| CONTACT: |
| Supreme Court of the Philippines Library Services, Padre Faura, Ermita, Manila, Philippines 1000 |
| (632) 8524-2706 |
| libraryservices.sc@judiciary.gov.ph |
108 OG No. 6, 633 (February 6, 2012)
[ CR-H.C. No. 02667, July 30, 2010 ]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ARNOLD PABLICO AND ALLAN TANGUERAN, ACCUSED: ARNOLD PABLICO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
Before this Court is an appeal from the Decision[1] dated July 7, 2005 and Order[2] dated February 9, 2006 of the Regional Trial Court, Fourth Judicial Region, Branch 49, Palawan and Puerto Princesa City in Criminal Case No. 15976 entitled "People of the Philippines, Plaintiff, versus Arnold Pablico and Allan Tangueran, Accused,", the dispositive portions of which read:
Decision dated July 7, 2005-
"Premises considered, the Court finds accused Arnold Pablico guilty beyond reasonable doubt in the shooting of Renante Cabrestante in the afternoon of March 9, 2000 at Sitio Mabengeten, El Nido, Palawan which shooting resulted to the death of said Renante Cabrestante. For the crime of Murder for which he was found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, accused Arnold Pablico is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua and to pay by way of civil indemnity the heirs of Renante Cabrestante the amount of fifty thousand pesos (P50,000.00).The facts are:
On the other hand, since there was no proof of conspiracy in the shooting of Renante Cabrestante, co-accused Allan Tangueran is acquitted of the crime of Murder for which he was charged as co-principal. Because of such acquittal, the Provincial Jail Warden is directed to immediately release Allan Tangueran from detention at the Provincial Jail.
On the other hand, it is directed that Arnold Pablico shall serve his penalty of Reclusion Perpetua at the Iwahig Prison and Penal Colony, Puerto Princesa City. Therefore, the Provincial Jail Warden shall immediately transfer and commit Arnold Pablico to the said colony.
SO ORDERED."
Order dated February 9, 2006-
"As the accused in his Motion for Reconsideration has not raised a new issue and considering the fact that the decision of the Court had amply discussed and cited the pertinent decisions of the Supreme Court the Motion For Reconsideration is denied as it is hereby denied.
SO ORDERED."
On June 19, 2000, an Information[3] was filed against accused-appellant Arnold Pablico ("Pablico" for brevity) and Allan Tangueran ("Tangueran" for brevity) for the crime of Murder, the accusatory portion of which reads:
"That on or about the 9th day of March, 2000, at around 5:00 o"clock in the afternoon, at Sitio Mabengeten, Barangay Villapaz, in the Municipality of El Nido, Province of Palawan, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused, with treachery and evident premeditation, conspiring, confederating together and mutually confabulating with each other, with intent to kill, while both armed with homemade shotgun locally known as "pirit-pirit", did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously shoot with their homemade shotgun one Renante Cabrestante, hitting him in vital parts of his body and inflicting upon him gunshot wound which was the direct and immediate cause of his death shortly thereafter.On November 15, 2000 and December 15, 2000, accused-appellant Pablico and accused Tangueran, respectively, assisted by their counsel, pleaded[4] not guilty to the crime charged.
Contrary to law."
During the pre-trial conference[5] on January 10, 2001, the prosecution proposed the marking as exhibit "A" of the Certificate of Death, which attests to victim Renante Cabrestante's ("Cabrestante" for brevity) fact of death. The pre-trial conference was closed and terminated without any proposal on the part of the defense.
Thereafter, trial ensued.
The prosecution presented Rodel Villanueva ("Villanueva" for brevity), Oliver Cabrestante ("Oliver" for brevity) and Dr. Cesar Rivera ("Dr. Rivera" for brevity) as witnesses.
On the other hand, Daniel Bacaltos ("Bacaltos" for brevity), Luciano Angeles ("Angeles" for brevity), accused-appellant Pablico and accused Tangueran were presented as witnesses for the defense.
