Case Digest (G.R. No. 112984)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 112984)
Facts:
People of the Philippines v. Cresencio De Gracia and Bonifacio De Gracia, G.R. No. 112984, November 14, 1996, Supreme Court Third Division, Francisco, J., writing for the Court.On February 19, 1992, 70-year-old Crispin Almazan died from multiple stab wounds and a compound nasal fracture; the Autopsy Report (Exh. F-3) listed several penetrating and sharp-edged injuries to the neck, face and chest. An Information dated April 10, 1992 charged brothers Cresencio, Dalmacio (then at large) and Bonifacio De Gracia with murder, alleging use of a bladed weapon with evident premeditation, treachery, conspiracy and superior strength. Upon arraignment the accused (except Dalmacio) pleaded not guilty and the case went to trial.
At trial prosecution witnesses, principally Anita Almazan and Aries Almazan, testified they saw the De Gracia brothers confront Crispin, curse him and then assault him: Anita placed the encounter near the victim’s house and described a spear; Aries said the attack occurred nearer the ricefield and mentioned a bolo; both described stabbing and repeated blows. Police officers recovered a blood-stained spear, a chisel and a leather scabbard from the scene and photographed the victim; Anita executed a sworn statement (Exh. D). The Regional Trial Court, Branch 31, Nueva Ecija, promulgated judgment on May 26, 1993, convicting Cresencio and Bonifacio of murder and sentencing them to reclusion perpetua, ordering joint indemnity of P50,000 (moral damages) and P29,250 (actual damages and expenses).
The accused appealed to the Supreme Court, assigning four errors: (I) conviction based on inconsistent and improbable testimony; (II) failure to give exculpatory weight to imputed motive; (III) failure to acquit on ground of self-defense and defense of a relative; and (IV) failure to credit Bonifacio with voluntary surrender and apply the Indeterminate Sentence Law. The Court heard the record and briefing and issued the instant decision affirming the conviction but modifying Bonifacio’s penalty under the Indeterminate Sentence Law.
Issues:
- Did the trial court err in convicting the accused-appellants despite alleged inconsistencies and improbabilities in the prosecution witnesses’ testimonies?
- Should the trial court have given exculpatory weight to the accused-appellants’ claimed imputation of motive?
- Was the verdict erroneous for failing to acquit on grounds of self-defense or defense of a relative?
- Did Bonifacio de Gracia qualify for the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender and the benefits of the Indeterminate Sentence Law?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)