G.R. No. 117481 March 6, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. RENATO ALBAO @ JUN and JOSE ALENO, accused-appellants.

FACTS

On October 28, 1990, in Reservation, Poblacion, Quezon, Palawan, the victim Onsing Tangkoy was hacked to death. Prosecution eyewitnesses Albinio Usa and Tabita Tangkoy (the victim’s widow) testified that they were walking home with the victim when accused-appellants Renato Albao and Jose Aleno, who were drinking, called Tangkoy over. Despite Tabita’s dissuasion, Tangkoy approached. Albao then suddenly hacked Tangkoy on the back with a bolo. Tabita ran away, and while running, she heard her husband shout for help and saw Aleno come out with a bolo in a hacking gesture towards her husband. Albinio Usa also witnessed the initial hacking by Albao before he ran. The autopsy report indicated the cause of death was brain injury from multiple hack and stab wounds. The accused-appellants were charged with murder. At trial, both accused-appellants denied the charges and invoked self-defense. Renato Albao claimed the victim attacked him first with a bolo, and he merely defended himself. Jose Aleno claimed he was merely present but did not participate, and he presented an alibi that he was at a different location. The Regional Trial Court convicted both of murder and sentenced each to reclusion perpetua.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the accused-appellants are guilty of the crime of murder. This involves evaluating the credibility of the prosecution’s eyewitness accounts versus the accused-appellants’ defenses of self-defense (Albao) and alibi (Aleno), and determining the presence of qualifying circumstances like treachery.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the decision of the trial court.
1. For Appellant Renato Albao: The Court found his claim of self-defense unavailing. The burden of proof for self-defense lies with the accused, and it must be established by clear and convincing evidence. Albao’s claim that the victim initiated the aggression was not credible. His testimony was inconsistent and uncorroborated. Furthermore, the nature and number of the victim’s wounds (multiple hack and stab wounds, including a nearly severed arm and detached ears) were inconsistent with mere self-defense and indicated a determined effort to kill. The Court affirmed his conviction for murder. The qualifying circumstance of treachery was present, as the attack was sudden and from behind, giving the victim no opportunity to defend himself. The Court affirmed the penalty of reclusion perpetua and the award of P50,000.00 as civil indemnity.
2. For Appellant Jose Aleno: The Court acquitted him based on reasonable doubt. The prosecution evidence against him was inconclusive. Eyewitness Tabita Tangkoy admitted she did not actually see Aleno hack her husband; she only saw him come out with a bolo in a hacking gesture. Her testimony was equivocal and did not positively establish that Aleno inflicted any wound. The testimony of Albinio Usa did not mention any act of hacking by Aleno. The medical report did not specify which wounds were inflicted by which assailant. Given the weakness of the prosecution’s evidence linking him to the fatal attack, his defense of alibi, while inherently weak, assumed relevance. The Court ruled that the evidence failed to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt. He was ordered released unless detained for another lawful cause.