G.R. No. 103968 July 11, 1996
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. DIMSON M. GARDE, accused-appellant.

FACTS

The appellant, Dimson M. Garde, was charged with murder for the killing of Noli Diaz in Bacolod City on May 14, 1987. The information alleged that Garde, conspiring with his co-accused Edeme Tayapad, who remains at large, attacked and stabbed the victim, inflicting eleven fatal wounds. Upon arraignment, Garde pleaded not guilty. The trial court convicted him and sentenced him to reclusion perpetua. Initially, Garde moved to withdraw his appeal, but the Public Attorney’s Office later manifested his change of mind, leading the Supreme Court to reinstate the appeal for review.
The prosecution’s evidence, as summarized by the Solicitor General, established that while the victim was talking with friends, Tayapad approached from behind, greeted him, and then stabbed him. Appellant Garde then emerged and also stabbed the victim repeatedly with a double-bladed knife. An eyewitness, Arnold Balabag, positively identified both assailants and the weapons used. The defense presented a different version, claiming Garde was merely present, witnessed the stabbing by Tayapad out of shock, and later fled. Garde also claimed his extrajudicial confession was coerced and given without counsel.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused-appellant, Dimson M. Garde, for the crime of murder beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court found the testimony of eyewitness Arnold Balabag to be credible and sufficient to establish Garde’s direct participation in the killing. Balabag clearly identified Garde as one of the assailants who stabbed the victim and even identified the specific double-bladed weapon he used. The Court reiterated that the uncorroborated testimony of a single credible eyewitness is enough to sustain a conviction, especially where, as here, no ill motive was shown to impel the witness to falsely testify. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is accorded great respect.
Regarding the extrajudicial confession, the Court found it unnecessary to rely upon it for the conviction, as the eyewitness account was already conclusive. Nevertheless, the Court noted that the confession was executed with the assistance of counsel and subscribed before an assistant city fiscal, undermining the claim of coercion. Garde’s failure to file any complaint regarding his alleged maltreatment further weakened this defense. The Court modified the civil indemnity, increasing it from P30,000 to P50,000 in line with prevailing jurisprudence. The decision of the trial court was affirmed with this modification.