Case Digest (G.R. No. L-49761)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines v. Esperidion Alegarbes, Jr., G.R. No. L-49761, September 21, 1987, Second Division, Yap, J., writing for the Court. The case reached the Supreme Court on automatic review because the trial court had imposed the death penalty.The plaintiff-appellee was The People of the Philippines; the defendant-appellant was Esperidion Alegarbes, Jr., then a soldier connected with the 40th Infantry Battalion and designated Assistant Chief of the Military Police assigned in Bacolod, Lanao del Norte. The criminal information charged Alegarbes with the murder of Arlington Rara.
On the evening of April 23, 1978, Rara was found mauled and lying unconscious in the poblacion of Bacolod, Lanao del Norte. Two soldiers first assisted and intended to take him to their checkpoint. When Alegarbes arrived he interrogated the groggy Rara; according to prosecution eyewitnesses (Damian Argao, Andres Pumicpic, Rey Salvacion) Alegarbes struck Rara, pulled his hair, fired his revolver once at the side (not hitting), whipped him with his belt, and—after Rara knelt and begged forgiveness—pulled him up and shot him pointblank in the neck. Rara was taken to a clinic but died shortly thereafter. The municipal health officer who performed the autopsy (Exhibit A) found an anterior neck bullet wound with powder burns, indicating close-range firing (about one foot).
The defense offered a different account: Alegarbes claimed he was on patrol, was armed only with an Armalite and a hand grenade (no revolver), heard a .22-caliber shot before his arrival, fired a warning shot upward with his Armalite when someone tried to assault him from behind, and later ordered the victim brought to the clinic. No soldier companions or other witnesses corroborated his account.
The Court of First Instance of Lanao del Norte, Branch III, Iligan City, by decision dated December 15, 1978, con...(Subscriber-Only)
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in convicting Esperidion Alegarbes, Jr. of murder?
- Was the qualifying circumstance of treachery correctly applied?
- Were the aggravating circumstances of abuse of public position and cruelty properly found?
- Should the mitigating circumstances of lack of intent and voluntary surrender have been credi...(Subscriber-Only)
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)