G.R. Nos. 101564-65 - SEPTEMBER 1993 - PHILIPPINE JURISPRUDENCE CASE NUMBERCASE TITLE G.R. Nos. 101564-65September 30, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Franklin Buenavista G.R. No. 100736September 30, 1993 Dyne-Sem Electronics Corp. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. 106274September 28, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Henry Padero G.R. No. 105375September 28, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Ernesto Aseñas G.R. No. 94592September 28, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Ruben M. Calijan G.R. No. 49475September 28, 1993 Jorge C. Paderanga vs. Dimalanes B. Buissan, et al. A.M. No. RTJ-91-672September 28, 1993 Sps. Jose Sy Bang And Iluminada Tan vs. Antonio Mendez, Sr. G.R. No. 105562September 27, 1993 Luz Pineda, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 105419September 27, 1993 Pioneer Savings And Loan Bank vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 105223September 27, 1993 Philippine Appliance Corporation vs. Bienvenido E. Laguesma, et al. G.R. No. 96488September 27, 1993 Indophil Acrylic Mfg. Corp. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. 85472September 27, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Eriberto P. Yabut G.R. Nos. 103604-05September 23, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Macario E. Acabal, et al. G.R. No. 103464September 23, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Henry S. Alvarez, et al. G.R. No. 101257September 23, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Gregorio Briones, Jr., et al. G.R. No. L-51025September 22, 1993 Antonio A. Enriquez vs. Felicidad Angco Boyles G.R. No. 106929September 21, 1993 Anita Caoile, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 106719September 21, 1993 Brigida S. Buenaseda, et al. vs. Juan Flavier, et al. G.R. No. 103090September 21, 1993 Kimberly Clark Philippines vs. Danilo Lorredo, et al. G.R. No. 80262September 1, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Fernando C. Ocampo G.R. Nos. 92961-64September 1, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Benjamin C. Magpayo G.R. No. 103632September 1, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Rogelio T. Mortos G.R. No. 107243September 1, 1993 Philippine National Bank vs. Noah's Ark Sugar Refinery, et al. G.R. Nos. 97468-70September 2, 1993 Southeast Asian Fisheries Devt. Center vs. Danilo Acosta, et al. G.R. No. 105752September 2, 1993 Inocencio Gonzales vs. Civil Service Commission A.M. No. RTJ-92-8450September 3, 1993 Joey Cuaresma, et al. vs. Restituto Aguilar G.R. No. 98108September 3, 1993 Roman P. Aquino vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. 101006September 3, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Hamid K. Ambih G.R. No. 105010September 3, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Ronnie D. Cortes, et al. G.R. No. 82769September 6, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Eugenio P. Javar G.R. No. 98282September 6, 1993 Emiliano G. Lizares, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 102909September 6, 1993 Sps. Vicente Pingol, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 104578September 6, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Jose V. Adriano G.R. No. 95681September 8, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Josefino Pascual, et al. G.R. No. 96451September 8, 1993 People's Security, Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. 97921September 8, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Rolando M. Domingo G.R. No. 106493September 8, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Ernesto B. Dio A.M. No. RTJ-93-936September 10, 1993 Albina Borinaga vs. Camilo E. Tamin, et al. G.R. No. L-51686September 10, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Gregorio T. Pastoral G.R. No. 93699September 10, 1993 Ramon Prieto, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. Nos. 100222-23September 14, 1993 Rajah Humabon Hotel, Inc., et al. vs. Cresenciano B. Trajano, et al. G.R. No. 100455September 17, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Luisito V. Eroles, et al. A.M. No. RTJ-91-714September 10, 1993 Bernabe Mortel vs. Vicente Leido, Jr. A.M. No. MTJ-92-691September 10, 1993 Sulu Islamic Association of Masjid Lambayong vs. Nabdar J. Malik G.R. Nos. 100456-59September 10, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Celso Amador, et al. G.R. No. 100474September 10, 1993 Artile Garbo, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 100644September 10, 1993 Filinvest Credit Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 102636September 10, 1993 Metrobank Employees Union, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. No. 103121September 10, 1993 Remedios T. Blaquera, et al. vs. Civil Service Commission, et al. G.R. No. 103974September 10, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Ariel S. Catanyag G.R. No. 104494September 10, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Paul N. Bandin G.R. No. 106895September 10, 1993 Elvira F. Valenzona vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 108292September 10, 1993 Republic vs. Sandiganbayan, et al. G.R. No. 110216September 10, 1993 Ignacio R. Bunye, et al. vs. Romeo M. Escareal, et al. G.R. No. L-97343September 13, 1993 Pascual Godines vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. L-74695September 14, 1993 In Re: Brigido Alvarado, Cesar Alvarado vs. Ramon G. Gaviola, Jr., et al. G.R. No. L-75025September 14, 1993 Vicente Garcia vs. the Chairman, Commission on Audit, et al. G.R. No. 93417September 14, 1993 Constancio T. Baguio vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 94311September 14, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Norberto Villagracia, et al. G.R. No. 98703September 14, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Danilo H. Cabisada G.R. No. 104960September 14, 1993 Philip G. Romualdez vs. Regional Trial Court, Branch 7, Tacloban City, et al. G.R. No. 109114September 14, 1993 Holiday Inn Manila, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et Al A.M. No. MTJ-93-813September 15, 1993 Fernando Cayao vs. Justiniano A. Del Mundo G.R. No. L-82619September 