Title
People vs. Obzunar
Case
G.R. No. 92153
Decision Date
Dec 16, 1996
Seven armed assailants chased and fatally stabbed an unarmed victim; self-defense claims and alibis rejected; Supreme Court affirmed murder conviction.

Case Summary (G.R. No. 251876)

Factual Background

The initial Information was filed against the accused on June 3, 1988, presenting that they conspired together while armed with deadly weapons to attack the victim, inflicting multiple injuries that resulted in his death. The accused, upon arraignment on June 28, 1988, entered a plea of not guilty. The prosecution's case relied heavily on eyewitness accounts and circumstantial evidence linking the accused to the crime.

Prosecution's Evidence and Witnesses

The prosecution presented Lydia Zilmar, the victim's sister, who testified she witnessed the attack on her brother. She identified the accused as the individuals who chased and attacked her brother, describing their actions in detail. Additional witnesses included Maria Gina Figueroa from the Commission on Audit, who corroborated prior threats made against the victim by the accused, and Pablo Millano, who testified to overhearing the accused planning the victim's murder. The prosecution also submitted Dr. Adoracion L. Cinco's autopsy findings, confirming that the cause of death was a stab wound to the chest.

Defense's Argument

The defense contended that only Virgilio Obzunar was responsible for the victim’s death, claiming self-defense. It presented witnesses who recounted a heated altercation leading up to the stabbing, asserting that Anastacio Macato was the aggressor in the events preceding the incident. Virgilio Obzunar testified that he acted in self-defense, but his version of the events raised inconsistencies and was considered implausible by the trial court.

Trial Court's Ruling

On January 16, 1990, the Regional Trial Court found the accused guilty of murder, sentencing them to reclusion perpetua and requiring them to pay civil indemnity to the victim's heirs. The trial court deemed the eyewitness account credible, emphasizing the prosecution's evidence of conspiracy among the accused, supported by the coordinated nature of their attack.

Appeals and Assignments of Error

In their appeal, the accused raised several issues, questioning the credibility of the prosecution witnesses, the existence of conspiracy, the rejection of self-defense claims, and the sufficiency of the evidence presented. They highlighted concerns over the trial court's evaluation of witness credibility and evidentiary weight.

Court's Analysis on Witness Credibility

The Court maintained that the determination of witness credibility rests primarily with the trial court, which had direct exposure to the testimonies and demeanor of the witnesses. It affirmed the trial court's findings, asserting that there were no significant errors in evaluating the testimonies that would warrant overturning the conviction.

Court's Conclusion on Conspiracy

The Court recognized that conspiracy can be inferred from the behavior of the accused during the commission of the crime, negating the need for direct evidence of an agreement. The testimonies established that all accused actively participated in the victim’s beating and restraint, confirming a collective intent to kill, thereby satisfying the criteria fo

...continue reading

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