G.R. No. 100804 April 29, 1994
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Sulpicio Pajares y Hagonoy, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On March 7, 1988, between 9:00 and 10:00 PM, at the corner of Bilbao and Padre Rada Streets, Tondo, Manila, the victim Alberto Pilapil (alias “Betty”), an ambulant vegetable vendor, was manning his pushcart. The accused-appellant, Sulpicio Pajares y Hagonoy, came from behind Pilapil’s right side and, without warning or provocation, stabbed him on the lower chest with a bladed instrument. The accused then fled. Eyewitness Reynaldo de Vera, who was about four arms-length away under well-lighted conditions, saw the incident and identified the accused. The victim initially fell but then ran towards a hospital. Police Corporal Amador Regalado, informed of the incident, proceeded to the area with de Vera. They saw the accused, who appeared drunk and was holding a pointed weapon tucked in his waist. De Vera positively identified the accused as the assailant to Regalado, who then arrested him and recovered a half-bladed black scissor from his waist. The accused was brought to the Mary Johnston Hospital where the conscious victim identified him as his assailant. The victim was later transferred to Jose Reyes Memorial Hospital where he died on March 8, 1988. During trial, the accused denied the accusation, claiming he was in the area selling vegetables and drinking with a friend, and was arrested without cause. His defense was corroborated by Hilario Candido, who, however, admitted on cross-examination that he had seen a similar half-bladed scissor in the accused’s possession the day before the incident.

ISSUE

Whether the accused-appellant is guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Murder with modifications. The prosecution conclusively proved the accused’s guilt through the positive testimony of eyewitness Reynaldo de Vera, the victim’s dying identification, the accused’s positive identification in a police line-up, and the recovery of the weapon. The defense of bare denial cannot overcome this evidence. The Court found that treachery attended the commission of the crime, as the accused attacked the victim suddenly from behind without warning, ensuring the execution without risk to himself. The Court ruled that proof of motive is not indispensable when the identity of the culprit is established. The penalty was modified to reclusion perpetua in accordance with Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, and the civil indemnity was increased to Fifty Thousand Pesos (P50,000.00).