15, 1993 Philippine Airlines, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 93173September 15, 1993 Honorio Saavedra, Jr. vs. Department of Justice, et al. G.R. No. L-94336September 15, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Rene M. Saluna G.R. No. 96009September 15, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Edmund M. Empleo G.R. No. 101503September 15, 1993 Planters Products, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 105090September 16,1993 Concrete Aggregates, Inc., et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. G.R. Nos. 107370-71September 16, 1993 Mario A. Navarro vs. Civil Service Commission, et al. G.R. No. L-86162September 17, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Virgilio Tamayo, et al. G.R. Nos. 89597-98September 17, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Oscar Balderama, et al. G.R. No. 100985September 17, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Teresita D. Andrada G.R. No. 104818September 17, 1993 Roberto Domingo vs. Court of Appeals, et Al G.R. No. 105818September 17, 1993 Eloisa Arambulo, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 96766September 20, 1993 People of the Philippines vs. Antonio Jaralba, et al. G.R. No. 50173September 21, 1993 Haniel R. Castro, et al. vs. Rafael T. Mendoza, et al. G.R. No. 93365September 21, 1993 Hilariona Fortaleza Dablo, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. G.R. No. 101818September 21, 1993 Marietta P. Santos, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc. People of the Philippines vs. Franklin Buenavista Dyne-Sem Electronics Corp. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Henry Padero People of the Philippines vs. Ernesto Aseñas People of the Philippines vs. Ruben M. Calijan Jorge C. Paderanga vs. Dimalanes B. Buissan, et al. Sps. Jose Sy Bang And Iluminada Tan vs. Antonio Mendez, Sr. Luz Pineda, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Pioneer Savings And Loan Bank vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Philippine Appliance Corporation vs. Bienvenido E. Laguesma, et al. Indophil Acrylic Mfg. Corp. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Eriberto P. Yabut People of the Philippines vs. Macario E. Acabal, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Henry S. Alvarez, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Gregorio Briones, Jr., et al. Antonio A. Enriquez vs. Felicidad Angco Boyles Anita Caoile, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Brigida S. Buenaseda, et al. vs. Juan Flavier, et al. Kimberly Clark Philippines vs. Danilo Lorredo, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Fernando C. Ocampo People of the Philippines vs. Benjamin C. Magpayo People of the Philippines vs. Rogelio T. Mortos Philippine National Bank vs. Noah's Ark Sugar Refinery, et al. Southeast Asian Fisheries Devt. Center vs. Danilo Acosta, et al. Inocencio Gonzales vs. Civil Service Commission Joey Cuaresma, et al. vs. Restituto Aguilar Roman P. Aquino vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Hamid K. Ambih People of the Philippines vs. Ronnie D. Cortes, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Eugenio P. Javar Emiliano G. Lizares, Jr. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Sps. Vicente Pingol, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Jose V. Adriano People of the Philippines vs. Josefino Pascual, et al. People's Security, Inc. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Rolando M. Domingo People of the Philippines vs. Ernesto B. Dio Albina Borinaga vs. Camilo E. Tamin, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Gregorio T. Pastoral Ramon Prieto, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. Rajah Humabon Hotel, Inc., et al. vs. Cresenciano B. Trajano, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Luisito V. Eroles, et al. Bernabe Mortel vs. Vicente Leido, Jr. Sulu Islamic Association of Masjid Lambayong vs. Nabdar J. Malik People of the Philippines vs. Celso Amador, et al. Artile Garbo, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Filinvest Credit Corporation vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Metrobank Employees Union, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. Remedios T. Blaquera, et al. vs. Civil Service Commission, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Ariel S. Catanyag People of the Philippines vs. Paul N. Bandin Elvira F. Valenzona vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Republic vs. Sandiganbayan, et al. Ignacio R. Bunye, et al. vs. Romeo M. Escareal, et al. Pascual Godines vs. Court of Appeals, et al. In Re: Brigido Alvarado, Cesar Alvarado vs. Ramon G. Gaviola, Jr., et al. Vicente Garcia vs. the Chairman, Commission on Audit, et al. Constancio T. Baguio vs. Court of Appeals, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Norberto Villagracia, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Danilo H. Cabisada Philip G. Romualdez vs. Regional Trial Court, Branch 7, Tacloban City, et al. Holiday Inn Manila, et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et Al Fernando Cayao vs. Justiniano A. Del Mundo Philippine Airlines, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Honorio Saavedra, Jr. vs. Department of Justice, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Rene M. Saluna People of the Philippines vs. Edmund M. Empleo Planters Products, Inc. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Concrete Aggregates, Inc., et al. vs. National Labor Relations Commission, et al. Mario A. Navarro vs. Civil Service Commission, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Virgilio Tamayo, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Oscar Balderama, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Teresita D. Andrada Roberto Domingo vs. Court of Appeals, et Al Eloisa Arambulo, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. People of the Philippines vs. Antonio Jaralba, et al. Haniel R. Castro, et al. vs. Rafael T. Mendoza, et al. Hilariona Fortaleza Dablo, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. Marietta P. Santos, et al. vs. Court of Appeals, et al. The Lawphil Project - Arellano Law Foundation, Inc.
