SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

Search for www.chanrobles.com

PLEASE CLICK HERE FOR THE LATEST ➔ SUPREME COURT DECISIONS

FIRST DIVISION

G.R. No. 104662 June 16, 1995

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. LEONARDO LOPEZ Y MANCILLA, JR., Accused-Appellant.chanrobles virtual law library

KAPUNAN, J.:

Accused-appellant Leonardo Lopez y Mancilla, Jr. was charged with murder in an information dated March 13, 1991 that reads:

That on or about August 8, 1990, in the City of Manila, Philippines, the said accused with intent to kill and with treachery and evident premeditation, did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and use personal violence upon the person of one Jesus Reyes by then and there stabbing him with a bladed weapon in the different parts of his body, thereby inflicting upon said Jesus Reyes mortal wounds which were the direct and immediate cause of his death thereafter.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

SO ORDERED. ¹chanrobles virtual law library

On arraignment, accused entered a plea of not guilty to the offense charged. ²

Thereafter, trial ensued.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

On August 15, 1991, Regional Trial Court Judge Romeo Callejo ³ rendered judgment, the dispositive portion of which reads:

WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered finding the accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of "Murder" defined in and penalized by Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, qualified by treachery, and there being no other modifying circumstances which attended the commission of the crime, hereby metes on said Accused the penalty of RECLUSION PERPETUA, with all the accessory penalties of the law and hereby condemns him to pay to the heirs of the deceased the amount of P4,500.00 as actual damages and P50,000.00 as indemnity. The period during which the accused was detained at the City Jail of Manila shall be credited to him in full provided that he agreed in writing to abide by and comply strictly with the rules of regulations of the City Jail of Manila. With Costs against the Accused.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

SO ORDERED. ⁴chanrobles virtual law library

Insisting that he is innocent of the crime charged, accused-appellant is now before this Court to challenge the trial court's decision and to protest his conviction.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

At about 8:00 o'clock in the morning of August 8,1990, Evelyn Paras, Edgardo Castro and Jesus Reyes went to the Barangay Hall at Onyx Street, San Andres, Manila to file a complaint against Mario Lopez who reportedly rained stones on the house of Evelyn Paras. ⁵

While they were at the Barangay Hall, appellant Leonardo Lopez who is the brother of Mario Lopez suddenly appeared behind them and in a swift and sudden motion, stabbed Jesus Reyes at the back with the use of a knife. ⁶ After the first attack, Edgardo Castro told Jesus Reyes to run even as he searched for a piece of wood with which to parry the blows of Lopez. Suddenly, Edgardo Castro was also struck at the back. He lost consciousness. ⁷

In the meantime, Jesus Reyes fled and ran for his life as he was being pursued by the appellant. He then fell on the ground face down. As he was trying to stand, appellant stabbed him at the back for a second time. ⁸ Appellant thereafter sped towards the market at Onyx Street in San Andres, Manila.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Both Edgardo Castro and Jesus Reyes were rushed to the Philippine General Hospital treatment. Unfortunately, Jesus Reyes expired. ⁹His family spent four thousand pesos (P4,000.00) for his burial. ¹⁰

Dr. Marcial Cenido performed an autopsy on the body of Jesus Reyes and submitted the autopsy report ¹¹ describing the wounds inflicted on the deceased and the cause of death, to wit:

EXTERNAL INJURIES AND EXTENSIONS INTERNALLY:

1. Penetrating stab wound, left posterior thorax, 8.5 cm. from the posterior midline, measuring 2.2 cm. x 0.8 cm. x 11 cm. in depth, directed obliquely forwards, slightly upwards and towards the midline thru the 8th intercostal space and piercing the upper lobe of the left lung and thoracic aorta;chanrobles virtual law library

2. Penetrating stab wound, right upper posterior lumbar, 14 cm. from the posterior midline measuring 2.3 cm. x 1 cm. x 10.8 cm. in depth, directed obliquely forwards, slightly upwards and towards the midline piercing the diaphragm and right lobe of the liver;chanrobles virtual law library

3. Abrasion, chin, right and left of anterior midline measuring 3 cm. x 0.5 cm. and 0.5 x 0.3 cm., respectively;chanrobles virtual law library

4. Abrasion, left of anterior shoulder and the lateral to the left nipple, measuring 1.2 cm. x 1 cm. and 1.2 cm. x 2 cm. respectively;chanrobles virtual law library

5. Abrasion, right knee measuring 0.8 cm. x 0.5 cm., right posterior shoulder measuring 0.5 cm. x 0.2 cm., middle 3rd, right forearm, posterior measuring 3 cm. x 0.4 cm. and posterior distal 3rd of the right thigh measuring 2 cm. x 0.4 cm.

