People v. Alison
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: The underlying dispute involves a brutal robbery in band that resulted in the deaths of two Philippine Constabulary (PC) officers and attempted murder. The incident occurred on March 18, 1966, when a group of twelve individuals, including the appellants, planned and executed a robbery targeting Juanito Uy on Burias Island. The plan involved some members entering the residence to commit the robbery while others maintained an armed cordon. During the execution, PC officers Lt. Plaridel Abaya, Sgt. Gregorio Calnea, and Cpl. Alfredo Llantino were present and sleeping in the house. The perpetrators, identified as Aquino Alvarez, Enrico Cabatingan, Juanito Alerta, and Pablo Mendoza, fired upon the sleeping officers, killing Sgt. Calnea and Cpl. Llantino, and then proceeded to rob Juanito Uy of cash and a firearm. Procedural History: Following their arrest in Masbate, the accused provided extrajudicial statements admitting their participation. The Provincial Fiscal of Quezon filed an amended information charging twelve individuals with robbery in band with double murder and attempted murder. One accused, Valeriano Jimenez, was discharged to become a state witness. The Court of First Instance of Quezon, Branch IV, in Criminal Case No. C-351, rendered a decision on January 3, 1969, convicting four accused (Aquino Alvarez, Enrico Cabatingan, Juanito Alerta, and Pablo Mendoza) of the crime charged and sentencing them to death by electrocution, while sentencing seven others to life imprisonment (cadena perpetua). The court also ordered the accused to indemnify the victims' heirs and reimburse stolen property. Several accused later withdrew their appeals (Nasalito Subing-Subing, Dominador Alerta, Idoles Coro, and Gerardo Santiago), and one accused, Bonifacio Alison, died during the pendency of the appeal. This left Juanito Alerta, Enrico Cabatingan, Aquino Alvarez, Pablo Mendoza, Romulo Cabatingan, and Pedro Galupo as the remaining appellants before the Supreme Court. The Petition: The case reached the Supreme Court on automatic review of the death penalty imposed by the lower court. The appellants, through their counsel de oficio, raised defenses of alibi and alleged maltreatment during the extraction of their extrajudicial confessions. The Supreme Court, however, found the testimonies of eyewitnesses Juanito Uy, Lt. Plaridel Abaya, and state witness Valeriano Jimenez to be credible and sufficient to overcome the defense of alibi. While affirming the conviction for robbery in band, the Court modified the sentences. The death penalty for Aquino Alvarez, Enrico Cabatingan, Juanito Alerta, and Pablo Mendoza was reduced to reclusion perpetua. The Court also reclassified the crime for Romulo Cabatingan and Pedro Galupo from robbery in band with double murder to simple robbery in band, sentencing them to an indeterminate penalty of seven (7) years, four (4) months, and one (1) day to ten (10) years of prision mayor.
Issue(s)
Whether the guilt of the accused-appellants has been proven beyond reasonable doubt. Whether the defense of alibi and claims of maltreatment are tenable. Whether the participation of Romulo Cabatingan and Pedro Galupo warrants conviction for the complex crime of robbery in band with double murder and attempted murder. Whether the penalties imposed by the trial court are proper.
Ruling
The Court modified the penalties imposed by the trial court. Aquino Alvarez, Enrico Cabatingan, Juanito Alerta, and Pablo Mendoza were each sentenced to reclusion perpetua. Romulo Cabatingan and Pedro Galupo were sentenced to seven (7) years, four (4) months and one (1) day, as minimum, to ten (10) years of prision mayor, as maximum. The appealed judgment was affirmed in all other respects, including the civil indemnity.
Ratio Decidendi
On the guilt of the accused-appellants: The Court affirmed the trial court's finding that the guilt of the accused-appellants was proven beyond reasonable doubt. The testimonies of eyewitnesses Juanito Uy, Lt. Plaridel Abaya, and state witness Valeriano Jimenez were found credible and sufficient to overcome the defense of alibi. The Court reiterated the principle that alibi is a weak defense, especially when not corroborated and when the accused are positively identified by credible witnesses. The Court noted that the distance between Masbate and San Narciso, Quezon, while traversable, did not render the presence of the accused at the scene of the crime impossible, given the mode of transport. The positive identification by the victims and the state witness, coupled with the corroboration of the extrajudicial confessions by the corpus delicti, established their culpability. On the defense of alibi and claims of maltreatment: The Court rejected the defense of alibi, citing established jurisprudence that it is a weak defense easily fabricated and difficult to prove. The claims of maltreatment were also dismissed. The Court observed that the accused had the opportunity to complain if they were indeed maltreated, especially since their statements were taken not only by PC soldiers but also by Fiscals and sworn before a City Judge. Their failure to complain at the earliest opportunity, and the presence of their counsel de oficio who failed to appear during the investigation, militated against their claims. The Court emphasized that the extrajudicial confessions were corroborated by evidence of the corpus delicti, lending them credibility. On the participation of Romulo Cabatingan and Pedro Galupo: The Court agreed with the defense that Romulo Cabatingan and Pedro Galupo should not have been convicted of the complex crime of robbery in band with double murder and attempted murder. Based on the testimony of the state witness, the plan was solely to rob Juanito Uy, and the killing of the PC soldiers occurred only when Alvarez, Cabatingan, Alerta, and Mendoza entered the room. The Court found that the killing or assault upon the PC soldiers was not known to Romulo Cabatingan and Pedro Galupo, who were positioned outside to guard the premises, nor to Pedro Galupo, who remained in the pumpboat. Therefore, their participation was limited to robbery in band, with the aggravating circumstances of nighttime and evident premeditation, warranting a lesser penalty than that for the complex crime. On the penalties imposed: For the four principal accused (Aquino Alvarez, Enrico Cabatingan, Juanito Alerta, and Pablo Mendoza), who were initially sentenced to death, the Court, for lack of necessary votes, imposed the next lower penalty of reclusion perpetua. For Romulo Cabatingan and Pedro Galupo, whose participation was deemed limited to robbery in band, the Court imposed a penalty of seven (7) years, four (4) months and one (1) day, as minimum, to ten (10) years of prision mayor, as maximum, considering the aggravating circumstances of nighttime and evident premeditation. The civil indemnity awarded by the trial court was affirmed.
Main Doctrine
The Court modified the penalties imposed by the trial court, sentencing the principal accused to reclusion perpetua instead of death, and imposing a lesser penalty on those with lesser participation, while affirming the civil indemnity awarded.