Villanueva testified6 that: victim Cabrestante was his brother-in-law; he usually saw accused-appellant Pablico and accused Tangueran in Poblacion and Sitio Mabengeten, respectively, located at Barangay Villapaz, El Nido, Palawan, for as far as he knows, the latter are residents of the said barangay; he did not usually see accused-appellant Pablico and accused Tangueran carrying firearms; Arcadio Cabrestante ("Arcadio" for brevity) is victim Cabrestante's father; on March 9, 2000, at around 2:30 o'clock up to 3:30 o'clock in the afternoon, he, victim Cabrestante and Oliver went to Sitio Mabengeten to haul lumber for the construction of victim Cabrestante's house; victim Cabrestante invited him to gather woods and he was unaware if a permit to cut and gather woods was secured from the proper authorities; Barangay Villapaz is about five (5) kilometers away from Sitio Mabengeten; the place where they were gathering woods could only be reached from Barangay Villapaz by walking for more than an hour; Barangay New Ibahay in El Nido, Palawan is about seven (7) kilometers away from Barangay Villapaz; a person coming from Barangay New Ibahay has to pass through Barangay Villapaz in going to Sitio Mabengeten and arrives there after about three (3) hours; he, Oliver and victim Cabrestante returned to sitio Mabengeten at around 5:00 o'clock in the afternoon for their next haul of lumber; he, Oliver and victim Cabrestante placed the pieces of round timber on their shoulders and hauled them from the lower portion up to the flat portion of Sitio Mabengeten where they left their carabao and cart; accused-appellant Pablico and accused Tangueran arrived in Sitio Mabengeten at around 5:30 o'clock in the afternoon armed with homemade shotguns ("pirit-pirit"); he, Oliver and victim Cabrestante had no quarrel nor misunderstanding with accused-appellant Pablico and accused Tangueran; when asked by accused-appellant Pablico and accused Tangueran what they were doing, they respondent that they were gathering the cut woods; since accused-appellant Pablico and accused Tangueran were not yet through gathering woods, victim Cabrestante bid them goodbye for darkness might catch them along their path, and they left accused-appellant Pablico and accused Tangueran; while they were walking one after another about eight (8) meters away from accused-appellant Pablico and accused Tangueran, three (3) successive shots were suddenly fired at them; while each of them was carrying a two-and-a-half (2 1/2)-meter long wood, he was walking ahead, followed by Oliver and victim Cabrestante was at the back; he did not actually see the person who fired the shot because he was focused on the direction in front of him; victim Cabrestante fell to the ground after being hit by the first shot; he and Oliver dropped the pieces of wood that they were carrying and they ran away towards the lower portion of the forest area; another two (2) shots followed, then he saw accused-appellant Pablico holding the shotgun in an aiming position (nakatutok), but he did not see the latter in the act of firing it; he could not think of any reason why accused-appellant Pablico would shoot victim Cabrestante; he had never seen a homemade shotgun prior to the incident, and it was Oliver who told him that the thing being carried by accused-appellant Pablico was a homemade shotgun; only he, Oliver, victim Cabrestante, accused-appellant Pablico and accused Tangueran were present at the scene of the incident and he was unaware of the presence of other persons at the scene of the incident; upon reaching Barangay Villapaz, he and Oliver informed Arcadio about the shooting incident; he, Arcadio and Oliver went to the scene of the incident at about 8:30 o'clock in the evening and found victim Cabrestante, who was still alive at that time, sprawled on the ground; they carried victim Cabrestatnte at a distance of about two (2) kilometers from the spot where he was found to the place where they left the carabao and the cart; victim Cabrestante was first taken to Kagawad Victor Lagrosa's house in Barangay Villapaz; while dressing the wounds and cleaning victim Cabrestante body, they discovered that the left buttock of victim Cabrestante was hit; on March 10, 2000, at 4:00 o'clock in the morning, victim Cabrestante was finally transferred to Arcadio's house; there was no available banca to transport him to Taytay who died at 10:00 o'clock in the morning without receiving any medical attention; the incident was reported to the Barangay Captain and the police; he presented himself to the Barangay Captain for investigation after the nine (9)-day wake of victim Cabrestante and his statement was relayed to the police.
