Facts:

On January 30, 1976, the Second Division of the Supreme Court of the Philippines decided the case People of the Philippines vs. Leonarda Legones and Alfredo Legones, identified under G.R. No. L-30245. The appellants, Leonarda Legones and Alfredo Legones, are the mother and brother, respectively, of Roberto "Locloc" Legones, who was accused of raping Myrna Roxas Garguna, a seventeen-year-old girl. The complainant filed a rape case against Roberto on February 20, 1968, pertaining to an incident that allegedly took place on February 14, 1968. The Legones siblings, after failed attempts to resolve the case amicably with the complainant's family, resorted to kidnapping her.

On April 22, 1968, while she was on a tricycle driven by Felipe Pabon, the Legones approached the vehicle and forcibly entered, sandwiching Myrna between them to prevent her escape. Myrna was terrified because she feared for her safety due to her prior experience with Roberto. The appellants forcibly

...

Facts:

Parties and Preliminary Background

• The case involves the People of the Philippines as plaintiff-appellee and Leonarda Legones (the mother) together with Alfredo Legones (the brother) as defendants-appellants.
• The incident is connected to an earlier rape case filed by a seventeen-year-old complainant against Roberto “Locloc” Legones, who is the son of Leonarda and the brother of Alfredo.

Nature of the Alleged Offense

• The appellants were implicated in kidnapping with serious illegal detention.
• It is alleged that the appellants not only detained the complaining witness but also compelled her to sign an affidavit to withdraw the rape case against Roberto Legones.
• The motive behind the kidnapping was linked to the appellants’ interest in extinguishing the prosecution against their family member.

Chronology and Dynamics of the Crime

• Prior Pleas for Amicable Settlement
• On several occasions, the appellants visited the residence of Felisa Garguena (the complainant’s grandmother) to plead for an amicable settlement of the rape case.
• Their pleas were unsuccessful, leading to further action.
• The Kidnapping Incident (April 22, 1968)
• While the complainant was riding in a tricycle driven by Felipe Pabon after visiting the public market in Ozamis City, the appellants stopped the vehicle near the City Kitchen.
• The appellants boarded the tricycle, positioning the complainant between them to restrict her movement.
• Although the complainant attempted to struggle by moving sideways, the firm grip of the appellants prevented her escape.
• The Detention and Coercion
• Upon reaching the port area, the appellants pulled the complainant from the tricycle and dragged her into the Port Canteen, a carinderia owned by them.
• Inside the establishment, she was first detained in a room and later transferred to a mezzanine whose window shutter was nailed shut, effectively confining her for two days.
• During her detention, Leonarda Legones, with the presence of Attorneys Daguman and Dajalos, forced the complainant to sign an affidavit that, among other assertions, requested the dismissal of the rape case.
• The Complainant’s Escape and Subsequent Action
• On April 24, 1968, Alfredo Legones, accompanied by three waitresses, took the complainant to a boat named “Sweet Ride.”
• In the boat, subsequent events allowed the complainant to shift her position to avoid the attention of a guard, and she eventually alighted at Cebu City on the advice of a fellow passenger.
• Upon reaching Cebu City, she reported the incident to the local police, leading to the filing of the case by her father alongside her the following day.

Evidence and Testimonies Presented

• Identification by Direct Testimony
• The complainant clearly identified the appellants as the perpetrators of the kidnapping and illegal detention.
• Felipe Pabon, the tricycle driver, corroborated the identification and the capability of the tricycle to accommodate three persons.
• Conflicting Testimonies and Defense Evidence
• Defense witnesses, Attorneys Dajalos and Daguman, testified to support the claim that the signature on the affidavit was voluntarily executed by the complainant.
• Alfredo Legones presented an alibi, claiming that he was in Guintolan, Malagas, Zamboanga del Sur, overseeing work on his land and was supported by tenant Jose Pidros’ testimony.

Proceedings in the Lower Court and Grounds of Appeal

• The Court of First Instance of Misamis Occidental convicted the appellants of kidnapping with serious illegal detention, sentencing them to life imprisonment with accessory penalties, and imposing indemnity and cost obligations.
• On appeal, the appellants disputed:
• The trial court’s appreciation of the prosecution’s evidence and the credibility of its witnesses.
• The weight given to the testimony regarding the forced execution of the affidavit.
• The dismissal of the defense’s alibi as insufficient to create reasonable doubt.

Issue:

• Whether the trial court erred in giving overwhelming probative value to the testimonies of the complainant and other prosecution witnesses over the defense evidence.
• Whether the forced nature of the affidavit’s signing, under duress by the appellants aided by Attorneys Dajalos and Daguman, was erroneously characterized by the trial court.
• Whether the defense’s alibi provided by Alfredo Legones, supported by Jose Pidros’ testimony, created sufficient reasonable doubt to sustain an acquittal.
• Whether the trial court properly assessed the credibility of the witnesses, especially considering the opportunity it had to observe their demeanor and conduct during testimony.

Ruling:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Ratio:

• (Subscriber-Only)

Doctrine:

• (Subscriber-Only)