People v. Aguinaldo
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On May 20, 1982, at about 1:00 PM, appellant Gavino Aguinaldo arrived with two unidentified companions, armed with long guns, at the house of the victim, Marcelo Bueno. Silveria Pasion, the victim's sister, testified that her brother was seated while she was beside him with her infant child. A cousin, Gabriel Malunao, was also present. The appellant and his companions invited Marcelo to visit a barrio lass, which Marcelo declined. The conversation then shifted to revolution. Silveria observed her daughter asleep and took her upstairs. An unpleasant conversation ensued, after which one of appellant's companions accused Marcelo of being a "CI" (civilian informer of the NPA). Immediately thereafter, this companion shot Marcelo in the head. The appellant and his other companion then successively fired at Marcelo. Before leaving, they warned Silveria and Gabriel not to report the incident to the police, threatening them with the same fate as Marcelo. Despite the threat, Silveria reported the death to the Barangay Captain, who accompanied her to a military detachment to request security. Due to fear, Silveria and her family evacuated after Marcelo's burial and returned three months later to report the incident to the police upon learning of appellant's apprehension. Procedural History: The Regional Trial Court, Branch VIII of Aparri, Cagayan, found Gavino Aguinaldo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of Murder, sentencing him to suffer the penalty of Reclusion Perpetua and ordering him to pay damages and costs. The Petition: The accused appealed the decision of the RTC.
Issue(s)
Whether the trial court erred in finding the appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder. Whether the testimony of Silveria Pasion is credible despite alleged inconsistencies and her relationship to the victim. Whether the appellant's defense of denial and presence at the scene without participation is sufficient to overcome the prosecution's evidence.
Ruling
The judgment of conviction is affirmed, but the imprisonment is modified to a minimum of ten (10) years and one (1) day of prision mayor to a maximum of eighteen (18) years, eight (8) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal, applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law.
Ratio Decidendi
On the guilt of the appellant: The Court affirmed the trial court's finding of guilt. The appellant's mere denial of participation in the crime could not prevail over the positive testimony of Silveria Pasion, who identified the appellant as one of the assailants who shot her brother while he was already lying prostrate on the ground. The Court found no plausible reason to overturn the trial court's assessment of credibility. The presence of the appellant at the scene, coupled with the positive identification by an eyewitness, established his culpability beyond reasonable doubt. On the credibility of Silveria Pasion: The Court found Silveria Pasion's testimony to be credible. Her initial reluctance to identify the appellant to the authorities was attributed to her fear for her life and her family's safety, a natural reaction given the threats made by the assailants. The Court noted that such initial reluctance is common and does not affect credibility, as held in People vs. Rosario. Furthermore, her relationship to the victim did not impair her credibility, as there was no showing of improper motive for testifying against the accused, and her natural interest would deter her from implicating innocent persons. The Court also addressed the alleged inconsistency regarding the location of the gunshot wounds, explaining that these referred to minor details and that even the medico-legal expert, Dr. Jacob, could not distinctly remember due to apprehension at the time of the post-mortem examination. Dr. Jacob himself testified that the wounds were on the thorax cavity and that he could not precisely recall all locations due to fear. On the appellant's defense: The appellant's defense that he was merely present at the scene and did not participate in the shooting was found insufficient. He admitted his presence and pointed out the victim's house to the armed men. The positive identification by Silveria Pasion directly contradicted his claim of non-participation. The Court reiterated the well-settled rule that findings of fact by the trial court, especially on the issue of credibility, are given great weight on appeal, and there were no cogent reasons to disturb them in this case. The appellant's defense failed to create reasonable doubt regarding his involvement in the commission of the crime.
Main Doctrine
The positive testimony of a witness, even if related to the victim, is given full faith and credit when there is no showing of improper motive. Minor inconsistencies in the testimony do not impair credibility, especially when explained by fear or apprehension.