Title
Avelino y Bulawan vs. People
Case
G.R. No. 181444
Decision Date
Jul 17, 2013
Petitioner convicted of murder for killing barangay chairman; alibi rejected, treachery proven; damages awarded, affirmed by Supreme Court.
Font Size:

Case Digest (G.R. No. 181444)

Facts:

    Parties and Charges

    • Petitioner: Bobby AAbela Avelino y Bulawan, alongside co-accused (including Ricardo Tolentino alias Sonny Muslim, Farouk Musa a.k.a. Boy Muslim, Bubut Tuwad, Angkol, Mon, Renato Meneses a.k.a. Nato, Benjamin Elbona a.k.a. Toto Mata, and Dominic Apan a.k.a. Domeng Bakukang).
    • Charged with murder before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila with qualifying circumstances of treachery and evident premeditation.
    • Aside from those who pleaded not guilty (petitioner, Renato Meneses, Benjamin Elbona, and Farouk Musa), other accused remain at-large.

    Pre-Crime Preparations and Assembly

    • On a September day in 2000 around 2:00 p.m., petitioner directed his employee, Renato Sosas y Verzosa, to summon several individuals for a meeting.
    • The summoned group convened at the petitioner’s warehouse located in Tagaytay, within the Baseco Compound, Tondo, Manila.
    • During the assembly, an exchange took place in which the petitioner uttered the threat “Papatayin si Chairman,” causing confusion among the group.

    The Crime Incident – October 5, 2000

    • Around 9:00 p.m., Alfredo Manalangsang, while riding a tricycle near Baseco Compound, encountered a situation en route to the compound.
    • As the tricycle passed an area between Muelle Del Rio and 2nd Street, Port Area, an owner-type jeep driven by Barangay Chairman Generoso Hispano was blocked by men.
    • Three men, identifiable by wearing bonnets, were observed where:
    • Two of the men were blocking the jeep’s path.
    • The third, wearing a green jacket and positioned near the gutter, fired successive gunshots at Chairman Hispano.
    • Manalangsang, who hid behind a center island, witnessed the assailant move towards the jeep, pull down the nearly lifeless body of Chairman Hispano, and later identified the petitioner when he stooped down and adjusted his bonnet to inspect the victim.
    • Shortly after, as events unfolded:
    • The owner-type jeep was driven away by the accused as it was momentarily obstructed by a tricycle and a white car.
    • Mary Ann CaAada, a witness familiar with the petitioner, recognized him driving the jeep.

    Physical and Documentary Evidence

    • The scene revealed the owner-type jeep of Chairman Hispano with several empty shells of 9 mm caliber scattered on its floor.
    • Additional evidence included the testimonies of prosecution witnesses such as Delia Hispano (the victim’s wife), Diana Espinosa, Dr. Romeo T. Salen, P/Insp. Mario Prado, and an NBI agent, among others.

    Defendant’s Evidence and Trial Developments

    • The petitioner, along with his co-accused, maintained a plea of not guilty.
    • In defense, the petitioner advanced:
    • A denial of guilt, emphasizing that he did not commit the crime.
    • An alibi stating that on October 5, 2000, he and his wife were at the Land Transportation Office in Pasay City and later checked in at the Pharaoh Hotel in Sta. Cruz, Manila.
    • Testimony claiming that due to procedural delays, he was at the hotel, parked his car on Dasmariñas Bridge, and only later discovered his car missing.
    • On October 23, 2000, the petitioner was arrested by NBI agents.
    • After trial, the RTC found him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder (qualified by treachery) and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua.
    • The RTC also ordered payment of moral, actual, and civil indemnity damages to the victim’s heirs.
    • The Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the RTC’s decision and increased the award of actual damages.
    • The petitioner filed a motion for reconsideration, which the CA denied.

Issue:

    Sufficiency and Credibility of Identification

    • Whether the positive identification of the petitioner by eyewitnesses (Manalangsang and CaAada) is reliable despite the defense’s allegations of inconsistencies and poor illumination at the scene.
    • The weight to be accorded to the prosecution’s evidence against the self-serving negatives of an alibi and denial.

    Validity of the Defense of Denial and Alibi

    • Whether the petitioner’s defense—that he was elsewhere (at the Land Transportation Office and later at the Pharaoh Hotel)—proves that it was physically impossible for him to be present at the scene of the crime.
    • Whether the proximity of the alleged alibi location (Pharaoh Hotel) to the crime scene undermines the defense’s claim.

    Presence of Qualifying Circumstances

    • Whether the elements of treachery and evident premeditation have been sufficiently established through the manner of execution and the facts surrounding the ambush on Chairman Hispano.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is an AI-powered legal research platform in the Philippines for case digests, summaries, and jurisprudence. AI-generated content may contain inaccuracies; please verify independently.