G.R. No. 95957 - FEBRUARY 1992 - PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE CASE NUMBERCASE TITLE G.R. No. 95957February 28, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Carlito Alcantara G.R. No. 83027February 28, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Noriel C. Fule G.R. No. 71664February 28, 1992 Baguio Country Club Corp. vs. Nat'l. Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. 100990February 27, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Ruperto Pascua G.R. No. 101022February 27, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Eduardo Andasa G.R. No. 95425February 26, 1992 Florencio P. Salles vs. Niceforo B. Francisco, et al. G.R. No. 92143February 26, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Ponciano Agcaoili G.R. No. 85923February 26, 1992 Cynthia S. Santiago, et al. vs. Teofilo Guadiz, Jr. et al. G.R. No. 88226February 26, 1992 Adjap Allama, et al. vs. Republic of the Phils. G.R. No. L-62082February 26, 1992 Philippines National Bank vs. Teodoro N. Florendo, et al. G.R. No. L-58507-08February 26, 1992 Ramon Gil Abad, et al. vs. Court of First Instance of Pangasinan G.R. No. L-49823February 26, 1992 Heirs of Eugenio Sevilla, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 96283February 25, 1992 Chung Fu Industries (Philippines) Inc., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 94193-99February 25, 1992 National Power Corp. vs. Enrique T. Jocson, et al. G.R. No. 89425February 25, 1992 Republic of the Phil. vs. Sandiganbayan, et. al. G.R. No. 86200February 25, 1992 Apex Mining Co., Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. A.C. No. P-88-198February 25, 1992 Pedro J. Callejo, Jr. vs. Jose D. Garcia G.R. No. 85502February 24, 1992 Sunville Timber Products, Inc. vs. J. Alfonso G. Abad, et al. A.C. No. 3695February 24, 1992 Domingo C. Gamalinda vs. Fernando Alcantara, et al. B.M. No. 44February 24, 1992 Eufrosina Y. Tan vs. Nicolas El. Sabandal G.R. No. 96161February 21, 1992 Philips Export B.V., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 96004February 21, 1992 Jose O. Teodoro, et al. vs. Guillermo Carague, et al. G.R. No. 94643February 21, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Jovito C. Callao, et al. G.R. No. 94008February 21, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Edgar B. Fernandez G.R. No. 69162February 21, 1992 Bank of the Philippines Islands vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al. G.R. No. L-42844February 21, 1992 Jesus Fernandez vs. Anscor Container Corp., et al. A.C. No. 2505February 21, 1992 Evangeline Leda vs. Trebonian Tabang G.R. No. 89783February 19, 1992 Mariano B. Locsin, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 89767February 19, 1992 State Investment House, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, Et. Al. G.R. No. 88383February 19, 1992 Harris Sy Chua vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-56428February 18, 1992 Southern Food Sales Corp. vs. Bernardo Li. Salas, et al. G.R. No. 87182February 17, 1992 Pacific Mills, inc., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-61260February 17, 1992 Sergio Bautista vs. Jose P. Castro, et al. G.R. No. 96409February 14, 1992 Antonio M. Carpio vs. The Executive Secretary, et al. G.R. No. 86773February 14, 1992 SEAFDEC-AQD, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. 84275February 14, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Gil Uy, et al. G.R. No. 100874February 13, 1992 Benjamin I. Espiritu vs. Nelson B. Melgar, et al. G.R. No. 95871February 13, 1992 Dominga Tabora Vda. De Macoy, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 95753February 13, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Ruben O. Lim G.R. No. 72780February 13, 1992 Sotero Collado vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al. G.R. No. L-59791February 13, 1992 Meralco vs. Gregorio G. Pineda, et al. G.R. No. L-46772February 13, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Court of First Instance G.R. No. 101646February 13, 1992 Mariquita J. Mantala vs. Ignacio L. Salvador, et al. G.R. No. 90801February 13, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Francisco Lozano G.R. No. 90247-49February 13, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Jose T. Ocampo G.R. No. 84276February 13, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Cresencio Jimenez, Jr., et al. G.R. No. 84888February 12, 1992 Lunesa Balangcad vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 101837February 11, 1992 Rolito T. Go vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 87653February 11, 1992 Conrado M. Aquino, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. 88709February 10, 1992 Nicos Industrial Corp., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 90964February 10, 1992 Manggagawa Ng Komunikasyon, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. A.C. No. 3247February 10, 1992 Jose P. Mariano vs. Rtc Judge Jose S. Peñas, Jr. G.R. No. 94757February 7, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Pilar Amparo Pinzon, et al. G.R. No. 93805-06February 7, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Ramil Balatucan, et al. G.R. No. 88979February 7, 1992 Lydia O. Chua vs. The Civil Service Commission, et. al. G.R. No. L-51824February 7, 1992 Percelino Diamante vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-44888February 7, 1992 Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. vs. Fidel P. Dumlao, et al. G.R. No. L-41862February 7, 1992 B. R. Sebastian Enterprises, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-30440February 7, 1992 Mapulo Mining Ass'n. vs. Fernando Lopez A.M. No. RTJ No. 90-474 & RTJ No. 90-606 February 7, 1992 Clemencio C. Sabitsana, Jr. vs. J. Adriano R. Villamor G.R. No. 97568February 