Title
People vs. Tapitan
Case
G.R. No. L-21492
Decision Date
Apr 25, 1969
Land dispute in Goliptoc led to Maximo Candia's murder; appellants' alibi rejected, conspiracy inferred; conviction upheld, penalty modified to reclusion perpetua.

Case Summary (G.R. No. L-21492)

Background and Incident

The fatal incident arose from a land dispute over a property in Goliptop, Dumingag, between the deceased, Maximo Candia, and the accused, Eleno and Enriquito Tapitan. The deceased and eyewitness Cleto Baranda were on the disputed land early in the morning, preparing to build a house after claiming rights to the land. Meanwhile, the Tapitans believed the property belonged to them, given their prior residence on the site. Tensions escalated, culminating in threats made by Eleno Tapitan against Candia. On that day, a confrontation led to Candia being shot.

Sequence of Events and Shooting

Eyewitness Cleto Baranda described the encounter in detail, noting that Eleno Tapitan approached with a revolver and a bolo, challenging the deceased and Baranda about their presence on the land. Despite their pleas for a peaceful discussion, Eleno commanded his son Enriquito to shoot, resulting in multiple shots being fired. Baranda witnessed Enriquito firing a homemade shotgun from behind a banana grove before he was able to reload. The fatal shot struck Candia, who had raised his hands in a non-confrontational manner, indicating his intent to flee.

Medical Findings

The forensic examination of Candia revealed multiple gunshot wounds, including two wounds that significantly compromised vital organs, ultimately leading to death due to hemorrhage from the injuries. Both defendants acknowledged the reality of Candia's death but sought to escape liability through an alibi and a claim of self-defense.

Alibi Defense and Credibility Issues

The appellants claimed they were in Ozamis City on the day of the shooting, supported by the testimony of a witness, Maximo Leonardo. However, the trial court found this alibi unconvincing due to its implausibility, especially in contrast to the testimonies of Cleto Baranda and other witnesses present during the shooting. Notably, the defense's claim lacked substantial corroboration, which contributed to the court's doubt regarding its veracity.

Evaluation of Conspiracy and Conviction

The court evaluated whether the actions of Eleno and Enriquito Tapitan constituted a conspiracy to commit murder. The records indicated collaboration between them in attacking the deceased; thus, the trial court properly inferred a conspiracy. The Court of Appeals noted that once a conspiracy was shown, each conspirator is liable for actions taken in furtherance of that conspiracy, regardless of their individual participation level.

Judicial Findings and Sentence

The appellate court upheld the lower court's conviction of the Tapitan defendants for murder, identifying evident premeditation a

...continue reading

Analyze Cases Smarter, Faster
Jur helps you analyze cases smarter to comprehend faster, building context before diving into full texts. AI-powered analysis, always verify critical details.