Case Summary (G.R. No. 184601)
Core facts as found by the trial court and affirmed by the appellate courts
The RTC’s factual findings (adopted and summarized by the Court of Appeals and affirmed on further appeal) are: on the evening of August 11, 2002, three men (including the victim Wilson) were near an artesian well. The appellant, apparently intoxicated and looking for his godson Rogelio, approached them and asked about Rogelio’s whereabouts. An altercation ensued. Witnesses testified that, as the others were standing to leave, the appellant suddenly embraced Wilson and then lunged a six-inch knife into Wilson’s left chest. Wilson attempted to defend, sustaining a cut on the right arm; Bernardo and Joel were injured in the melee; Francisco (Rogelio’s father) also arrived and was stabbed. The appellant then fled. Wilson was transported to the Region I Medical Center and was declared dead on arrival.
Medical findings (cause of death)
The municipal health officer’s post-mortem report recorded multiple injuries: a 3 cm stab wound to the left chest parasternal/infraclavicular area; a 3.5 cm stab wound to the right forearm; abrasions and other marks. The stated cause of death was cardiorespiratory arrest secondary to hypovolemic shock due to stab wound.
Defense theory and testimony
The appellant and his wife testified that the appellant went to look for Rogelio, encountered the group, was insulted and struck with a bottle, and became involved in a physical struggle. The defense claimed that Wilson had drawn a knife and that appellant either acted in self-defense or that the fatal result was accidental during a struggle for the knife (appellant alleged Wilson fell on his own knife after being grappled and thrown to the ground). The defense emphasized mutual combat and contesting versions of who started the attack.
Trial court credibility findings and reasoning on culpability
The RTC found inconsistencies in the appellant’s and his wife’s testimonies and credited the prosecution witnesses, who positively identified the appellant as the stabber. The court concluded that the attack was sudden and unprovoked from the victim’s perspective; therefore treachery was present as a qualifying circumstance. The RTC rejected the claim of self-defense and of accident, concluding that the appellant intentionally stabbed the victim and that the circumstances insured execution of the crime without risk to the offender.
Issues raised on appeal and standard of review applied
The appellant assigned errors asserting misinterpretation of facts, undue credence to allegedly incredible prosecution witnesses, and failure to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Supreme Court applied the established rule of deference to the trial court’s assessment of credibility, noting that appellate courts will not disturb such findings absent a showing that the trial court overlooked or misconstrued facts that would alter the result. The Court emphasized that trial courts have the best opportunity to observe demeanor and resolve credibility, an approach followed in the lower courts’ affirmations.
Legal analysis on self-defense, burden of proof, and treachery
The Court reiterated the elements the accused must prove to establish self-defense: (1) unlawful aggression by the victim; (2) reasonable necessity of the means employed to repel it; and (3) lack of sufficient provocation by the accused. The accused bears the burden of proving these elements by clear, satisfactory and convincing evidence. The Court stressed that unlawful aggression—actual or imminent—is the most important element and must be proven first. The record did not show convincing proof that Wilson engaged in actual or imminent unlawful aggression; the witnesses’ account indicated the appellant suddenly stabbed Wilson as he was leaving, affording Wilson no opportunity to defend. On treachery, the Court agreed with the RTC that the sudden embrace and immediate stabbing constituted a method that ensured execution without risk to the offender, thereby qualifying the crime as murder with treachery. The Court also rejected the appellant’s attempt to rely alternately on accident and self-defense, noting established doctrine that an accused cannot invoke mutually contradictory defenses and that accident (an exempting circumstance) is different in nature from self-defense (a justifying circumstance), each requiring a distinct and clear evidentiary showing.
Sentence, damages and modification by the high court
On the criminal aspect the Court
...continue readingCase Syllabus (G.R. No. 184601)
Case Caption and Basic Information
- Full caption as provided: PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. MARCIAL MALICDEM Y MOLINA, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.
- G.R. No.: 184601.
- Decision date of the Supreme Court: November 12, 2012.
- Division: First Division; ponente: Justice Leonardo-De Castro.
- Lower court references: Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 42, Dagupan City in Crim. Case No. 2002-0561-D (Decision dated July 31, 2006); Court of Appeals decision dated April 21, 2008 in CA-G.R. CR.-H.C. No. 02522 (pened by Associate Justice Martin S. Villarama, Jr., with Associate Justices Noel G. Tijam and Myrna Dimaranan Vidal concurring).
- Parties: People of the Philippines (plaintiff-appellee) v. Marcial Malicdem y Molina (accused-appellant).
Information, Charge, and Arraignment
- Information filed: September 12, 2002, charging the accused with the crime of murder.
- Allegations in the information: On or about August 11, 2002 in the evening at Brgy. Anolid, Mangaldan, Pangasinan, appellant, armed with a bladed weapon, with intent to kill and with treachery, willfully, unlawfully and feloniously attacked, stabbed and hit Wilson S. Molina, inflicting a fatal stab wound on a vital part of the body, causing his death, contrary to Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code as amended by RA 7659.
- Arraignment: Appellant arraigned on October 17, 2002 and pleaded not guilty.