4, 1992 Celine Marketing Corp. vs. Bienvenido E. Laguesma, et al. G.R. No. 97351February 4, 1992 Ramon A. Gonzales vs. Francisco I. Chavez, Et Al. G.R. No. 95902February 4, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Don Rodrigueza G.R. No. 84698February 4, 1992 Philippines School of Business Adm., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 96425February 4, 1992 Progressive Dev't. Corp. vs. Hon. Sec. of Labor, et al. G.R. No. 94533February 4, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Ignacio Tonog, Jr., et al. G.R. No. 94338February 4, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Jose Buligon G.R. No. 93695February 4, 1992 Ramon C. Lee, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 87421February 4, 1992 Michael Lawrence vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. A.M. No. 2925February 4, 1992 Juan M. Francisco, Jr., et al. vs. Atty. Antonio B. Bosa, et al. G.R. No. 101678February 3, 1992 Bureau Veritas vs. Office of the President, et al. G.R. No. L-48009February 3, 1992 People of the Philippines vs. Marcelino Devaras, et al. G.R. No. 96490February 3, 1992 Indophil Textile Union vs. Teodorico P. Calica, et al. The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc. People of the Philippines vs. Carlito Alcantara People of the Philippines vs. Noriel C. Fule Baguio Country Club Corp. vs. Nat'l. Labor Relations Commission, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Ruperto Pascua People of the Philippines vs. Eduardo Andasa Florencio P. Salles vs. Niceforo B. Francisco, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Ponciano Agcaoili Cynthia S. Santiago, et al. vs. Teofilo Guadiz, Jr. et al. Adjap Allama, et al. vs. Republic of the Phils. Philippines National Bank vs. Teodoro N. Florendo, et al. Ramon Gil Abad, et al. vs. Court of First Instance of Pangasinan Heirs of Eugenio Sevilla, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Chung Fu Industries (Philippines) Inc., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. National Power Corp. vs. Enrique T. Jocson, et al. Republic of the Phil. vs. Sandiganbayan, et. al. Apex Mining Co., Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. Pedro J. Callejo, Jr. vs. Jose D. Garcia Sunville Timber Products, Inc. vs. J. Alfonso G. Abad, et al. Domingo C. Gamalinda vs. Fernando Alcantara, et al. Eufrosina Y. Tan vs. Nicolas El. Sabandal Philips Export B.V., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Jose O. Teodoro, et al. vs. Guillermo Carague, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Jovito C. Callao, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Edgar B. Fernandez Bank of the Philippines Islands vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al. Jesus Fernandez vs. Anscor Container Corp., et al. Evangeline Leda vs. Trebonian Tabang Mariano B. Locsin, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. State Investment House, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, Et. Al. Harris Sy Chua vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Southern Food Sales Corp. vs. Bernardo Li. Salas, et al. Pacific Mills, inc., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Sergio Bautista vs. Jose P. Castro, et al. Antonio M. Carpio vs. The Executive Secretary, et al. SEAFDEC-AQD, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Gil Uy, et al. Benjamin I. Espiritu vs. Nelson B. Melgar, et al. Dominga Tabora Vda. De Macoy, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Ruben O. Lim Sotero Collado vs. Intermediate Appellate Court, et al. Meralco vs. Gregorio G. Pineda, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Court of First Instance Mariquita J. Mantala vs. Ignacio L. Salvador, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Francisco Lozano People of the Philippines vs. Jose T. Ocampo People of the Philippines vs. Cresencio Jimenez, Jr., et al. Lunesa Balangcad vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Rolito T. Go vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Conrado M. Aquino, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. Nicos Industrial Corp., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Manggagawa Ng Komunikasyon, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. Jose P. Mariano vs. Rtc Judge Jose S. Peñas, Jr. People of the Philippines vs. Pilar Amparo Pinzon, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Ramil Balatucan, et al. Lydia O. Chua vs. The Civil Service Commission, et. al. Percelino Diamante vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Pilipinas Shell Petroleum Corp. vs. Fidel P. Dumlao, et al. B. R. Sebastian Enterprises, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Mapulo Mining Ass'n. vs. Fernando Lopez Clemencio C. Sabitsana, Jr. vs. J. Adriano R. Villamor Celine Marketing Corp. vs. Bienvenido E. Laguesma, et al. Ramon A. Gonzales vs. Francisco I. Chavez, Et Al. People of the Philippines vs. Don Rodrigueza Philippines School of Business Adm., et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Progressive Dev't. Corp. vs. Hon. Sec. of Labor, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Ignacio Tonog, Jr., et al. People of the Philippines vs. Jose Buligon Ramon C. Lee, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Michael Lawrence vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. Juan M. Francisco, Jr., et al. vs. Atty. Antonio B. Bosa, et al. Bureau Veritas vs. Office of the President, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Marcelino Devaras, et al. Indophil Textile Union vs. Teodorico P. Calica, et al. The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
FIRST DIVISION
G.R. No. 95957 February 28, 1992
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
CARLITO ALCANTARA,defendant-appellant.
