G.R. No. 87085 February 2, 1993
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,
vs.
MANOLITO TOLENTINO @ "BONG", CARLITO TALA @ "BOY", RODOLFO MATAWARAN and @ JOHN DOE, accused-appellants.
The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.
Public Attorney's Office for accused-appellants.
NOCON, J.:
This is an appeal by accused Carlito Tala alias "Boy" from the decision 1
dated September 7, 1988 of the Regional Trial Court of Guagua,
Pampanga, Third Judicial Region, Branch 51 in Criminal Case No. G-1627,
the pertinent portion of which reads:
Finding
that the evidence has reached a degree of moral certainty that all the
elements of the crime of robbery with homicide were adequately proven
the three accused Tolentino, Matawaran and Tala should be found guilty
of the crime charged. The Court also finds that the prosecution has
proven actual damages in the amount of P60,000.00 as hospital and
medical expenses and P30,000.00 as funeral expenses or a total of
P90,000.00. Also proven is the claim of moral damages which the Court
assess at P40,000.00 for the death of the three children.
WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court finds the
accused Manolito Tolentino alias "Bong", Carlito Tala alias "Boy" and
Rodolfo Matawaran guilty beyond reasonable doubt as co-principals by
direct participation of the crime of Robbery with Multiple Homicide and
Serious Physical Injuries as charged in the Amended Information, with
the attendance of the aggravating circumstances of nighttime, dwelling,
abuse of superior strength and there were more than one victim, without
modifying circumstance with respect to accused Carlito Tala alias "Boy"
and Rodolfo Matawaran to offset the same, but with mitigating
circumstance of voluntary plea of guilty with respect to Manolito
Tolentino, and hereby sentences each of said accused to suffer the
penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA, with the accessory penalties of
the law, and ordering each of them to indemnify solidarily the heirs of
the deceased Enrique Lingad, Geraldine Lingad and Glenly Lingad in the
sum of P30,000.00 for each victim by reason of their death and the
further sum of P90,000.00 for actual damages, plus the amount of
P4,000.00 by way of restitution of the unrecovered cash amount stolen
from the spouses Domingo Lingad, Jr. and Adelaida Lingad and the
additional amount of P40,000.00 for moral damages incurred by the
offended couple for the death of their three (3) children, without
subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, and to pay the
proportionate share of the costs.
The scythe (Exhibit "KK") used in the commission of the crime charged is hereby confiscated in favor of the state. 2
On
January 24, 1984, accused-appellant Carlito Tala alias "Boy" together
with Manolito Tolentino alias "Bong", Rodolfo Matawaran and one John Doe
were charged for the crime of ROBBERY WITH MULTIPLE HOMICIDE AND
SERIOUS PHYSICAL INJURIES in an Amended Information committed as
follows:
That
on or about the 8th of November, 1983, in the municipality of Lubao,
province of Pampanga, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the above-named accused MANOLITO TOLENTINO alias
"Bong", CARLITO TALA alias "Boy", RODOLFO MATAWARAN and alias JOHN DOE,
conspiring and confederating together and helping one another with grave
abuse of confidence, nighttime purposely sought to facilitate the
commission of the offense, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and
feloniously, with intent of gain and without the knowledge and consent
of the owner and by the use of force upon things, to wit: by forcibly
breaking a wooden window grill of the comfort room to effect entrance
into the said house and once inside, did then and there take, steal and
carry away with them cash money amounting to FOUR THOUSAND (P4,000.00)
PESOS, Philippines currency, belonging to Domingo Lingad Jr., to the
damage and prejudice of said owner in the total amount of P4,000.00;
that on the occasion of the said robbery and for the purpose of enabling
them to take, steal and carry away the amount above-mentioned, herein
accused in pursuance of their conspiracy, did then and there wilfully,
unlawfully and feloniously and with evident premeditation and taking
advantage of their superior in number and strength and with deliberate
intent to kill, armed with a scythe, treacherously attack, assault and