Republic of the Philippines
SUPREME COURT
Manila
SECOND DIVISION
G.R. Nos. 101564-65 September 30, 1993
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES,plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
DAVID POSADAS, SR., DAVID POSADAS, JR., RODOLFO MORALESalias"Rudy", FRANKLIN BUENAVISTA, MARCIAL POSADAS, DANILO POSADAS, ALFREDO MAGNO & ANASTACIO BARTULINAalias"Anastacio Batilano", accused, FRANKLIN BUENAVISTA,appellant.
The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.
Francisco B. Figura for accused David, Danilo and Marcial Posadas.
Lope B. Gustilo for accused-appellant Buenavista.
PADILLA,J.:
Accused David Posadas, Sr., Danilo Posadas, Marcial Posadas and Franklin Buenavista were found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder in a decision rendered in Criminal Case No. 18269, dated 27 March 1991.*The said four (4) accused were, however, acquitted of the charge of violation of Presidential Decree 1866 (Illegal Possession of Firearms). The case against their co-accused, Rodolfo Morales, was dismissed due to his death on 18 July 1988 while the three (3) other co-accused, David Posadas, Jr., Alfredo Magno and Anastacio Bartulina alias Anastacio Batilano, remain at-large.
On 9 December 1992, accused David Posadas, Sr., Marcial Posadas and Danilo Posadas filed an "Urgent Motion to Withdraw Appeal"1which was granted by this Court on 5 July 1993, after requiring and receiving the comment of the Office of the Solicitor General interposing no objection to said withdrawal of appeal.
The Court therefore will review this case only to determine whether or not the prosecution has proved the guilt of accused-appellant Franklin Buenavista with moral certainty as to overcome the constitutional presumption of his innocence.
The facts established by the accused, turned state witness, Conrado Gatilago are as follows:
On 13 August 1984, David Posadas, Sr. went to visit Rodolfo Morales alias "Rudy" at the latter's house in Alta Tierra Village, Jaro, Iloilo City. Gatilago who was the caretaker of Morales' poultry farm testified that on that day David Posadas, Sr. was trying to convince Rodolfo Morales to kill a certain Arthur Maravilla.2
In the afternoon of 13 August 1984, David Posadas, Sr. met with David Posadas, Jr., Marcial Posadas, Danilo Posadas, Alfredo Magno, Anastacio Bartulina, Rodolfo Morales and Conrado Gatilago. It was then that the group agreed to kill Maravilla.3
David Posadas, Sr. later distributed various firearms to the group and he also ordered David Posadas, Jr. to proceed to Tambalisa Island, Concepcion, Iloilo to verify if Maravilla was still residing there. When David, Jr. returned with news that Maravilla was at his house, the group proceeded to Tambalisa Island where they spent the night at Alfredo Magno's house. The next day they each test-fired their firearm in preparation for their diabolical plan to eliminate Maravilla. Later that day, the group proceeded to the house of accused-appellant, Franklin Buenavista, which was near Maravilla's house to inquire if the latter was at home. Buenavista answered in the affirmative.4The group left immediately and appellant Buenavista was left behind.
The group then met Eliseo Santos, Maravilla's caretaker whom they proceeded to maul and manhandle and later tied to a tree. The group later returned to Buenavista's house and David, Sr. ordered Buenavista to call Sixto, Eliseo Santos' son and Maravilla's helper to tell him that his father was tied to a tree. Gatilago testified that the purpose of calling Sixto Santos was to make sure Maravilla would be left alone inside his house.5Appellant Buenavista did as he was ordered and Sixto Santos and another unidentified man came out after which David, Jr. and Morales fired at the two (2) men forcing them to flee. It was at this point that Maravilla came out of his house. David, Jr. then shot Maravilla hitting him on both thighs causing him to fall down. Morales and Bartulina likewise shot Maravilla while David, Jr. later hacked the victim with a bolo. Maravilla died on the spot of thirty-six (36) gunshot wounds and several hack wounds.
