Case Digest (G.R. No. 103604-05)
Facts:
On the evening of January 28, 1980, at Nagbinlod, Sta. Catalina, Negros Oriental, barangay captain Antonio Silvano and his wife Rizalina Apatan-Silvano were accosted by neighbors Juanito Rismundo, Engracio Valeriano, Macario Acabal and Abundio Nahid, all armed with bolos and pinuti, demanding Antonio’s presence and inquiring about the sale of votes in the upcoming local election. When Antonio failed to answer, Rizalina lied that he was in a meeting. The assailants then doused the store beside the house with gasoline and set it ablaze. As the fire spread, Rizalina fell from the roof; Rismundo, Valeriano and Acabal each struck her once, and Nahid delivered four blows. The house was burned, and Rizalina died of her wounds. Immediately thereafter the same group attacked Wilson Silvano, the Silvanos’ son, inflicting multiple hack wounds that would have been fatal but for prompt medical aid. Separate informations for murder (Criminal Case No. 4585) and frustrated murder (Criminal CaseCase Digest (G.R. No. 103604-05)
Facts:
- Nature of the Cases
- Two Informations (filed February 28, 1981, R.T.C. Negros Oriental) charge:
- Criminal Case No. 4585 – Murder of Rizalina Apatan Silvano (January 28, 1980) with qualifying circumstances of treachery and evident premeditation; aggravating circumstances alleged: nighttime, by a band, use of fire, craft/fraud/disguise, ignominy.
- Criminal Case No. 4584 – Frustrated murder of Wilson Silvano (immediately after the murder), with qualifying circumstance of alevosia; aggravating circumstances alleged: nighttime, by a band, armed men affording impunity, craft/fraud/disguise.
- Accused: Engracio Valeriano (who later jumped bail), Macario Acabal, Juanito Rismundo, Abundio Nahid, and several John Does (unidentified).
- Procedural History
- Arraignment: All pleaded not guilty; joint trial ordered.
- Trial before Branch 37 (Judge Diez); 1987 fire destroyed records; reconstitution ordered; retaking of testimony commenced.
- Engracio Valeriano absconded; alias warrant issued; records re-raffled to Branch 33 (Judge Bulado) after reconstitution; decision promulgated December 20, 1991.
- Prosecution Evidence
- Antonio Silvano (barangay captain; husband of victim Rizalina): testified he recognized Acabal, Rismundo and Valeriano outside his home; they demanded votes, set fire to his store, and hacked his wife—each gave one blow, Nahid gave four blows; he and Rizalina fled to the kitchen roof, she fell, then was hacked and left to burn.
- Visitacion Silvano (daughter-in-law): heard cries, asked Wilson to turn on truck lights; saw Valeriano hack Wilson and others chase him; observed other accused near parents-in-law’s burning house.
- Dr. Avelino Torres (chief of hospital): examined Rizalina at 1 a.m. on January 29 – body charred, still warm; found three hacking wounds (right leg amputated, left leg hacked behind knee, abdomen with eviscerated viscera) inflicted before fire; examined Wilson – seven hack wounds that would have caused death without medical aid.
- Sworn statements (Exh. D, F) of Rismundo and Acabal taken before Governor Teves and Provincial Fiscal; defense alleges coercion.
- Defense of Alibi
- Macario Acabal: at a wake in Sitio Canggabok, Nagbinlud; arrested February 29, 1980; manhandled; forced to sign affidavit.
- Juanito Rismundo: grinding corn in Sitio Dinapo; Feb 6, 1980, brought by PC soldier and Carballo’s son to Capitol; beaten, forced to sign.
- Abundio Nahid: at home in Sugong Milagros (20 km away); political rivalry with Silvanos cited as motive for adverse testimony.
Issues:
- Whether the trial court erred in cancelling the accused-appellants’ bail bonds and ordering their immediate arrest when the decision imposed only civil indemnity (₱30,000) without explicitly stating any prison sentence.
- Whether the evidence proves the guilt of the accused-appellants beyond reasonable doubt for murder under Article 248, RPC.
- Whether the prosecution witnesses positively and credibly identified the accused-appellants as the perpetrators.
- Whether, in the absence of overwhelming evidence, the accused-appellants should have been acquitted on the hypothesis of reasonable doubt.
Ruling:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Ratio:
- (Subscriber-Only)
Doctrine:
- (Subscriber-Only)