INTERNAL FINDINGS:

1. Stab wounds of the internal organs and tissues as indicated under the internal extensions of the external wounds with recovered blood of about 2,000 cc from the left thoracic cavity and generalized pallor; andchanrobles virtual law library

2. Recovered from the stomach about half of a glassful of brownish viscid liquid without alcoholic odor.

CAUSE OF DEATH:

Penetrating stab wound, left posterior thorax and right posterior lumbar. ¹²chanrobles virtual law library

After the incident, appellant went into hiding and was not heard of or seen in the neighborhood until seven (7) months later when Evelyn Paras saw him at his house. She called the police and the appellant was promptly arrested. ¹³

On his part, accused-appellant anchored his defense on denial and alibi and averred that at the time of the stabbing incident, he was sleeping in his house located some thirteen (13) meters from the scene of the crime. He claimed that he learned of the stabbing only from his wife who informed him that his brother, Mario Lopez, was brought to Police Station No. 2 of the Western Police District on suspicion that he perpetrated the alleged crime. He did not go to the precinct to check on his brother. He sent his older brother instead. Therefrom, he stayed in his house most of the time, occasionally visiting his cousins in Paco and Caloocan. ¹⁴

In the appeal brief he submitted to this Court, he reiterates the foregoing arguments and challenges the court a quo's decision on the following ground, viz:

Ichanrobles virtual law library

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN CONVICTING THE ACCUSED OF THE CRIME OF MURDER AND IN HOLDING HIM PECUNIARILY LIABLE FOR P4,500.00 AS ACTUAL DAMAGES AND FOR P50,000.00 AS DEATH INDEMNITY TO THE HEIRS OF THE DECEASED JESUS REYES.

IIchanrobles virtual law library

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN DISREGARDING THE ACCUSED'S DEFENSE OF ALIBI AND IN HOLDING THAT THE ACCUSED WAS POSITIVELY AND SPONTANEOUSLY IDENTIFIED AS THE AUTHOR OF THE CRIME OF MURDER BY THE PROSECUTION WITNESS.

IIIchanrobles virtual law library

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN CONCLUDING THAT THE GUILT OF THE ACCUSED FOR THE CRIME OF MURDER HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED BY EVIDENCE BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT. ¹⁵chanrobles virtual law library

The appeal is not impressed with merit.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Accused-appellant would want to impress upon this Court that the prosecution's evidence is flimsy and incredible. He contends that compared to his own "straightforward" testimony, the prosecution's evidence cannot even "survive the test of reason and common sense." ¹⁶

The Court is not impressed.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

The prosecution presented two (2) witnesses who were present during the stabbing incident. These witnesses positively identified the appellant as the person who stabbed Jesus Reyes on that fateful day. Indeed, appellant's denial of culpability cannot be given greater evidentiary weight than the positive declarations of credible witnesses who testified on affirmative matters. ¹⁷ Hence, we reproduce below with approval certain portions of the testimonies of prosecution witnesses Edgardo Castro and Evelyn Paras who testified in clear, categorical and positive manner that appellant was the perpetrator of the offense charged.

Testimony of Edgardo Castro:

Q. Mr. Witness, on August 8, 1990 at around 8:00 o'clock in the morning, can you recall where were you?

xxx xxx xxx

A. We were near the Barangay Hall, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. And you used the word "pumunta kami," who were your companions?chanrobles virtual law library

A. I am (sic) also with Jesus Reyes and Evelyn Paras, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Why were you proceeding to the Barangay Hall at Onyx Street corner Estrada Street?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Because we were going to file a complaint, sir.

xxx xxx xxx

Q. When you were proceeding to the Barangay Hall at Onyx and Estrada Streets all together with Evelyn Paras and Jesus Reyes, do you recall of any unusual incident that happened?

xxx xxx xxx

A. Jesus Reyes was stabbed, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. And who stabbed this Jesus Reyes?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Leonardo Lopez, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. How far were you in relation to the place where Jesus Reyes was stabbed by Leonardo Lopez?chanrobles virtual law library

A. We were near each other, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. How was this Reyes stabbed by Lopez?chanrobles virtual law library

A. When we were near the Barangay Hall, sir, Leonardo Lopez suddenly stabbed Jesus Reyes at the back.

xxx xxx xxx

Q. Will you please stand up and will you please demonstrate to this Honorable Court how Leonardo stabbed Jesus Reyes at the back?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Leonardo Lopez came from the back and he suddenly stabbed Reyes, sir.

xxx xxx xxx

Q. After this Jesus Reyes was stabbed by Lopez at the back, what did you do?chanrobles virtual law library

A. I let Jesus Reyes ran (sic) away, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrary chanrobles virtual law library