Oliver corroborated Villanueva's testimony and testified[7] further that: he is the brother of victim Cabrestante; on March 9, 2000, between 2:00 o'clock and 2:30 o'clock in the afternoon, he, Villanueva and victim Cabrestante began constructing the latter's house in Villapaz, El Nido, Palawan; sitio Mabengeten is a kilometer and a half away from Villapaz and it could be reached by walking fast within an hour; the Barangay Captain authorized them to gather round wood (anibong) for the said construction; accused-appellant Pablico inquired from him, Villanueva and victim Cabrestante why they were there in Sito Mabengeten; he saw accused-appellant Pablico shoot victim Cabrestante with a "pirit-pirit" while the latter was bending to pick up the wood that he gathered; he saw "pirit-pirit before when he was guarding edible birds nest at New Ibajay, but he neither fired one nor saw one being fired; a "pirit-pirit" is loaded with a shotgun ammunition; he was eight (8) meters away from accused-appellant Pablico and less than an arm's length away from victim Cabrestante when the gunshots were fired, but he was not hit; he was about twenty (20) meters away when accused-appellant Pablico and accused Tangueran fired two (2) shots; when questioned by the lower court, he stated that accused Tangueran was merely looking and pointing his gun at him and Villanueva; Villanueva left him at the scene of the incident to fetch Arcadio and he remained hiding until Villanueva returned with Arcadio who brought a flashlight at the scene of the incident at 8:00 o'clock in the evening; the place where he hid is fifty (50) meters away from the place where victim Cabrestante fell; he, Villanueva, Arcadio and victim Cabrestante arrived at Villapaz on March 10, 2000 at 2:00 o'clock in the morning; they also looked for a jeep to transport victim Cabrestante to Taytay, but there was none; they sought the help of a doctor, but the latter could not render proper medical attendance to save victim Cabrestante from death; victim Cabrestante sustained eight(8) wounds which were more or less two (2) inches away from each other on the left hip; Barangay Captain Perlito Sarmiento arrived are Arcadio's house and talked to victim Cabrestante; upon the invitation of the Barangay Captain, a doctor conducted an autopsy on victim Cabrestante's body at the barangay hall at the time it was about to be buried; Arcadio reported the incident to the police; and, he executed his affidavit before former Judge Palomar of El Nido only on April 3, 2000 because he first attended the funeral of victim Cabrestante who was buried on March 11, 2000.
Dr. Rivera testified[8] that: Arcadio identified victim Cabrestante's body and supplied all the details during the autopsy; victim Cabrestante sustained sixteen (16) gunshot wounds and an abrasion; the said wounds produced by a gunshot coming from a homemade shotgun ("pirit-pirit"); the metallic part[9] (lead) taken from victim Cabrestante's body was more of a shotgun pellet rather than a slug fired from a .38 caliber gun; the hollow point of a bullet of a .38 caliber gun is visible; the bullet could have hit the bone of victim Cabrestante's leg because of the deformity of the lead; the gun was fired from a distance of less than two (2) feet because of the presence of contusion, tatooing and powder burns; the left lateral thigh of the lower extremities sustained most of the sixteen (16) wounds; no injury was sustained from the torso up to the head; victim Cabrestante succumbed to hemorrhagic shock due to gunshot wounds or loss of blood on account of the delay in rendering immediate medical attendance; according to Arcadio, had victim Cabrestante been immediately taken to the hospital, he could have possibly survived; he could not tell which among the sixteen (16) wounds was fatal; probably, the assailant did not intend to kill victim Cabrestante but merely to scare and hurt the latter; and, victim Cabrestante's fall could have caused the abrasion.
For the defense, Bacaltos testified[10] that: he is a resident of New Ibajay, El Nido, Palawan; the whole day of March 9, 2000, he, accused-appellant Pablico, accused Tangueran, Angeles and Justiano Patanao ("Patanao" for brevity) gathered edible bird's nest at Staff Cliff, which is a kilometer and a half away from New Ibajay; they left the place on March 10, 2000 at 11:30 o'clock in the morning because they ran out of provisions/supplies such as battery; he and his group did not bring any firearms; he, accused-appellant Pablico, accused Tangueran, Angeles and Patanao went to concessionaire/employer Mariano Gabayan's residence in New Ibajay to secure provisions/supplies and spent the night there; Sitio Mabengeten, Barangay Villapaz, El Nido, Palawan is more or less five (5) kilometers away from New Ibajay and Star Cliff; Villapaz could be reached within twenty (20) minutes through a jeep ride from New Ibajay; Sitio Mabengeten could be reached by walking in an hour from Barangay Villapaz; it takes thirty (30) minutes to board a jeep from Star Cliff to New Ibajay; Oliver is a resident of Villapaz; he does not know Villanueva, but he knows victim Cabrestante and he did not see the latter on March 9, 2000; and, there are no passenger jeeps plying New Ibajay-Villapaz route at nighttime.
