Title
People vs. Atienza
Case
G.R. No. L-1913
Decision Date
May 28, 1948
On April 28, 1946, Lucio Balmes was killed near Filemon Atienza's land. Appellants were accused but acquitted due to inconsistencies in the prosecution's case, including Balmes' injuries, which suggested an alternative theory of murder by others.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-1913)

Charges and Sentencing

The defendants were accused of murdering Lucio Balmes. The lower court found them guilty, attributing Jose Atienza and Ceferino Dagohoy to reclusion perpetua, while Hilarion Birador and Francisco Oyando received an indeterminate sentence of 10 years and 1 day of prision mayor to 17 years, 4 months, and 1 day of reclusion temporal. Moreover, all defendants were ordered to jointly indemnify Balmes's heirs with P2,000.

Prosecution's Theory

The prosecution asserted that, around 10:00 AM on April 28, 1946, Lucio Balmes and Antonio Contreras, joined by two Mangyans, attempted to enter private pasture land owned by Filemon Atienza. Upon arriving, the gate was found closed, which prompted Antonio to order Simon to open it. Following the opening of the gate, they allegedly encountered the defendants, who began firing at them. This shooting lasted about forty minutes. After the incident, Antonio crawled toward Lucio and discovered him wounded and covered in blood before reporting to the Chief of Police later that evening.

Defense's Position

The defense argued that none of the accused were present at the crime scene and had no familiarity with Lucio Balmes. They contended that Balmes came to Bulalakaw under the pretense of purchasing cattle and was subsequently murdered by Antonio Contreras and his associates. The defense claimed that the wounds found on Balmes indicated the manner of death was inconsistent with the prosecution's narrative.

Evidence Analysis

An examination of the body revealed two distinct injuries: a gunshot wound to the left breast and a blunt force injury to the jaw, suggesting that Balmes's death occurred under different circumstances than pervaded by the prosecution's claims. The presence of a blunt injury indicated that the murder involved some violence that was not accounted for within the prosecution's framework.

Questions of Credibility

The court found significant inconsistencies within the accounts of the prosecution witnesses, particularly regarding the actions and motivations of the defendants. The prosecution's narrative suggested behavior inconsistent with that expected of assailants intent on murder. The defendants’ actions—continuing to fire at Balmes for an extended period without effectively pursuing or eliminating witnesses—presented logical contradictions. Furthermore, the abandonment of Balmes's body at the crime scene contradicted an intention to conceal

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur is a legal research platform serving the Philippines with case digests and jurisprudence resources.