People v. Lazo
REITERATIONFacts
The Antecedents: On October 13, 1979, between 6:30 and 8:00 PM, Felipe Garcia, his wife Felicidad, and others were having supper in their kitchen. The kitchen was illuminated by three kerosene lamps. Suddenly, the kitchen door opened, and Berting Arellano entered, followed by Danilo Lazo holding a carbine rifle. Tony Arellano, who was facing the door, identified both assailants. Danilo Lazo then fired his rifle twice. The first shot hit the wall, and the second shot fatally wounded Felipe Garcia and grazed the left leg of Tony Arellano. Felipe Garcia died seven to eight hours after an emergency operation. Tony Arellano was treated for a bullet wound on his left leg, requiring nine days of medical attendance. Procedural History: Tony Arellano identified Danilo Lazo and Berting Arellano as the assailants the following morning. He reported the incident to the police, who recovered two empty .30-caliber shells and two slugs from the scene. A handkerchief with the name "Danny" or "Dony" embroidered on it was found near the premises. Preliminary examinations led to the arrest and detention of Lazo and Arellano. They were charged with murder with frustrated murder and illegal possession of firearms. The illegal possession charge was dismissed for insufficiency of evidence. The information for murder with frustrated murder alleged conspiracy, intent to kill, evident premeditation, and treachery. Lazo and Arellano were granted bail. After trial, the Regional Trial Court found them guilty of murder with frustrated murder, sentencing them to reclusion perpetua and ordering them to indemnify the widow of Felipe Garcia. The trial court appreciated the aggravating circumstances of dwelling, nighttime, and treachery. The Petition: Both Danilo Lazo and Berting Arellano appealed their conviction. Danilo Lazo argued that the trial court erred in giving credence to the eyewitness testimony of Tony Arellano, in not appreciating his defense of alibi, and in not acquitting him due to reasonable doubt. Berting Arellano contended that he was denied due process due to the absence of a valid preliminary investigation and representation by counsel, and he also claimed to have an alibi.
Issue(s)
Whether the trial court erred in giving credence to the eyewitness testimony of Tony Arellano. Whether the defense of alibi presented by Danilo Lazo and Berting Arellano was sufficient to overcome the prosecution's evidence. Whether Berting Arellano was denied due process due to the alleged absence of a valid preliminary investigation and representation by counsel. Whether the aggravating circumstances of dwelling, nighttime, and treachery were correctly appreciated by the trial court. Whether the crime committed was a complex crime of murder with frustrated murder.
Ruling
The Supreme Court affirmed the decision of the Regional Trial Court with a modification increasing the indemnity to P50,000.00. The Court ruled that the crime committed was murder with frustrated murder, and the penalty of reclusion perpetua was correctly imposed. The aggravating circumstances of dwelling, nighttime, and treachery were sustained. The Court found the alibi of both accused to be unconvincing and the eyewitness testimony of Tony Arellano to be credible. The procedural challenge regarding the preliminary investigation was dismissed due to waiver.
Ratio Decidendi
On the credibility of Tony Arellano's testimony: The Court held that the trial court did not err in believing Tony Arellano's narration. Despite seeming inconsistencies, his account was a fairly accurate depiction of the crime, corroborated by the postmortem report and the findings of the investigating officers. The testimony bore "the earmarks of truth and sincerity" and was delivered spontaneously and naturally. The well-established rule that the testimony of a single witness, if positive and credible, is sufficient to support a conviction was applied. The Court found no reason to deviate from the trial court's assessment of Tony's sincerity and the truthfulness of his account. On the defense of alibi: The Court found the alibi of Danilo Lazo to be doubtful. While he claimed to be at his wife's bedside, the evidence presented was weak, consisting only of a medical certificate issued weeks later and the testimony of Dr. Farin, who admitted to not keeping regular medical records for out-of-clinic treatments. The Court noted the irregularity of this practice and Danilo's evasive answers during cross-examination regarding the clinic's facilities and attendance. The distance between the clinic and the crime scene was also deemed negotiable within a timeframe that did not preclude his presence. Similarly, Berting Arellano's alibi of working as a farmhand in Sta. Teresita was considered an obvious fabrication. His explanation for being in Macugay to look for farmhands after buying seedlings was deemed illogical, placing the cart before the horse. His corroborating witness, Leonarda Madayag, could not definitively account for his whereabouts during the exact time of the murder and showed bias. The alibi offered by both accused was inherently weak and lacked strong corroboration, thus failing to overcome the positive identification by the eyewitness. On the denial of due process regarding preliminary investigation: The Court found Berting Arellano's argument to be devoid of merit. The records showed that both accused were informed of their right to a preliminary investigation and to counsel but chose to waive the second stage of the proceedings. The right to a preliminary investigation is personal and can be waived expressly or by implication, as evidenced by the municipal judge's certification and order. Furthermore, the failure to raise the issue of a lack of preliminary investigation before arraignment constituted a forfeiture of the right, which could not be invoked for the first time on appeal. Their subsequent filing of a petition for bail without raising this issue further demonstrated their waiver. On the aggravating circumstances: The trial court correctly concluded that the aggravating circumstances of dwelling, nighttime, and treachery attended the commission of the crime. The attack was perpetrated inside the victim's dwelling, under the cover of darkness (nighttime), and with treachery, as the assailants suddenly opened the door and fired without any warning, depriving the victims of the opportunity to defend themselves. These circumstances were properly appreciated by the lower court in imposing the penalty. On the complex crime: The Court affirmed the trial court's conclusion that the crime committed was the complex crime of murder with frustrated murder. This was because the death of Felipe Garcia and the wounding of Tony Arellano were caused by a single bullet fired by Danilo Lazo. Under Article 48 of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty for a complex crime is that for the most serious crime, which is murder in this case, to be applied in its maximum period. However, due to the constitutional prohibition against capital punishment, the penalty of reclusion perpetua was imposed on both accused-appellants, as they acted in concert and conspiracy was evident from their coordinated actions.
Main Doctrine
The crime committed was a complex crime of murder with frustrated murder, punishable by the penalty for the most serious crime, murder, in its maximum period. Due to the constitutional prohibition against capital punishment, reclusion perpetua was imposed. Aggravating circumstances of dwelling, nighttime, and treachery were correctly appreciated. The right to preliminary investigation can be waived, and failure to raise its absence before arraignment constitutes forfeiture of the right.