stab GLENLY LINGAD, 10 years of age, ENRIQUE LINGAD, 8 years of age, IRENE LINGAD, 11 years of age, inflicting upon them serious and fatal injuries which directly caused the death of Glenly Lingad, Enrique Lingad and Irene Lingad and
likewise causing Serious Physical Injuries upon GRACE PAULE, 13 years
of age, which injuries have required and will require medical attendance
for a period of more than thirty (30) days and will incapacitate said
Grace Paule from performing her customary labor for the same period of
time. 3
Upon
arraignment, accused Tala, Tolentino and Matawaran pleaded "Not Guilty"
while their co-accused named only John Doe in the Ameded Information
was never identified by the prosecution nor arrested. However, during
the initial hearing of this case, accused Manolito Tolentino change his
plea from "Not Guilty" to "Guilty" in open court. 4
The facts as found by the trial court are as follows:
At around 7 p.m. of November 7, 1983, Adelaida Lingad
left her niece, Grace Paule and her three (3) children namely:
Geraldine (Irene), Glenly and Enrique, all minors, at home to attend the
wake of her uncle in a house 200 meters away from her place. The
children were the only ones left at home. Her husband was then working
abroad. At that time, Adelaida had P4,000.00 in cash which was wrapped
in newspaper and kept hidden under her bed. Before leaving the house,
Adelaida instructed the kids to go to bed.
At around 1
p.m. or 2 p.m. of November 8, 1983, accused Tala, Tolentino, Matawaran
and an unknown person whose face was covered entered the house of
Adelaida Lingad by forcibly breaking the window grill of the comfort
room and demanded to know from the children where their mother hid her
money. Grace Paule knew Manolito Tolentino because he is both an uncle
and a barriomate. She also knew Carlito Tala who is a relative of her
mother and Rodolfo Matawaran who is a "barkada" of Carlito. She
recognized all the accused for the lights were on. 5
When the man whose face was covered threatened to stab the kids,
Geraldine got so frighten that she revealed to the accused where her
mother hid the money.
After Tolentino took the P4,000.00, he stabbed Grace
Paule with a scythe while the other three (3) accused held the three (3)
other children who were then stabbed one after the other by Tolentino.
During the stabbing incident, Grace Paule lost consciousness but was
able to regain it back after about five (5) minutes and shouted for
help. Her mother and grandmother, who lived nearby, heard her and
immediately proceeded to said house but the four (4) accused had already
left.
When
accused Tolentino's brother informed Adelaida about the stabbing
incident that took place in her house, Adelaida immediately rushed to
her house and saw all the children with stab wounds. Glenly was lying on
the bed already dead while her bloodied niece Grace was sitting down
near the door looking pale and holding her heart. Upon reaching
Geraldine, who was lying at the porch, she asked her the identities of
the person responsible for stabbing them with the latter answering
"Bong-Bong" and also mentioning the names of Tala and Matawaran. 6 However, when she asked her son Enique the later was not able to answer but merely made a sign with his three (3) fingers. 7 Thereafter, Adelaida lost consciousness and was brought to the house of her mother.
Upon reporting said incident to the authorities,
Adelaida together with three (3) policemen went back to her house and
investigation was conducted where it was discovered that the accused
entered into the house by destroying the middle portion of the wooden
bars of the comfort room.
Meanwhile, the children were brought to the Central
Luzon General Hospital where Glenly was pronounced dead on arrival and
Enrique eventually died after undergoing an unsuccessful surgery.
Geraldine who was operated twice at the Makabali Hospital also succumbed
to her untimely death.
Grace Paule was the only surviving victim of this
horrible and harrowing experience and testified that she was awaken by
the four (4) accused who entered the house of her aunt in the early
morning of November 8, 1983 and subsequently stabbed her and her three
(3) cousins. She positively identified the three (3) accused because
accused Manolito Tolentino is her uncle as well as her barriomate and
accused-appellant Carlito Tala is a relative of her mother while accused
Rodolfo Matawaran is the "barkada" of accused-appellant Tala.
