Title
People vs. Abboc
Case
G.R. No. L-28327
Decision Date
Sep 14, 1973
Three accused fatally shot Lucagan Banig over a carabao dispute; alibis rejected, murder affirmed due to treachery, indemnity increased.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 236827)

Proceedings and Verdict

The legal proceedings began with a criminal complaint filed on February 9, 1965, leading to an information charge for murder filed on September 30, 1965, subsequently amended to include Bitel Abboc. On September 19, 1969, the trial court found all three defendants guilty of murder, sentencing them to reclusion perpetua, ordering them to indemnify the heirs of Lucagan Banig in the sum of P6,000, and to pay the costs.

Testimonies and Evidence Presented

The trial court based its decision primarily on the testimonies of Dayapan Banig and Marcos Banig, siblings of the victim. Dayapan recounted events leading to the shooting, including the arrival of the accused at her home prior to the incident, followed by gunshots and her brother's dying declaration that implicated the Abboc defendants. Additionally, Bantes Saluquem, a Sanitary Inspector, confirmed through an exploratory examination that Lucagan Banig had sustained several gunshot wounds consistent with a rifle.

Rejection of Defense

The defense presented an alibi claiming that Ayaman and Bitel Abboc were attending to a sick grandfather during the timeframe of the murder. The trial court dismissed this defense due to the close proximity and timeframe that would have allowed the accused to be at the crime scene. Furthermore, the alibi for Bersamin Abboc was undermined by inconsistencies in testimony regarding his whereabouts, including alterations in police records that suggested fabrication.

Appellate Review and Standards of Credibility

In reviewing the case, the appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, emphasizing that credibility assessments by the trial court are given significant deference unless a clear error or oversight emerges from the records. The court found no such grounds for disturbing the trial court's findings. The appellate court also rejected the appellants' speculative arguments regarding the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses, highlighting that those assertions

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.