case, the defense even stipulated that the heir of the victim
suffered actual damages amounting to P30,000.00.(2!]
WHEREFORE, in view of the foregoing, the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Gumaca,
Quezon, Branch 61 finding appellant Leoncio Pedrigal y Simballana @ "Bakla" guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of murder and sentencing him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, is
AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. In addition to the award of P50,000.00 as civil
indemnity, appellant is likewise ordered to pay the heirs of the victim PS0,000.00 as moral
damages, P25,000.00 as exemplary damages, and 30,000.00 as actual damages. Costs de
oficio
SO ORDERED.
Davide, Jr,(Chairman), C.J., Vitug, Carpio, and Azcuna, JJ., concut.
'l Records, pp. 2-3.(1 TSN, June 17, 1998, pp. 5-6.
31 Penned by Judge Aurora V. Maqueda-Roman of the Regional Trial Court of Gumaca,
Quezon, Branch 61, Rollo, pp. 16, 29.
(41 TSN, September 27, 2000, p. 10.
5] Appellant's Brief, Rollo, p. 44.
6] People v. Rubiso, G.R. No. 128871, 18 March 2003.
7] People v. Muiiez, G.R. No. 150030, 9 May 2003.
'8] people v. Vicente, G.R. No. 137296, 26 June 2003.
°] People v. Aliben, G.R. No. 140404, 27 February 2003.
[10] G.R. No. 141943-45, 13 November 2002.
(1) Decision, Records, pp. 262, 277.
(21 people v. Tumaob, 353 Phil. 331, 337 (1998).
'3] People v. Torio, G.R. No. 122109, 25 June 2003.
14] People v. Vicente, supra.
(SI Decision, Records, pp. 276-277.
16] People v. Villegas, G.R. No. 138782, 27 September 2002.
17] People v. Sibonga, G.R. No. 95901, 16 June 2003.
18] People v. Mallari, G.R. No. 145993, 17 June 2003.
(191 People v. Vicente, supra.
201 People v. Torio, supra.
(21] TSN, June 17, 1998, pp. 9-10; People v. Valledor, G.R. No. 129291, 3 July 2002.Source: Supeme Cour E-Libary [Date rated: November 26,2014
‘This page was dynamically geuetated by te E-Lilary Cottent Manageett System