Title
People vs. De la Cerna
Case
G.R. No. L-20911
Decision Date
Oct 30, 1967
Sixteen charged for 1958 double murder of Rafael and Casiano Cabizares; land dispute cited as motive. Supreme Court convicted some as principals, acquitted others, citing treachery, premeditation, and credible witness testimonies.
A

Case Digest (G.R. No. L-20911)

Facts:

  • Background and Initiation of Proceedings
    • Sixteen persons, including the appellants, were indicted by the provincial fiscal in the Court of First Instance of Cotabato for double murder.
    • The victims were Rafael and Casiano Cabizares—a father and son—killed by gunshots on February 3, 1958, in Barrio Cebuano, municipality of Tupi, Cotabato.
    • During trial, motions to dismiss the indictment were filed on the ground that the fiscal had conducted his own investigation even after a municipal court had dropped some accused. This objection was raised only after the prosecution rested its case and was thus deemed waived.
  • Chronology of the Incident
    • Early Morning Movement
      • Rafael Cabizares, accompanied by family members including his wife, brothers, and minor sons, left for Tupi with five sacks of corn.
      • Due to difficulties with a bull cart on an uphill path, Rafael requested his brother and son to help carry the sacks.
    • The Shooting at the Hilltop
      • Approaching Sulpicio de la Cerna’s house on the hill, Rafael and his companions arrived for unloading.
      • While inside the house, Sulpicio de la Cerna fired at Rafael, causing him to fall.
      • Sulpicio then directed his companions to burn his house in order to fabricate an excuse.
    • Transfer and Treatment of the Wounded
      • Casiano, Gumercindo, Marcelo, and Romualdo Cabizares carried a wounded Rafael 100 meters to his father Demetrio’s house.
      • Upon arrival, the wounds were washed and Rafael was brought into the third room of the house.
    • Attack and Subsequent Actions at Demetrio’s House
      • After Rafael was admitted, the accused arrived, armed with firearms, bolos, and canes.
      • They stoned the house and thrust bolos through bamboo walls and flooring, ordering the occupants, particularly the women, to leave.
      • Inside, Serapio Maquiling climbed into the kitchen and, with a carbine provided by Sulpicio, shot Rafael through the window.
      • Casiano, who had attempted to flee, was shot by Serapio when he was seen running.
      • Finally, Sulpicio retrieved the carbine and fired a third shot at Rafael, who was lying defenseless on the floor.
    • Physical Evidence and Autopsy Findings
      • The post-mortem examination confirmed the nature and trajectory of the wounds on both decedents.
        • Casiano’s wound entered from the back and exited in front.
ii. Rafael sustained multiple gunshot wounds (one entry, one exit, and an additional fatal stab wound on the left side).
  • An empty carbine shell and cut pieces of bamboo flooring were presented as forensic evidence.
  • Conspiracy and Pre-Meditation
    • Evidence showed there had been a meeting on February 2, 1958, at Andres Abapo’s house where the killing of Rafael was premeditated.
    • Witness Maximo Cana testified on the planned conspiracy involving appellants Sulpicio de la Cerna, Antonio Bautista, Severino Matchoca, and Serapio Maquiling.
    • Despite later attempts by Cana to retract his testimony, the original detailed account was found credible.
  • Alleged Alibis and Defense Versions
    • Appellants who were later convicted as accomplices (Godofredo Rotor, Antonio Bautista, Severino Matchoca, and Teodoro Libumfacil) raised alibi claims regarding their whereabouts.
    • The prosecution and multiple eyewitness testimonies contradicted these alibis, placing each defendant at or near the scene and actively participating in the events.
  • Witness Testimonies
    • Eyewitness Accounts from the Cabizares Family
      • Multiple family members (Romualdo, Margarito, Gumercindo, Marcelo, and Juan Cabizares) provided detailed observations of the shooting and subsequent actions inside Demetrio’s house.
      • Their testimonies established the sequence wherein Rafael was wounded, moved to the third room, and then fatally shot through treacherous means.
    • Testimonies on the Physical and Circumstantial Evidence
      • Felisa Bastismo, Rafael’s mother, corroborated witnessing the chaos outside Demetrio’s house and noted the stoning of the house.
      • Additional witnesses such as Bonifacio Barro and Dr. Bienvenido Garcia detailed the forensic findings and the discovery of physical evidence (e.g., the cut flooring and carbine shell).
    • Conflicting Testimonies and Retractions
      • Maximo Cana’s testimony initially implicated the accused in a conspiracy; his later retraction did not suffice to overturn the original detailed account due to inconsistencies in his retracted version and corroboration by other witnesses.
      • Defense witnesses attempted to point out inconsistencies or improbabilities in the prosecution testimonies; however, these were deemed immaterial or explained by factors such as distance, angle of observation, and natural human reaction under stress.

Issues:

  • Procedural Issue
    • Whether the fiscal’s decision to indict all accused, including those earlier dropped by the Municipal Court after his own investigation, constituted an irreversible procedural error.
    • Determination that such an objection was waived because the appellants raised it only after the prosecution rested its case and after entering their pleas.
  • Substantive Issues on Liability
    • Whether Sulpicio de la Cerna and his co-accused were guilty of the double murder of Rafael and Casiano Cabizares.
    • The extent of culpability for each appellant:
      • Determining Sulpicio de la Cerna’s liability for the murder of Rafael Cabizares, given the evidence of premeditated treachery and overt planning.
      • Assessing whether Sulpicio could be held liable for Casiano Cabizares’ killing, given the inconsistent involvement in that particular act.
    • The validity of alibi and alternative defense versions raised by appellants such as Godofredo Rotor, Antonio Bautista, Severino Matchoca, and Teodoro Libumfacil.
    • The weighing of inconsistencies and alleged improbabilities in eyewitness testimonies versus physical evidence and forensic findings.
    • Whether the praise for “courage under fire” (as seen in Gumercindo Cabizares’ actions) could affect the credibility or interpretation of events.
  • Conspiracy and Its Effects on Criminal Liability
    • Whether the preexisting conspiracy to kill Rafael Cabizares extended liability to acts beyond the planned target, specifically the killing of Casiano.
    • The application of the rule that co-conspirators are liable only for acts done pursuant to their conspiracy and not for incidental acts beyond the agreed plan.

Ruling:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

  • (Subscriber-Only)

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.