Case Summary (G.R. No. 180169)

Background of the Case

• The case involves an appeal from the Decision of the Court of Appeals affirming the Regional Trial Court's conviction of Agustino Tamolon and Antonio Cabagan for Multiple Murder.
• The appellants were charged with the murder of five individuals in March 1984 in Magsaysay, Davao del Sur.
• The Information alleged that the appellants, armed and in conspiracy with others, attacked and killed the victims.

Proceedings and Evidence Presented

• Upon arraignment, both appellants pleaded not guilty.
• The trial included multiple cases against the appellants, with other accused remaining at large.
• The prosecution's evidence indicated that the appellants were part of a group that attacked the Malabarbas family during a supposed roving patrol.

Defense Testimonies

• Agustino Tamolon claimed he was far from the crime scene and engaged in honey gathering at the time of the incident, asserting he had no knowledge of the Malabarbas family.
• Antonio Cabagan denied involvement and stated he was pressured to testify against others while in detention.
• Witnesses for the defense, including a barangay captain and a pastor, testified that the appellants were not linked to the massacre until years later.

Trial Court's Decision

• The Regional Trial Court convicted both appellants of Multiple Murder, sentencing them to Reclusion Perpetua for each victim and ordering indemnification to the victims' heirs.
• The decision was appealed directly to the Supreme Court but was referred to the Court of Appeals.

Court of Appeals' Ruling

• The Court of Appeals affirmed the RTC's decision with modifications regarding the indemnity and moral damages awarded to the victims' heirs.
• The CA emphasized the credibility of the prosecution's witness, Modesto Landas, who provided direct testimony against the appellants.

Assessment of Witness Credibility

• The appellate court upheld the trial court's assessment of Landas' credibility, noting that the trial court is best positioned to evaluate witness demeanor and reliability.
• The court reiterated that a co-conspirator's testimony can be sufficient for conviction if it is sincere and detailed.

Appellants' Defense and Its Weakness

• The appellants' defense relied on denial and alibi, which the court found insufficient against the positive testimony of the prosecution.
• The court highlighted that denial and alibi are weak defenses that require substantial corroborative evidence to be credible.

Damages Awarded

• The Court o...continue reading