On the otherhand, accused-appellant Tala denied
having been in the house of Adelaida Lingad on that fateful morning and
maintained that at around 11 p.m. of November 7, 1983, he and accused
Matawaran were delivering watermelons at Saging, Dinalupihan, Bataan.
Thereafter, they went to Samal to return the trailer where the
watermelons were loaded and proceeded to his house in Lourdes, Lubao,
Pampanga. On their way home, they passed the house of Adelaida Lingad
and noticed nothing unusual. They arrived at his house at around 3 a.m.
of November 8, 1983 and slept there.
In rejecting the defense of alibi, the trial court correctly stated as follows:
Inasmuch
as the two accused, Tala and Matawaran, were riding in a jeep and the
scene of occurence is only a 30 minutes drive from their place of
destination, which is Dinalupihan, Bataan, it is [still] possible for
them to reach their alleged destination and come back to Lourdes, Lubao,
Pampanga in time to participate in the commission of the offense. Their
painful and laborious effort to extend the period of time especially
the three hours to load the watermelons is pitiful in its incredibility.
The indubitable fact remains that despite all allegations alleging
alibi the accused Tala and Matawaran slept in Lourdes, Lubao and were in
fact apprehended there.
It must be noted that the alibi in order to be given
full faith and credit must be clearly established and must not leave any
room for doubt as to its plausibility and verity.
In order that alibi as a defense may prosper, the
evidence to support it must be clear and convincing as to preclude the
possibility of the accused's presence at the scene of the crime while
the evidence as to his identification must be weak and insufficient.
Foremost and above all, it is essential that the
defense of alibi cannot prevail over the positive testimony of a witness
who clearly identified them as two of the cohorts of Manolito
Tolentino.
It
is clear that in this case that the accused Tala and Matawaran failed
to establish the credibility of their defense of alibi, first, as the
facts narrated by them were not clear and convincing, second, there
exist a wide room for doubt as to the plausity and verity of their
testimonies, and finally, their defense of alibi is belied by the
positive identification made by Grace Paule. 8
Resolving
the arguments of accused-appellant Tala that no probative value should
be given to the extrajudicial statement of Grace Paule taken by Fiscal
Abiog while she was still staying at the Makabili Hospital, since his
name and that of accused Matawaran were not mentioned by her as the
unnamed companion of accused Tolentino, thereby indicating that the
witness really had no inkling as to his participation in said crime
until Mang Medrano supplied her their names, does not convince Us of the
want of probative value of said statement of Grace Paule.
True that
Grace failed to mention the names of accused-appellant Tala and accused
Matawaran in her extrajudicial statement, but considering the fact that
at the time her statement was taken she was then groggy and delirious
from the stab wound she sustained but was nevertheless, able to
positively identify accused-appellant on the witness stand as one of the
persons who stabbed her and the children. We find Grace's testimony
credible. There is no evidence on record to show why said witness would
falsely implicate the accused-appellant Tala who is a relative of her
mother unless it is the truth. There being no improper motive on her
part to point to accused-appellant as one of the perpetrators of the
crime charged, Grace's testimony is entitled to full faith and credit. 9
Moreover, her testimony was corroborated by prosecution witness
Adelaida Lingad when the latter testified that her deceased daughter
Geraldine mentioned the names of the accused-appellant Tala and accused
Matawaran as the persons who stabbed her before she died. 10
As to
accused-appellant's contention that the statement of Geraldine, naming
her assailant soon after she was stabbed is inadmissible as part of res gestae,
We find said contention fallacious. The testimony of Adelaida Lingad,
as mother of the victims belied the accused-appellant's allegation:
Fiscal Abiog:
May I make it of record that all these three accused were properly or positively identified by the witness.
Now, Mrs. Witness, when we initially hear this
case, you testified that you asked Geraldine who was then at the porch,
you asked her as to who stabbed or caused those stabbed wounds and you
testified that she told you she was stabbed by a certain Bong-Bong. Now,
in the courtroom, you pointed out to a certain person which you
recognized or you know to be Manolito Tolentino, do you know the
nickname of that Manolito Tolentino who is residing in your barrio?
