G.R. No. L-11795-96; May 20, 1960
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RECARIDO JARDENIL, RICARDO BLAQUIO, RESTITUTO PEROJO, MANUEL DE LA PEÑA, ELEUTERIO DE LA PEÑA, alias ELEUTERIO MAGLOTIS, and SANTIAGO N. alias TAGOY, defendants. RECARIDO JARDENIL and RICARDO BLAQUIO, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

This is a consolidated appeal from two criminal cases (Nos. 5021 and 5039) jointly tried in the Court of First Instance of Negros Occidental. In Case No. 5021, the defendants, including appellants Recarido Jardenil and Ricardo Blaquio, were charged with the murder of Bayani Sarmiento. In Case No. 5039, the same defendants were charged with the frustrated murder of Johny (or Jose) Marco. Only Jardenil and Blaquio were tried, as the other defendants were not apprehended; Manuel de la Peña was discharged to become a state witness. The trial court convicted Jardenil and Blaquio of murder in Case No. 5021 and attempted homicide in Case No. 5039, sentencing them to life imprisonment and an indeterminate penalty, respectively.
The prosecution’s version, as summarized from the trial court’s decision, established that Jardenil had a personal grudge against Bayani Sarmiento. On April 26, 1956, Jardenil, Blaquio, and their co-accused planned to kill Sarmiento and Jose Marco. After drinking tuba, the group proceeded to a store where Sarmiento and Marco were drinking. Jardenil confronted Sarmiento with a bayonet. When Sarmiento tried to pacify him, Restituto Perojo pushed Sarmiento towards Jardenil, who then stabbed Sarmiento in the abdomen. Jardenil then attacked Marco, hitting him on the forehead with the bayonet and stabbing him in the back. The other accused also assaulted Marco and left him for dead. Sarmiento died from his wounds, while Marco survived with injuries deemed non-fatal.
Jardenil claimed self-defense, testifying that Marco and Arturo Filiu attacked him first, and he only grabbed Marco’s bayonet to hit Marco in retaliation. Blaquio denied participation, claiming his presence was coincidental and that he saw Santiago N. stab Sarmiento.

ISSUE

The main issue on appeal hinges on the credibility of the evidence, specifically whether the prosecution’s version proving the guilt of appellants Jardenil and Blaquio for the crimes charged is more credible than the appellants’ defenses of self-defense and denial.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions but modified the nature of the crime and penalty in Case No. 5021. The Court found the prosecution’s evidence credible, relying on the testimonies of witnesses including Manuel de la Peña, Arturo Filiu, Jose Marco, and Lina Navarro (an impartial bystander), which were corroborated by medical findings and police investigators. The Court rejected Jardenil’s claim of self-defense as inherently incredible, noting the improbability of Marco leaving his weapon accessible if he intended to attack and the absence of injuries on Jardenil. The Court also noted that Jardenil had previously admitted in an affidavit to stabbing Sarmiento. Blaquio’s denial was contradicted by his own affidavit supporting the prosecution’s version.
However, the Supreme Court found that the qualifying circumstance of evident premeditation was not sufficiently established. Thus, the crime in Case No. 5021 was homicide, not murder. The Court found the generic aggravating circumstances of intoxication (purposely sought to facilitate the crime) and abuse of superior strength. Consequently, the penalty for homicide was modified to an indeterminate sentence ranging from ten (10) years and one (1) day of prision mayor to seventeen (17) years, four (4) months and one (1) day of reclusion temporal. The conviction for attempted homicide in Case No. 5039 and the award of indemnity were affirmed. The decision was modified accordingly.