On March 5, 2002[11], Angeles was called to the witness stand but the defense dispensed with his testimony upon the prosecution's admission of the gist of Angeles' testimony as Bacaltos' corroborating witness.
Accused-appellant Pablico testified[12] that; he has been a resident Barangay New Ibajay, El Nido, Palawan since 1998; he and victim Cabrestante were friends; Oliver and Villanueva are his long time acquaintances; victim Cabrestatnte, Oliver and Villanueva used to gather balinsasayaw; he had no conflict of interest, disagreement nor quarrel with victim Cabrestante, Oliver and Villanueva; victim Cabrestatnte, Oliver and Villanueva were rice field workers in March 2000; he heard about Sitio Mabengeten, Barangay Villapaz, El Nido, Palawan, but he has never been there; the whole day and night of March 9, 2000, he was with accused Tangueran, Bacaltos, Patanao and Angeles at Star Cliff gathering edible bird's nest (balinsasayaw); he and accused Tangueran did not have the chance to go to Sitio Mabengeten and meet victim Cabrestante, Oliver and Villanueva in the afternoon of March 9, 2000; and, he and accused Tangueran did not own and bring "pirit-pirit" at Star Cliff.
Accused Tangueran corroborated the testimonies of Bacaltos and accused-appellant Pablico and testified[13] further that: he is unfamiliar with and he has never been to Sitio Mabengeten; he knows victim Cabrestante, Oliver and Villanueva since childhood; he climbed the cliff to gather balinsasayaw; they armed themselves with bolos, not with "pirit-pirit; he has not yet seen a "pirit-pirit"; he saw a shotgun for the first time at the Provincial Jail, but he is unfamiliar with its characteristics or mechanism and its pellets; he is actually unfamiliar with the trajectory of a bullet which was described in his counter affidavit; and, it was Atty. Padon who prepared his counter-affidavit and he merely affixed his signature on it.
After the presentation of both parties' evidence, the assailed decision dated July 7, 2005 was promulgated. On motion for reconsideration, the order dated February 9, 2006 was rendered by the lower court.
Hence, this appeal raising the following assignment of errors:
Accused-appellant Pablico contends that he has no motive to kill victim Cabrestante. Oliver and Villanueva could not have seen him in the act of shooting victim Cabrestante because Oliver and Villanueva were walking ahead of victim Cabrestante while they were carrying round timbers. Oliver andI.
THE COURT ERRED IN GIVING FULL CREDENCE TO THE TESTIMONIES OF THE PROSECUTION WITNESSES RODEL VILLANUEVA AND OLIVER CABRESTANTE AND DISREGARDING THE ACCUSED DEFENSE OF DENIAL.II.
THE COURT ERRED IN APPRECIATING THE QUALIFYING CIRCUMSTANCES OF TREACHERY IN CONVICTING THE ACCUSED OF THE CRIME OF MURDER.
Villanueva immediately ran away when they heard the first burst of gunfire. Villanueva hid while Oliver continuously ran away to seek help. The testimonies of Oliver and Villanueva are impossible because he could have cornered them had he intended to kill them. He was at Star Cliff at the time of the shooting incident and the information did not specifically state the factual circumstances that would qualify the crime charged to murder.
The appeal is bereft of merit.
Accused-appellant Pablico's defenses of lack of motive and alibi are unavailing in the face of the credible and reliable positive identification by prosecution witnesses Oliver and Villanueva.
Oliver, Villanueva and accused-appellant Pablico are acquainted with each other. Oliver and Villanueva saw accused-appellant Pablico carrying a homemade shotgun ("pirit-pirit") when the latter arrived at the scene of the incident. Oliver and Villanueva heard the first gunshot behind them, while they were walking eight (8) meters away from accused-appellant Pablico, and saw victim Cabrestante fall to the ground. Oliver and Villanueva heard the subsequent two (2) gunshots. Villanueva was able to see accused-appellant Pablico from behind pointing the gun at them as he ran away from the latter. Oliver, who was standing less than an arms length from victim Cabrestante, saw accused-appellant Pablico shoot victim Cabrestante while the latter was in the act of picking up the woods that they gathered from the forest. Oliver, Villanueva and Arcadio saw the multiple gunshot wounds sustained by victim Cabrestante.