Q. What about you, what did you do?chanrobles virtual law library

A. I was trying to look for some wood to help Jesus Reyes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Were you able to get a piece of wood?chanrobles virtual law library

A. I was able to get a piece of wood but someone hit me, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. What was that thing that hit your head?chanrobles virtual law library

A. I don't know, sir, because I was hit at the back.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Now, this Jesus Reyes, when you asked him to run, what did Jesus Reyes do?chanrobles virtual law library

A. He ran away to the direction of Estrada Street, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. What happened to him if you still recall after running?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Leonardo Lopez chased him, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. What happened when Leonardo Lopez chased Jesus Reyes?chanrobles virtual law library

A. I did not notice it because somebody hit the back of my head and my mouth and I lost consciousness, sir.

xxx xxx xxx

Q. Have you seen this Leonardo Lopez prior to August 8, 1990?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. And since when have you known this Leonardo Lopez before August 8, 1990?chanrobles virtual law library

A. We grew up together, sir.

xxx xxx xxx

Q. What was the instrument that was used by this Leonardo Lopez?chanrobles virtual law library

A. It is a .29, sir.

xxx xxx xxx

Q. Will you please look inside the courtroom and point to him?

xxx xxx xxx

(witness pointing to a person who, when asked, stated his name as Leonardo Lopez). ¹⁸

Testimony of Evelyn Paras:chanrobles virtual law library

Q. Can you recall of any unusual incident that happened while you were in front of the Barangay Hall on August 8, 1990 at around 8:00 o'clock in the morning?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. And could you tell to this Honorable Court what was that incident?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir. We were on our way to the Barangay Hall and somebody just suddenly appeared from the back, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Who is that person who appeared suddenly at your back?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Junior Lopez or Leonardo Lopez, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. What did that Leonardo Lopez do when he suddenly appeared at your back?chanrobles virtual law library

A. He stabbed my cousin, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. What is the name of your cousin?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Jesus Reyes, sir.

xxx xxx xxx

Q. Where was he hit?chanrobles virtual law library

A At the back, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Can you tell what instrument was used by this Lopez stab your cousin?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. What was it?chanrobles virtual law library

A. A .29, sir.

xxx xxx xxx

Q. When your cousin was stabbed by this Lopez, what did your cousin do?chanrobles virtual law library

A. He ran away, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. What about Lopez, what did he do when your cousin ran?chanrobles virtual law library

A. He chased him, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. Now, when Lopez was chasing your cousin, what happened to your cousin?chanrobles virtual law library

A. He fell on (sic) the ground, sir.

xxx xxx xxx

Q. When your cousin fell to the ground, what did Lopez do?chanrobles virtual law library

A. My cousin stood up, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. What did your cousin do?chanrobles virtual law library

A. He ran away but was chased and again he was stabbed at the back, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. How many times did he stab him for the second time?chanrobles virtual law library

A. He was stabbed again once, sir.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. What part of the body of your cousin was hit?chanrobles virtual law library

A. At the back, sir.

xxx xxx xxx

Q. Now, if you see again this Junior Lopez, can you still identify him?chanrobles virtual law library

A. Yes, sir.

xxx xxx xxx

(witness is pointing to a person who, when asked, stated his name as Leonardo Lopez).chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Q. How long have you know this Leonardo Lopez and Mario Lopez prior to August 8, 1990?chanrobles virtual law library

A. For a long time, sir. ¹⁹

These declarations were likewise confirmed by the postmortem findings of Dr. Marcial Cenido ²⁰ who testified that the victim suffered two (2) fatal wounds ²¹ which caused his death. Moreover, the identification of appellant by the witnesses as the perpetrator of the crime is entitled to full faith and credit considering that there appears no evidence to show that they were moved by improper motive to falsely testify against the appellant. Appellant has been their neighbor for a long time and the records bear out that no animosity existed between them before the incident.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

As earlier stated, the defense of the appellant is mere denial and alibi. He contended that at the time of the incident, he was sleeping at his house and that at around 9:00 o'clock that morning, he left his house to sell newspaper and cigarettes.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

In appreciating the defense of alibi, this Court has repeatedly held that the accused must be able (a) to prove his presence at another place at the time of the perpetration of the offense and (b) to demonstrate that it would thus be physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime. ²²Neither of the above essential requisites has been convincingly established. The distance of thirteen (13) meters from the place of commission to the house of the appellant can easily be negotiated in a number of minutes. Most importantly, alibi cannot stand in the face of positive identification of the accused by disinterested witnesses ²³ as in the case at bench.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