The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.
Public Attorney's Office for defendant-appellant.
GRIÑO-AQUINO,J.:
This is a petition for review of the decision dated July 17, 1990 of the Regional Trial Court of Lucena City, Branch 55, convicting defendant-appellant Carlito Alcantaraof the crime of murder and sentencing him to suffer the penalty ofreclusion perpetua.
The information which was filed against the appellant on July 18, 1989 by the Provincial Prosecutor of Quezon reads as follows:
That on or about the 6th day of January 1989, at Barangay Ilayang Bolo, Municipality of Unisan, Province of Quezon, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, armed with a small bolo (itak-itakan), with intent to kill and with treachery, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and stab with the said bolo one Wilfredo Hugo, thereby inflicting upon the latter a stab wound on a vital part of his body which directly caused his death.
That accused attacked and stabbed said Wilfredo Hugo suddenly and unexpectedly without giving him any opportunity to repel the attack or to escape. (p. 7,Rollo)
Upon arraignment, Alcantara pleaded not guilty.
The facts of the case as set forth in the decision of the courta quoare as follows:
The scenario depicted by the People's evidence is that Wilfredo Hugo, the victim, at the time of his death, was a resident of Barangay Ilayang Bolo, Unisan, Quezon. He was earning his livelihood as a tenant of a coconut plantation and receiving an income of around P1,500.00 a year. Although single in civil status, he fathered two (2) sons from a common law life.
The crime scene is the waiting shed situated at Sitio Malinta, Ilayang Bolo, Panaon, Unisan, Quezon, which is adjacent to the house of the spouses Atanacio and Delia Tapero, both prosecution witnesses (Exhibits "K" and "L"), and fifteen (15) to twenty (20) meters away, more or less, from the house of a certain Hector Rivera, a brother-in-law of Atanacio Tapero.
The spouses Atanacio and Delia Tapero positively identified the accused as Wilfredo Hugo's assailant four (4) days after the crime in question occured (sic) by executing and signing their separate and sworn statements (Exhibit "A" with sub-marking) before investigators of the Unisan Police Force on January 10, 1989. In their separate testimonies before the Court, they recalled how they witnessed the killing of Wilfredo Hugo on the night of January 6, 1989, as follows: That on or about 7:00 o'clock that night, they were inside the aforestated waiting shed with Wilfredo Hugo conversing with one another when accused Carlito Alcantara arrived causing them to stop their conversation; that the accused then invited Wilfredo Hugo to the house of Hector Rivera, which is situated nearby, and asked the victim for "pulutan" but Wilfredo Hugo refused and made the following utterances: "Why will I go when you know that I do not go there;" that after Wilfredo Hugo made such utterances, the accused, who sat beside Wilfredo Hugo at the latter's right side after his arrival, stood up as if he was going away from the waiting shed and after moving towards his right, he suddenly swerved to his left side and stabbed Wilfredo Hugo with a small bolo (itak-itakan) (Exhibit "B") in his left hand hitting the victim on the right side of his body just under his armpit; and that at the time accused stabbed Wilfredo Hugo, the spouses Tapero thought that accused merely boxed the victim with his left hand.