Accused-appellant Franklin Buenavista assigns a single error to the trial court:
. . . IN CONVICTING THE ACCUSED FRANKLIN BUENAVISTA OF THE CRIME OF MURDER ON THE GROUNDS THAT THE FACTS DO NOT WARRANT SUCH CONVICTION AND THE GUILT OF THE ACCUSED WAS NOT PROVED BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.6
The trial court convicted accused-appellant Franklin Buenavista based on the finding that "the defense of alibi is worthless in the face of positive identification by credible prosecution witnesses."7
While it is true that alibi is a weak defense which can be appreciated only when it is clearly established that it was impossible for the accused to be at the scene of the crime at the time when it was committed, the Court also is aware that an alibi, albeit genuine, cannot in all cases be adequately proven.8In theAlborescase, this Court had occasion to quote Mr. Justice J. B. L. Reyes in the case ofPeople v.Fraga9that:
The rule that alibi must be satisfactorily proven was never intended to change the burden of proof in criminal cases; otherwise, we will see the absurdity of an accused being put in a more difficult position where the prosecution's evidence is vague and weak than where it is strong.
In the case at bench, the constitutional presumption of Buenavista's innocence dictates that the prosecution's evidence be examined independently of accused-appellant's alibi. Indeed, the testimony of state witness Conrado Gatilago may have established the presence of Buenavista at the scene of the crime at the time it was committed but the question is: did the evidence clearly establish Buenavista's participation in the killing of Maravilla?
The Solicitor General in a "Manifestation and Motion in Lieu of Brief" prays for the acquittal of accused-appellant Franklin Buenavista based on two (2) grounds, namely: (1) there is no evidence to prove appellant's participation in the murder of Arthur Maravilla and (2) appellant was coerced to call for Sixto Santos to come out.10
We agree with the Solicitor General and consequently we reverse the trial court's conviction of accused-appellant Franklin Buenavista.
It should be noted that the testimony of Conrado Gatilago established that Franklin Buenavista merely verified that the victim, Arthur Maravilla was at home. The reply of Buenavista was a response to the inquiry posed by David, Sr. and his group.11Nowhere in Gatilago's testimony was it shown that Buenavista was an active or willing participant in the plan to liquidate Maravilla. His alleged participation in luring Sixto Santos out of the house is belied by Gatilago's own testimony, to wit:
Q Was there any conversation that transpired further between your group and Franquilino (Franklin) Buenavista?
A Yes, sir.
Q What was that?
A David Posadas, Jr.orderedthat the son of tho old man who was Sixto be called.
Q Called for what purpose?
A To inform Sixto that his father, the old man, was already tied on (sic) a tree.
Q For what purpose was the information to be given?
A So that Sixto will come out of the house of Arthur Maravilla so that Arthur Maravilla will be left alone and it will be easy to kill him.
Q Is this Sixto that you mentioned is the son of (sic) the old man staying inside the house of Arthur Maravilla?
A Yes, sir.
Q So what did Franquilino Buenavista do when he wasinstructedto execute their instruction?
A Franquilino Buenavista obey (sic) theorderand called Sixto that his father was already tied up there on the tree.12(emphases supplied)
The guilt of Franklin Buenavista cannot be based on mere conjectures that he became part of the conspiracy by verifying that the victim was at home and obeying the order of David, Jr. to call Sixto. The Court takes note of the fact that the group of David, Jr. was composed of no less than eight (8) fully-armed men and it would not take much logic or experience to infer that Buenavista acted out of a natural sense of self-preservation when he followed theordersof David, Jr. The doubt as to guilt must be resolved in favor of the constitutional presumption of his innocence.
WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is hereby REVERSED, as to appellant Franklin Buenavista, based on reasonable doubt. The accused-appellant Franklin Buenavista is hereby ACQUITTED and ordered immediately released unless he is being detained for other legal grounds.
SO ORDERED.
Narvasa, C.J., Regalado, Nocon and Puno, JJ., concur.
#Footnotes
* Regional Trial Court, Branch 38, Iloilo City, presided over by Judge Roger B. Patricio.
1Rollo, p. 24.
2 TSN, 17 May 1985, pp. 8-10.
3 TSN, 17 May 1985, pp. 11-13.
4 TSN, 17 May 1985, pp. 16-21.
5Ibid., p. 26.
6Rollo, p. 210.
7 Trial Court Decision, p. 18.
8 People v. Albores, G.R. Nos. 101122-23, 9 December 1992, 216 SCRA 302.
9 G.R. No. L-12500, 31 August 1960, 109 Phil. 241.
10Rollo, pp. 266 and 269.
11 TSN, 17 May 1985, p. 21.
12 TSN, 17 May 1985, pp. 25-26.