Case Digest (G.R. No. 70091)
Case Digest (G.R. No. 70091)
Facts:
The People of the Philippines, G.R. No. 70091, December 29, 1986, the Supreme Court En Banc, Melencio-Herrera, J., writing for the Court.On March 30, 1982, the body of Jose Lacumbes (the deceased) was found near his farm hut in Sitio Capacohan, Barangay Mabini, Tubajon, Surigao del Norte. Post-mortem findings recorded an incised wound of the neck, multiple stab wounds in the back, removal of the right external ear, contusions on the left lumbar region, and both hands tied at the back; cause of death was hemorrhage secondary to those wounds. On February 2, 1983, Criminal Case No. 14 (RTC, 10th Judicial Region, Branch 32) charged eight persons with murder; only Brigido Encipido, Charlito Manatad, and Eddie de la Pena (hereinafter the appellants) were tried while five co-accused remained at large.
At trial the prosecution presented eyewitness Felicisimo Alciso, who testified that he heard a gunshot, saw the deceased tied and mauled, and identified the appellants in court as among those who beat and hacked the victim on the afternoon of March 30, 1982. Other prosecution witnesses included Armando Bagacay (hearsay of threats), INP Station Commander Jorge Ortega, and Municipal Mayor Mariano Espina, both of whom testified that Encipido and de la Pena orally admitted responsibility for the beheading and other killings when they introduced themselves as "rebels." De la Pena additionally testified in open court that he was with the group and present at the killing but claimed he was forced to join and merely stood by; he also made extrajudicial admissions while in jail and to others that implicated the group.
The defense offered alibis: Encipido said he was sawing lumber in Barangay Boa and remained at Norberto Bukid’s house; Manatad claimed he was plowing a field in Barangay Malinao and corroborating testimony partially supported this. Appellants also alleged coercion in obtaining a written admission signed before the PC and contended various prosecutions’ testimonies were incredible or hearsay.
On December 5, 1984, the trial court convicted the appellants of murder and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua, awarded P12,000 in civil indemnity, and taxed costs. A Motion for Reconsideration filed December 26, 1984 was denied as filed late; appellants filed a Notice of Appeal which the Intermediate Appellate Court treated as an appeal from the order denying the motion. Because the penalty imposed was reclusion perpetua, the appeal was indorsed to the Supreme Court, which accepted the case in the interest of substantial justice.
Appellants advanced several assignments of error, contesting (A) the admission and weight of hearsay testimony, (B) the credibility of eyewitness Alciso, (C) the use of de la Pena’s judicial admission against his co-accused, (D) the sufficiency of evidence against Encipido and Manatad, (E) the trial court’s denial of the motion for reconsideration as untimely, and (F) conviction of de la Pena.
Issues:
- Was the trial court’s denial of appellants’ Motion for Reconsideration as filed out of time a reversible procedural error?
- Were the extrajudicial oral admissions related by Station Commander Ortega and Mayor Espina admissible and properly weighed by the trial court?
- Was the testimony of co-accused Eddie de la Pena given in open court admissible against co-accused Brigido Encipido and Charlito Manatad despite joint representation by one counsel de oficio?
- Was the evidence taken en conjunto sufficient to establish the appellants’ guilt of murder beyond reasonable doubt?
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)