Title
People vs. Jaberto y Teloy
Case
G.R. No. 128147
Decision Date
May 12, 1999
Two men charged with murder for stabbing a sleeping victim; Supreme Court upheld conviction, citing treachery and credible witness testimonies.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 141296)

Applicable Law

The applicable legal framework for this case is defined by the Revised Penal Code of the Philippines and relevant jurisprudence concerning murder, especially the qualifying circumstance of treachery as well as the credibility of witness testimony.

Case Overview

The prosecution charged Estanislaw Jaberto and Melvin Timtim with murder, alleging that they conspired to stab Primitivo Dagoc in a swift and unprovoked attack. While Timtim remains unaccounted for, Jaberto pleaded not guilty and was the singular focus of the trial.

Evidence for the Prosecution

Eyewitness accounts presented by Mardonio Pelonio and Franklin Dagoc, the latter being the son of the victim, formed the crux of the prosecution's case. They testified that Jaberto and Timtim ambushed Dagoc while he was napping outside his store, with Jaberto delivering the fatal stab. Following the attack, the witnesses pursued the assailants, leading to Jaberto's capture and the recovery of the knife used in the crime. At the police station, Jaberto confessed to owning the knife and admitted to stabbing Dagoc.

Evidence for the Defense

Jaberto's defense contended that he was merely present at the scene and did not participate in the stabbing. He claimed he was unaware of Timtim's actions and asserted that he was coerced into confessing during police questioning, which he alleged was not conducted in his presence of a lawyer. The defense also sought to depict discrepancies between witness statements and their affidavits as proof of their unreliability.

Ruling of the Trial Court

The trial court ruled that the testimonies of the prosecution witnesses were credible, clear, and convincing. The court rejected Jaberto's claim of passive presence, emphasizing his immediate flight after the incident as indicative of guilt. Furthermore, the court found that treachery was undeniably present in the manner of attack against an unsuspecting victim.

Assignment of Errors

In his appeal, Jaberto asserted two main errors by the trial court: (1) the credibility of prosecution witnesses was flawed due to inconsistencies in their accounts and (2) the conclusion that treachery characterized the murder was erroneous. Jaberto argued that the attack lacked suddenness and was not executed with malice.

The Court's Ruling on Appeal

The Supreme Court found the appeal unmeritorious. It ruled that alleged irregularities raised by Jaberto, including his detention and incomplete pre-trial procedures, were irrelevant to the determination of guilt. The Court reaffirmed the trial court's findings regarding the credibility of the eyewitnesses, asserting that the discrepancies cited by the appellant were insignificant and did not undermine their overall reliability.

Ruling on Treachery

The Court supported the trial court's classification of the crime as murder due to treach

...continue reading

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