G.R. Nos. 108596-97 November 17, 1994
People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Abelo Albarico @ “Odak,” accused-appellant.

FACTS

After a joint trial, the Regional Trial Court convicted accused-appellant Abelo Albarico of two counts of murder (for the deaths of Alberto Cabahug and Charles Arevalo) and two counts of frustrated murder (against Rosita Porquiado and Victoria Escototo). The appellant appealed only the murder convictions. The prosecution established that during a benefit dance on May 22, 1992, the appellant, after being stabbed with an ice-pick by Alfredo Samante, went on a “stabbing frenzy” with a “pistolized” knife. He stabbed Alfredo Latoy, then Alberto Cabahug in the back (causing instant death), then Rosita Porquiado in the stomach. As people fled, he stabbed Victoria Escototo on the forearm and body. Upon exiting the dance area, he saw 12-year-old Charles Arevalo near the gate and stabbed him in the back, causing his death. Medical certificates confirmed the nature and extent of the victims’ wounds. The appellant, as sole defense witness, claimed he acted in self-defense, stating he was attacked by Samante and later by Celedonio Calosor with a bolo, which amputated his fingers. He claimed the stabbings of Cabahug and Escototo were in response to their attacks, and that the stabbing of Arevalo was accidental, occurring as the child ran between him and Calosor. He denied stabbing Porquiado.

ISSUE

The core issue is whether the trial court correctly convicted the appellant of murder for the deaths of Alberto Cabahug and Charles Arevalo, rejecting his claims of self-defense and accident.

RULING

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and affirmed the trial court’s decision in toto. The Court held that the appellant failed to prove the essential elements of self-defense by clear and convincing evidence. His testimony was found to be “full of contradictions, improbabilities and inconsistencies” compared to the credible and positive testimonies of the prosecution witnesses. The Court specifically noted: (1) Rosita Porquiado’s positive identification of the appellant as her assailant outweighed his mere denial; (2) his account of using Alfredo Latoy as a shield was improbable; (3) his claim that Victoria Escototo rushed at him with a gun was not credible; and (4) his claim that the stabbing of Charles Arevalo was accidental was belied by prosecution evidence that the child was stabbed at the back near the gate as the appellant fled, and by the medical finding of “multiple stab wounds,” which contradicted an accidental single wound. The killings of Cabahug and Arevalo were attended by treachery (attack from behind, sudden and unprovoked, ensuring execution without risk from the unarmed victims). For the killing of the child, abuse of superior strength was also present but was absorbed by treachery. The appellant’s claims were therefore unsubstantiated, and his guilt for murder was proven beyond reasonable doubt.