Procedural History
- Trial in RTC: Trial on the merits followed arraignment; RTC Branch 42 rendered Decision on July 31, 2006 convicting appellant of murder and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua, ordering damages (trial court award figures noted below).
- Appeal to Court of Appeals: Appellant appealed; Court of Appeals affirmed with modification in its April 21, 2008 Decision, adding exemplary damages.
- Confinement confirmation: Petitioner's confinement confirmed by the Bureau of Corrections on December 15, 2008.
- Appeal to the Supreme Court: Parties adopted their briefs filed before the Court of Appeals and waived supplemental briefs; the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed with modification the CA decision on November 12, 2012.
Facts as Found by RTC and Summarized by the Courts
- Date and place of incident: Evening of August 11, 2002, near an artesian well, Brgy. Anolid, Mangaldan, Pangasinan.
- Persons present at scene: Victim Wilson S. Molina (Wilson), Bernardo Casullar (Bernardo), Joel Concepcion (Joel), and later Francisco Molina (father of Rogelio).
- Appellant’s arrival and condition: Appellant arrived and was “reeking of alcohol” and drunk; asked the group about the whereabouts of his godson Rogelio.
- Sequence according to prosecution witnesses (Bernardo and Joel as summarized by RTC):
- Appellant, while they were seated, suddenly embraced Wilson and lunged a six-inch knife into the left part of Wilson’s chest.
- When appellant moved to strike again, Wilson deflected a blow which cut his right arm.
- Bernardo, attempting to help Wilson, was stabbed in the stomach by the knife.
- Joel boxed the appellant while aiding Wilson.
- Francisco Molina arrived and was stabbed in the stomach by appellant during the brawl.
- Appellant then ran away.
- Victim Wilson was brought to Region I Medical Center and declared dead on arrival.
- Appellant’s version as summarized by RTC:
- On that night appellant and his wife Anabel had gone out to look for his godson Rogelio and passed the artesian well where the three men were loitering.
- Bernardo allegedly made a sarcastic remark; appellant allegedly was struck by a bottle by Bernardo and was punched repeatedly.
- Appellant alleged that he was attacked, and that Wilson drew a knife; Anabel allegedly saw Wilson draw a knife and shouted a warning.
- Appellant professed to have grabbed a piece of bamboo, grappled with Wilson for possession of the knife, and thrown Wilson to the ground; appellant claimed that Wilson fell on the knife he was still holding.
- Appellant stated he was repeatedly punched and was hit on the cheek by Francisco while attempting to leave; Bernardo allegedly threatened vengeance.
Trial Evidence — Prosecution Witnesses
- Prosecution witnesses presented: Dr. Ophelia T. Rivera (Municipal Health Officer, post-mortem examiner), Bernardo Casullar, Joel Concepcion, Felipe Molina, and Maricon Nicolas.
- Key testimonial points (as summarized by the RTC and used by prosecution):
- Positive identification of appellant as the person who stabbed Wilson.
- Description of the sudden nature of the attack: appellant embraced Wilson and plunged a knife into his chest while the group was about to leave.
- Secondary injuries to others (Bernardo and Francisco) due to stabbing in the melee.
- Transport and medical result: Wilson declared dead on arrival at Region I Medical Center.
Trial Evidence — Defense Witnesses and Testimony
- Defense witnesses presented: Appellant Marcial Malicdem and his wife Anabel Malicdem.
- Defense theory: Self-defense (complete or incomplete) and, at times in argument, suggestion that the death may have been accidental (appellant falling on the knife held by Wilson).
- Testimonial content and inconsistencies:
- Appellant and Anabel’s account described initial provocation and physical assault by the group (bottle strike, punches).
- Anabel asserted she saw Wilson draw a knife and was allegedly boxed by Wilson after warning.
- Appellant claimed continued grappling for the knife and eventual throwing of Wilson to the ground; claimed the fatal wounding occurred when Wilson fell on the knife he still held.
- RTC observed inconsistencies between appellant and Anabel’s testimonies which undermined their credibility.
Medical / Post-Mortem Findings (Dr. Ophelia T. Rivera)
- Findings recorded in post-mortem report:
- Abrasion 1.2 x 0.5 cm just above the eyebrow, lateral aspect, left.
- Stab wound 3 cm, wound directed laterally and downward, parasternal line, infraclavicular area, left (presumably chest stab).
- Abrasion (teeth impression mark), middle third, anterior aspect, upper arm, left.
- Stab wound 3.5 cm, wound directed upward and posteriorly, middle third, medioposterior aspect, forearm, right.
- Abrasion 0.5 x 0.8 cm, lateral aspect, knee, left.
- Abrasion 2 x 1 cm, knee, right.
- Stated cause of death: Cardio-respiratory arrest secondary to hypovolemic shock due to stab wound.
Trial Court Findings and Rationale (RTC, July 31, 2006)
- RTC findings:
- Found appellant guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder.
- Rejected appellant’s plea of self-defense, finding his and his wife’s testimonies inconsistent and less credible than prosecution witnesses.
- Found the attack by appellant against Wilson to be sudden and without giving Wilson opportunity to defend himself, qu