G.R. No. 112620-21 - People vs. Pagal y Lamqui

The case involves the conviction of Noli Pagal and Adolfo “Boy” Lamqui for the crimes of murder and attempted murder.
The crimes occurred on March 23, 1990, involving an ambush on Paquito Medrano and Jose Rebujio, partners in a cattle business.
Initially filed in the RTC of Lingayen and later transferred to the Tayug RTC, the cases were re-docketed as Criminal Case Nos. T-1086 (murder) and T-1061 (attempted murder).

While traveling by motorcycle between Barangay San Miguel and Sitio Tulin in Cabuaan, Natividad, Pangasinan, the victims encountered unexpected obstacles.
Two bamboo poles obstructed the road; upon slowing down, Medrano and Rebujio noticed two men crouched in a canal on the left side of the road.
The assailants, later identified as Pagal and Lamqui, fired at the victims using an armalite rifle and a short firearm.
Despite sustaining multiple gunshot wounds, Medrano managed to drive to the hospital while Rebujio suffered severe injuries that eventually led to his death.

Medical certificates dated March 27, 1990, corroborated the injuries sustained by both victims, with details on the locations and severity of the wounds.
Dr. Cesar Bulosan testified that multiple powder burns were observed on the victims, supporting the hypothesis that a high-caliber automatic rifle (armalite) was used at close range.
Jose Rebujio’s subsequent transfer to the Armed Forces of the Philippines Medical Center and his eventual death on March 25, 1990 were documented in a medico-legal report.
Eyewitness testimony from Paquito Medrano not only identified the accused but also provided critical details about the ambush, including the distance (approximately three meters) from which the shots were fired.

Medrano testified that he was well acquainted with Pagal, identifying him as his nephew and former business partner.
A prior violent incident in 1988 between members of the Medrano and Pagal families had strained their relationship, providing a possible motive for the ambush.

The accused claimed that between 8:00 and 11:00 in the morning of March 23, 1990, they were at Barangay Calapugan, assisting in the construction of Hermenegildo Pate’s house.
Witnesses, including a construction worker (Jun de Guzman) and Pagal’s father (Arturo), were presented to corroborate the alibi.
Despite this claim, the positive identification of the assailants by Medrano and the physical evidence contradicted the alibi.

Whether the amassed evidence, including eyewitness identification and physical findings (gunshot wounds and powder burns), was sufficient to sustain the conviction for both murder and attempted murder.

Whether powder burns could be present on the victims when fired at from a distance beyond eighteen inches, particularly when an armalite rifle was employed.

Whether the ante-mortem statement of Jose Rebujio, admitted as part of the res gestae rather than as a dying declaration, was properly considered under the circumstances.

Whether the omission of the ballistic examination of Pagal’s firearm amounted to suppression of adverse evidence, and if such evidence should have been given greater weight.
The inherent weakness of the alibi defense when positive victim identification is at issue.