GR L 31042 43; (August, 1972) (Digest)

G.R. No. L-31042-31043 August 18, 1972
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff, vs. MARLO CANIAL Y ALIMON, ALFREDO EDWARDS Y CONTRERAS, and JANET CLEMENTE Y HERNANDEZ, defendants.

FACTS

On the evening of April 29, 1969, a shooting incident on Elias Street, Sta. Cruz, Manila, resulted in the deaths of Benjamin Galang, Ireneo Navasca, and Zosimo Felarca. Accused Marlo Canial, Alfredo Edwards, Janet Clemente, and Francisco Sevilla were charged with three counts of murder, allegedly committed with evident premeditation, treachery, and the use of a motor vehicle. The cases were jointly tried. Prosecution witnesses, including Leonardo Flores and Carlos Bolantis, testified that the accused arrived in a white Toyota. After a social visit, Janet Clemente was heard pointing out specific houses and individuals to Canial and Edwards. Canial retrieved a long firearm from the car’s compartment. Subsequently, Edwards shot Navasca and, after a struggle, Galang. Clemente then pointed out Felarca, who was approaching, and Edwards shot him too. Canial fired at Navasca’s body and shot at a house before the group fled.
The defense presented alibis. Canial and Edwards claimed they were elsewhere, with Edwards asserting he was at a movie house. Clemente denied involvement, stating she was at a party and left before the shooting. The trial court convicted Canial, Edwards, and Clemente, imposing three death penalties each and holding them solidarily liable for indemnity and moral damages. Sevilla was acquitted. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court for automatic review.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the guilt of the accused for the crime of murder was proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but modified the penalties. The alibis of the accused were correctly rejected by the trial court. The positive identification by multiple eyewitnesses, who provided consistent and credible narratives of the events, overwhelmingly established their presence and participation. The defense of alibi cannot prevail against such positive testimony. The Court found conspiracy among the three appellants. The acts of Janet Clemente in pointing out the victims to the shooters, coupled with her exhortations during the shooting, demonstrated a community of criminal purpose with Canial and Edwards. Her actions were integral to the execution of the plan, making her a co-conspirator.
The qualifying circumstance of treachery was properly appreciated. The attack was sudden and deliberate, employing means that ensured the execution without risk to the assailants from any defense the victims might offer. The victims were shot without warning, with Navasca and Felarca having no opportunity to resist. While Galang grappled for a gun, his killing was still treacherous as the initial assault that led to the struggle was sudden. However, the Court found that the aggravating circumstance of use of a motor vehicle was not proven to have facilitated the crime, as the car was merely used for transportation to and from the scene. With treachery as the sole qualifying circumstance and no generic aggravating circumstances, the penalty for each murder is reclusion temporal maximum to death. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the Court imposed an indeterminate sentence for each count. The awards for indemnity were sustained, but the awards for moral damages were deleted for lack of factual basis. The death of accused Marlo Canial pending appeal extinguished his criminal liability.