GR 111805; (January, 1995) (Digest)
G.R. No. 111805 . January 26, 1995. PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROBERTO CAJAMBAB y DE RUTAS and ARNULFO BANDAL y PUASO, accused-appellants.
FACTS
On December 3, 1990, Rodrigo Rogero was stabbed to death while sitting on a bench in Manila. Accused-appellants Roberto Cajambab and Arnulfo Bandal were charged with murder. The prosecution’s case hinged on the eyewitness account of Danilo Bitonio, who testified that he saw both appellants approach the victim. Bandal pulled the victim’s head up and stabbed him in the chest, after which Cajambab also stabbed him. The two then chased the fleeing victim and stabbed him again. The appellants denied the accusation, claiming they were playing basketball nearby, heard a commotion, and merely ran away. The defense presented Estrella Opina, who testified that Bitonio was playing cards with her and could not have witnessed the stabbing.
ISSUE
Whether the guilt of the accused-appellants for the crime of murder was proven beyond reasonable doubt.
RULING
Yes, the conviction is affirmed but modified regarding the penalty. The Supreme Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of witness credibility, a finding generally accorded great respect. The Court found no compelling reason to overturn the trial court’s reliance on the positive identification by eyewitness Danilo Bitonio. The testimony of defense witness Estrella Opina was deemed unreliable; on cross-examination, she admitted the scene was behind her and that she only looked back after the commotion started, undermining her claim that Bitonio could not have seen the incident. Her inconsistent statements about whether Bitonio was sitting playing cards or standing further weakened the defense.
The minor inconsistencies in Bitonio’s testimony were seen as enhancing its credibility by negating any suspicion of rehearsal. However, the Court found that the trial court erred in not appreciating the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender, which the prosecution admitted. Consequently, the penalty was reduced. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, the appellants were each sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of ten years and one day of prision mayor maximum to seventeen years, four months, and one day of reclusion temporal maximum. The award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity was sustained.