A Yes, sir.
Q What is the nickname of that Manolito Tolentino?
A Bong-Bong, sir.
Q And you also mentioned that before you asked
Geraldine as to who accused those stabbed wounds, Geraldine made a sign
with her three fingers, did you not ask her what she meant with that
sign with her three fingers?
Atty. Sampang:
The question was already answered during the
previous trial as appearing on page 26 of the transcript of stenographic
notes dated February 22, 1984.
Fiscal Abiog:
Alright, I will withdraw that question.
Court:
Next question.
Fiscal Abiog:
Q Now, according to you when you rushed home because
you were called by the brother of Manolito Tolentino informing you that
your children whom you left at home were stabbed and when you arrived
home, you reached Glenly already dead, and then Geraldine on the porch
wounded, and Enrique on the sala, also wounded, and Grace Paule near the
door, will you please tell us what happened to you when you saw or
witnessed this incident when you observed your children and you niece in
this condition?
A I asked my youngest child, sir.
Fiscal Abiog:
Q And the youngest child you are referring to or what is the name of your youngest child?
A Enrique, sir.
Q And what did you ask Enrique?
A I shouted and asked him and he responded by showing or raising his hand with three fingers, sir.
Q Alright, after you asked Enrique shouting, what
happened and he did not answer and instead he made a sign with his three
fingers, will you please tell us what else happened after that?
A I lost consciousness, sir.
Q And when you regained consciousness or where did you regain your consciousness?
A At the house of my mother, sir.
Q Will you please tell us how far is that house of your mother from the place of you residence?
Witness:
A From here up to that corner, sir.
Court:
Which corner?
A Up to there, sir. (Witness pointing to Joan's Refreshment).
Fiscal Abiog:
Which is about two hundred meters, more or less.
Atty. Sampang:
We agree, your Honor. (T.S.N., October 29, 1984, pp. 6-10).
The trial court had correctly applied the principle of res gestae, namely: (1) that the principal act, the res gestae,
be a startling occurrence; (2) that the statements were made before the
declarant had time to contrive or devise; and (3) that the statements
made must concern the occurrence in question and its immediately
attending circumstances 11
which are all present in the case at bar as Geraldine had named
accused-appellant as one of the perpetrators in the commission of the
crime immediately after the occurrence of the stabbing incident.
Accused-appellant Carlito Tala also contends that the
trial court erred in considering the extrajudicial confession of
accused Manolito Tolentino implicating him in the crime charged in the
face of the subsequent admission by Manolito Tolentino that he was alone
when he committed said crime.
We agree with the appellant on this point. The
extrajudicial confession of Tolentino cannot be used against appellant
under the principle of res inter alios acta unless accused is discharge from the information and made a state witness.
At any rate, the evidence on record, by itself is sufficient in proving accused-appellant's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from is hereby
AFFIRMED with the sole modification that the indemnity to be paid by the
accused-appellant Carlito Tala to the heirs of each victim is increased
to P50,000.00 in accordance with the recent jurisprudence of this
Court.
Narvasa, C.J., Feliciano, Regalado and Campos, Jr., JJ., concur.
# Footnotes
2 Rollo, pp. 81-82.
3 Id., at p. 12.
4 T.S.N., April 27, 1984, p. 4.
5 TSN, pp. 4-7, S. Oct. 9, 1985; pp. 17-18, S. Oct. 17, 1984.
6 T.S.N., February 22, 1984, pp. 21-26.
7 T.S.N., February 29, 1984, p. 9.
8 Rollo, pp. 77-81.
9 People vs. Odicta, 197 SCRA 158 [1991].
10 T.S.N., pp. 25-26, S. Feb. 22, 1984.
11 Ilocos Norte Electric Company vs. Court of Appeals, 179 SCRA 5 [1989]; People vs. Balbas, 122 SCRA 859.
No comments:
Post a Comment