Title
People vs. Abatayo
Case
G.R. No. 139456
Decision Date
Jul 7, 2004
Appellant convicted of homicide for fatal pipe attack; alibi rejected, eyewitness testimony upheld; charges reduced from murder due to unproven qualifying circumstances.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 139456)

Procedural History

Adones Abatayo was arraigned on the charges and pleaded not guilty. The prosecution presented several witnesses, including Juanito Gutang, who testified about the events leading to the murder. The trial experienced several postponements due to various reasons, including the absence of witnesses. Ultimately, the prosecution rested its case, and the defense presented its witnesses, establishing Abatayo's alibi.

Prosecution’s Case

The prosecution’s evidence included eyewitness testimony from Juanito Gutang, who stated that he witnessed Abatayo attacking the Basalan brothers with a pipe. Other witnesses confirmed the aftermath of the incident, including the discovery of the victims' bodies and the circumstances surrounding the attack. The public prosecutor also presented a necropsy report indicating that the victims died from severe head injuries.

Defense’s Position

Abatayo, through his defense, claimed he left the job site on the evening of September 9, 1993, and went home, corroborated by several witnesses who testified to his whereabouts. The defense challenged the credibility of the prosecution’s eyewitnesses, emphasizing the inability to complete cross-examination on Juanito Gutang's testimony.

Trial Court's Decision

The Regional Trial Court found Abatayo guilty of two counts of murder, imposing a sentence of reclusion perpetua (life imprisonment) for each count. The court based its conviction on the solid testimony of Juanito, asserting that the alibi offered by Abatayo lacked credibility.

Appeal and Legal Issues

On appeal, Abatayo raised several issues:

  1. The trial court erred by not removing Gutang's testimony due to incomplete cross-examination.
  2. The court improperly assigned probative value to Gutang's unfinished testimony.
  3. The conviction was not supported by proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Right to Cross-Examine

The court addressed the appellant's right to confront witnesses, asserting that while the right to cross-examine is fundamental, it may be waived if not asserted properly. Abatayo did not object or actively pursue the completion of the cross-examination at various stages during the trial, leading to the determination that he waived this right.

Credibility of Witnesses

The Supreme Court emphasized the credibility of Juanito's testimony, considering it coherent and consistent. The absence of any motive for Juanito to falsely accuse Abatayo reinforced the trustworthiness of his identification of the appellant as the perpetrator of the crime.

Analysis of Treachery and Premeditation

The appellate court found that the lower court’s finding of treachery and evident premeditation was not supported by evidence. The eyewitness’s account did not sufficiently demonstrate that the attack was sudden and left the victims without a chance to defend themselves. Thus, the appeal judges determined that neither treachery nor evident premeditation was established.

Alibi and Denial

The court held that Abatayo's alibi was weak and could not overshadow the eyewitness account. It noted that alibi becomes more implausible when it is corroborated only by relatives, and Abatayo's flight after the incident indicated consciousness of guilt.

Duplicity of

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster—building context before diving into full texts.