Moreover, Star Cliff is only about five (5) kilometers away from Sitio Mabengeten. The travel time by motor vehicle from Star Cliff to Sitio Mabengeten takes about thirty (30) minutes and the tragic incident occurred on that fateful afternoon of March 9, 2000.
The Supreme Court ruled that where a reliable eyewitness has fully and satisfactorily identified the accused as the perpetrator of the felony, motive becomes immaterial in the successful prosecution of a criminal case. Thus, whether or not accused-appellant Pablico had a reason to kill victim Cabrestante, his conviction may still follow from the untraversed identification made by prosecution witnesses. It is settled that motive is not essential for conviction of a crime when there is no doubt as to the identity of the culprit, and that lack of motive for committing the crime does not preclude conviction for such crime when the crime and participation of the accused are definitely proved.
It is the most natural reaction of victims of crimes to strive to remember the faces of their assailants and the manner by which they committed the crime.
For the defense of alibi to prosper, the accused must prove not only that he was at some other place at the time of the commission of the crime, but that it was physically impossible for him to be at the locus delicti or within its immediate vicinity.[14]
The lower court, therefore, rightly rejected accused-appellant Pablico's alibi.
This Court also agrees with the lower court in appreciating treachery as a qualifying circumstance.
Victim Cabrestante was about eight (8) meters away and in the act of picking up the woods that he gathered when accused-appellant Pablico shot him from behind.
There is treachery when the offender commits any of the crimes against persons, employing means, methods or forms in the execution thereof, which tend directly and specially to ensure their execution without risk to himself arising from the defense that the offended party might make. Two conditions must concur for treachery to exist, namely: (a) the employment of means of execution gave the person attached no opportunity to defend himself or to retaliate; and (b) the means or method of execution was deliberately and consciously adopted.[15]
The lower court properly awarded civil indemnity to the heirs of victim Cabrestante in the amount of P50,000.00.
However, the lower court should have awarded the heirs of victim Cabrestante moral damages amounting to P50,000.00, temperate damages amounting to P25,000.00 considering the fact that no evidence of funeral or burial expenses were presented in the lower court and exemplary damages in the amount of P25,000.00.
The heirs of victim Cabrestante are entitled to recover exemplary damages amounting to P25,000.00, considering that the crime was attended by the qualifying circumstance of treachery.
Civil indemnity is mandatory and granted to the heirs of the victim without need of proof other than the commission of the crime. Under prevailing jurisprudence, the award of P50,000.00 to the heirs of the victim as civil indemnity is in order.
The award of temperate damages in homicide or murder cases is proper when no evidence of burial and funeral expenses is presented in the trial court. Under Article 2224 of the Civil Code, temperate damages may be recovered as it cannot be denied that the heirs of the victim suffered pecuniary loss although the exact amount was not proved.
Anent moral damages, the same is mandatory in cases of murder and homicide, without need of allegation and proof other than the death of the victim. The award of P50,000.00 as moral damages is in order.[16]
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the appealed decision dated July 7, 2005 and the order dated February 9, 2006 of the RTC, Branch 49, Palawan and Puerto Princesa City in Criminal Case No. 15976 are AFFIRMED with MODIFICATION. Accused-appellant Arnold Pablico is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of MURDER and is hereby sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. Accused-appellant Pablico is also ordered to pay the heirs of Renante Cabrestante the amounts of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity, P50,000.00 as moral damages. P25,000.00 as temperate damages, and P25,000.00 as exemplary damages.
SO ORDERED.
Librea-Leagogo and Elbinias, JJ., concur.
Judgment affirmed with modification.
[1] Records, pp. 178-183.
[2] Records, p. 230.
[3] Records, pp. 1-2.
[4] Records, p. 27.
[5] Records, p. 46.
[6] TSN dated January 10, 2001.
[7] TSN dated January 31, 2001.
[8] TSN dated March 22, 2001.
[9] Records, p. 76.
[10] TSN dated December 5, 2001.
[11] Records, p. 106.
[12] TSN dated September 11, 2002.
[13] TSN dated March 12, 2004.
[14] People vs. Hernando, G.R. No. 186493, November 25, 2009.
[15] Ibid.
[16] People vs. Rodas, G.R. No. 175881, August 28, 2007.