The same spouses likewise recalled that after the stabbing incident, accused ran towards the house of Hector Rivera while Wilfredo Hugo asked help from them by uttering the following: "Utol Tacing (Atanacio's nickname), tulungan mo ako, tinraydor ako, may tama ako." And Atanacio held the victim while the latter was falling to the ground. At that instance, the accused returned to the waiting shed carrying the small bolo (Exhibit "B",Id.) in order to finish his prey but when he saw Wilfredo Hugo lying on the ground already lifeless, he ran away from the place of incident. (pp. 9-10,Rollo)
On July 18, 1989, the trial court rendered judgment finding the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder and sentenced him to suffer the penalty ofreclusion perpetua. The dispositive portion of the decision reads:
WHEREFORE, the Court hereby finds the accused CARLITO ALCANTARA Y RONTERASO GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt as principal of the crime of Murder, qualified by treachery, as defined and penalized by the provisions of Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, and there being no modifying circumstances proved to either aggravate or mitigate his liability, hereby sentences said accused to suffer a penalty ofreclusion perpetuaor life imprisonment; to pay to the heirs of the deceased Wilfredo Hugo the sum of P30,000.00, by way of indemnity for the death of said victim; P8,207.50, as actual damages; compensatory damages of P30,000.00, by way of unrealized earnings; and further, to pay the costs. (p. 20,Rollo)
Hence, this appeal wherein the appellant alleges that:
1. the trial court erred in believing the version of the prosecution and in disregarding that of the defense;
2 the trial court erred in convicting accused-appellant of the crime charged despite the failure of the prosecution to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The petition is without merit.
In disclaiming liability for the murder of Wilfredo Hugo, the appellant testified that he was in his house at Ilayang Bulo, Unisan, the night Hugo was stabbed to death with a bolo. However, appellant admitted that he was in Rivera's house in the afternoon of January 6, 1989 where he had a drinking session with some friends.
The defense of alibi, which the appellant relies on, is always received with caution, if not suspicion, by the courts, not only because it is inherently weak and unreliable, but also because of its easy fabrication. To overcome the evidence of the prosecution, an alibi must satisfy the test of full, clear, and satisfactory evidence (People vs. Baring, 187 SCRA 629,citingPeople vs. Gaddi y Catubay, 170 SCRA 649). For the defense of alibi to prosper, it does not suffice to prove merely the whereabouts of the accused at the time the crime was committed; it must be indisputably demonstrated that at the time of the commission of the crime, it was physically impossible for the suspect to have been at, or near, the scene of the crime (People vs. Manzanares, 177 SCRA 427).
Moreover, the defense of alibi cannot prevail over the positive identification of the accused by the prosecution witnesses (People vs. Serrano, 170 SCRA 663).
The accused was identified as the person who stabbed Wilfredo Hugo by the eye-witnesses, Atanacio and Delia Tapero, who were with the victim in the waiting shed when the stabbing occurred. They could not possibly have been mistaken as to the identity of the killer for they personally knew him.
As correctly pointed out by the trial court, the appellant's defense of alibi is weak, hence, must be rejected. Appellant's allegation that his wife, Amy Alcantara, and his brother-in-law, Glicerio Torres, met him when he arrived at his house in Ilayang Bulo, Unisan, at 5:00 o'clock in the afternoon of January 6, 1989, was not corroborated by his wife and brother-in-law. Furthermore, his house is not inaccessibly remote from the scene of the crime. As he himself testified, his house is only 2-1/2 kilometers distant from the murder scene.
The defense of alibi is unconvincing when the distance from the place where the accused allegedly was, and the scene of the crime can be negotiated within minutes (People vs. Marmita, Jr., 180 SCRA 723). InPeople vs. Binsol, 100 Phil. 713, we held that a distance of only three (3) kilometers between the scene of the crime and the alleged whereabouts of the accused "is not so far to preclude the possibility of the accused's at thelocus criminis."
The appellant assails the trial court's finding that treachery was present in the commission of the crime. He argues that the Municipal Health Officer's finding, upon a post-mortem examination of the body of the victim, that a contusion was sustained by the victim and his belief that it could have been caused by a fist fight between the victim and his assailant, rules out treachery in the stabbing of the victim. However, that speculation of the Municipal Health Officer was refuted by the two eye-witnesses who declared that no fight preceded the appellant's sudden attack against the deceased. The contusion on the forehead and jaw of the deceased could have been caused by his fall.
A sudden and unexpected attack, without the slightest provocation on the person of the one attacked, is the essence of treachery (People v. Rey, 172 SCRA 149). As testified by the prosecution witnesses, the appellant stood up and pretended to leave but he suddenly turned around to the left and stabbed the victim with his small bolo. The surprise attack was indeed treacherous as it was totally unexpected by the hapless victim.
WHEREFORE, finding no merit in the appeal, the decision of the trial court is AFFIRMEDin toto. However, the civil indemnity of P30,000 for the death of Wilfredo Hugo should be increased to P50,000 in accordance with more recent jurisprudence (People vs. Sazon, 189 SCRA 700).
SO ORDERED.
Narvasa, C.J., Cruz and Medialdea, JJ., concur.