G.R. No. 25702 - People vs. Cabantug

On July 26, 1925, several persons assembled in Jose Acebedo’s rice field located in the barrio of Entampilan, municipality of Panitan, Province of Capiz.
The gathering was organized for the purpose of reconstructing the ridges and plowing the field—locally known as daguiao work—without monetary compensation, although food was provided and participants were given tuba (a local alcoholic beverage).

Egmidio Deviente, while passing by the field en route from his brother Laureano Deviente’s house, was invited by the accused and his companions to join in drinking tuba.
After drinking, a challenge was proposed by Severino, one of those present, to engage in a finger contest known locally as juego al tornillo. Egmidio declined to participate with the accused Evaristo Cabantug.
At this point, it is presumed that all participants were under the influence of tuba, which set the stage for the ensuing conflict.

Despite Egmidio’s refusal to engage in the contest, Evaristo Cabantug, influenced by drink, unsheathed his bolo and struck Egmidio on the calf of his right leg without any apparent provocation.
Following the initial blow and the resulting wound, Egmidio immediately dropped his tuba receptacle, grabbed his bolo, and a mutual fight erupted between him and Evaristo.

In the confusion that ensued, several onlookers intervened; some individuals restrained Egmidio by seizing him around the waist, causing him to lean toward the ground.
During this struggle:

Evaristo Cabantug stabbed Egmidio on the shoulder.
Paulino Cabantug, another accused, inflicted a stab wound on the side of Egmidio.
The third accused, Melecio Cadiz, is also implicated for causing a wound on Egmidio’s hand.

The wounds sustained, particularly the one on the side (recorded as wound No. 1 on the certificate issued by the health officer), led to Egmidio Deviente’s death the following day in Panitan.
The trial court, based on the presented evidence, sentenced both Evaristo and Paulino Cabantug to twelve years and one day of reclusion temporal, imposed a joint and several indemnity of P500 to the deceased’s widow, and ordered the payment of court costs.
Melecio Cadiz was acquitted in the trial proceedings.

The accused argued on appeal that the trial court erred in convicting them of homicide.
Specific contentions included allegations of:

Failure to properly consider the alibi evidence presented by Paulino Cabantug.
Overlooking the purported exempting circumstance of self-defense claimed by Evaristo Cabantug.
A general error leading to the wrongful conviction of the accused.

Jesus Deviente, a 14-year-old boy who accompanied his father that afternoon, provided a clear and natural account of the altercation.
Geronima Dasal, who was positioned near Laureano Deviente’s house, observed and corroborated the events of the fight.

Patricio del Fin, who arrived at the scene later the same afternoon, recounted Egmidio’s account of the events, detailing the sequence of blows and the ensuing pursuit resulting in multiple wounds.

The consistency and corroboration among the testimonies of these witnesses solidified the prosecution’s case against the accused.

Whether the evidence presented at trial sufficiently established beyond a reasonable doubt that Evaristo and Paulino Cabantug were guilty of homicide.

Whether the trial court wrongly dismissed the alibi defense offered by Paulino Cabantug, which purportedly exonerated him by asserting his presence elsewhere during the incident.

Whether the defense’s argument that Evaristo Cabantug acted in self-defense could be substantiated by the evidence, especially given the dynamics of the fight and the actions of the deceased.

Whether the trial court made a proper assessment of the witness testimonies and other circumstantial evidence, particularly in light of the conditions of intoxication and the chaotic nature of the altercation.