G.R. No. L-3386 and L-3387 May 18, 1951
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ANTONIO IBALI, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

This was a joint prosecution for murder against Antonio Ibali, Cresencio Calija, and Santiago Lagazo, and for illegal possession of firearms and ammunition against Ibali alone. Lagazo was excluded from the information for murder and used as a state witness. Ibali was found guilty in both cases as charged and sentenced for murder to reclusion perpetua, indemnity of P2,000 to the heirs, and part of the costs; and for illegal possession to an indeterminate imprisonment of 5 to 7 years. Calija was convicted as an accomplice to murder and sentenced to an indeterminate penalty. Ibali appealed both sentences; Calija did not.
Melchor Manzano was murdered on the night of June 29, 1949, on the seashore in Pasuquin, Ilocos Norte. The medical certificate described multiple gunshot wounds, clean cut wounds, and a fracture. Initial arrests based on confessions obtained via third-degree methods were dismissed. A new investigation led to the apprehension of Santiago Lagazo, Antonio Ibali, and Cresencio Calija, all of whom made extrajudicial statements incriminating themselves.
At trial, Lagazo and Calija testified against Ibali. Their testimony, despite discrepancies with their prior confessions, established that Ibali invited Lagazo for a walk, retrieved a carbine, fetched Manzano, and later met Calija. The group agreed to go fishing. During a rest, Ibali jested about sharing Manzano’s mistresses; Manzano retorted that Ibali was already enjoying them. Ibali then struck Manzano with wood, slashed him with a bolo, and under Ibali’s threats, Calija and Lagazo also hacked him. They dragged the body near a stream where Ibali riddled it with carbine shots. They staged the scene to look like a killing over stolen yarn and a fish net. Ibali had a motive: both he and Manzano were involved with the same woman, Manzano’s wife’s sister.
Ibali set up an alibi, claiming he was home in bed from 8:00 p.m. to 5:00 a.m., and later that Lagazo and Calija came to his house late at night to confess the killing. This alibi was contradicted by defense witness Santos Licuan, who testified he saw Ibali, Lagazo, Calija, and Manzano together around 8:00 p.m. Ibali’s behavior the next day—feigning ignorance of the corpse’s identity by reporting it to authorities and asking Manzano’s wife if her husband was home, despite allegedly having been told by Lagazo and Calija whose body it was—was incriminating. The court found Ibali’s extrajudicial confession voluntary and admissible.
On the charge of illegal possession of firearms, evidence showed Ibali possessed the carbine (Exhibit “A”) about a year before the killing, and Lagazo testified he saw Ibali with it multiple times, including when Ibali used it to shoot Manzano’s corpse and later said he would leave it near Juan Manzano’s house, where it was found by a policeman.

ISSUE

1. Whether the trial court erred in convicting Antonio Ibali of murder based on the evidence presented.
2. Whether the trial court erred in convicting Antonio Ibali of illegal possession of firearms.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s decision in both cases, with modification to the indemnity.
1. On the murder charge: The conviction was upheld. The evidence, including the testimonies of co-accused Lagazo and Calija (despite discrepancies), the motive established, the contradiction of Ibali’s alibi by a defense witness, and Ibali’s own incriminating post-crime behavior, left no reasonable doubt that Ibali was the instigator and principal in the murder of Melchor Manzano. The court found the crime was planned, not merely provoked by the jesting exchange. The alleged non-compliance with rules in excluding Lagazo as a state witness was not a reversible error.
2. On the illegal possession of firearms charge: The conviction was upheld. Testimonies of Cresencio Failano and Santiago Lagazo sufficiently established Ibali’s possession of the unlicensed carbine used in the crime, which was later discovered where Ibali indicated.
The appealed decision was affirmed, except the indemnity for the killing was increased from P2,000 to P6,000. Costs were imposed on appellant.