In addition, there is the unrebutted finding of the trial court that the appellant fled soon after the incident. Flight evidences guilt and a guilty conscience; the same strongly indicates a guilty mind or betrays the existence of a guilty conscience. ²⁴

Finally, it is much too late for appellant to raise the question of his arrest without a warrant. When accused-appellant was arrested and a case was filed against him, he pleaded not guilty upon arraignment, participated in the trial and presented his evidence. Appellant is thus estopped from questioning the legality of his arrest. It is well-settled that any objection involving a warrant of arrest or procedure in the acquisition by the court of jurisdiction over the person of an accused must be made before he enters his plea, otherwise the objection is deemed waived. ²⁵ Besides, this issue is being raised for the first time by appellant. He did not move for the quashal of the information before the trial court on this ground. Consequently, any irregularity attendant to his arrest, if any, was cured when he voluntarily submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the trial court by entering a plea of not guilty and by participating in the trial. ²⁶Moreover, the illegal arrest of an accused is not sufficient cause for setting aside a valid judgment rendered upon a sufficient complaint after trial free from error. ²⁷

With respect to the civil indemnity, it would suffice to state that in line with the ruling of this Court in People v. Sison ²⁸ the trial court correctly awarded P50,000.00 as indemnity for the death of Jesus Reyes. However, the award of P4,500.00 as actual damages representing funeral expenses must be reduced to P4,000.00 in accordance with testimony in this regard. ²⁹

WHEREFORE, with the modification only of the award of actual damages from P4,500.00 to P4,000.00 to the judgment appealed from his hereby AFFIRMED with costs against accused-appellant.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

SO ORDERED.

Padilla, Davide, Jr. and Bellosillo, JJ., concur.chanroblesvirtualawlibrarychanrobles virtual law library

Quiason, J., is on leave.

1 Original Records, p. 1.chanrobles virtual law library

2 Id., at 4-5.chanrobles virtual law library

3 Then Presiding Judge of RTC, Manila, Branch XLIX, now Associate Justice of the Court of Appeals.chanrobles virtual law library

4 Decision, pp. 12-13; Original Records, pp. 48-49.chanrobles virtual law library

5 TSN, June 25, 1991, pp. 4-7.chanrobles virtual law library

6 Id., at 7.chanrobles virtual law library

7 TSN, June 10, 1991, pp. 17-18.chanrobles virtual law library

8 TSN, June 25, 1991, pp. 7-8.chanrobles virtual law library

9 TSN, June 20, 1991, p. 3.chanrobles virtual law library

10 TSN, June 25, 1991, p. 23.chanrobles virtual law library

11 Exhibit "B".chanrobles virtual law library

12 Original Records, p. 15.chanrobles virtual law library

13 TSN, June 25, 1991, p. 19.chanrobles virtual law library

14 TSN, July 16, 1991, pp. 3-5, 11-14.chanrobles virtual law library

15 Appellant's Brief, p. 1; Rollo, p. 41.chanrobles virtual law library

16 Id., at 14-15; Id., at 54-55.chanrobles virtual law library

17 People vs. Sendon, 228 SCRA 489, 498 (1993); People vs. Dela Torre, 198 SCRA 663 (1991).chanrobles virtual law library

18 TSN, June 20, 1991, pp. 14-22.chanrobles virtual law library

19 TSN, June 25, 1991, pp. 3-10.chanrobles virtual law library

20 See Note 10, supra.chanrobles virtual law library

21 TSN, June 20, 1991, p. 9.chanrobles virtual law library

22 People v. Dayson, G.R. No. 106234, March 2, 1995; People v. Penillos, 205 SCRA 546 [1992]; People v. Cinco, 194 SCRA 535 [1991].chanrobles virtual law library

23 People v. Mosende, 228 SCRA 341 [1993]; People v. Yadao, 216 SCRA 1 [1992]; People v. Lee, 204 SCRA 900 [1991].chanrobles virtual law library

24 Anciro v. People, 228 SCRA 629 [1993]; People v. Martinado, 214 SCRA 712 [1992]; People v. Garcia, 209 SCRA 164 [1992].chanrobles virtual law library

25 People v. Codilla, 224 SCRA 104 [1993]; De Asis v. Romero 41 SCRA 235 [1971].chanrobles virtual law library

26 People v. De Guzman, 224 93 [1993]; People v. Rabang, 187 SCRA 682 [1990].chanrobles virtual law library

27 People v. Briones, 202 SCRA 708 [1991]; U.S. v. Grant and Kennedy 18 Phil. 122 [1910].chanrobles virtual law library

28 198 SCRA 643 [1990].chanrobles virtual law library

29 See Note 9, supra.