G.R. No. 124452 July 28, 1999
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. PABLITO TAMBIS y BALIONG, accused-appellant.

FACTS

On December 25, 1994, in Barangay Hagbuaya, Catigbian, Bohol, accused-appellant Pablito Tambis y Baliong was charged with murder for hacking and beheading Leonardo Tagsa y Bibat, a physically handicapped person with a mental disorder. The information alleged treachery, abuse of superior strength, and cruelty, noting that the accused afterward publicly displayed the victim’s severed head. Upon arraignment, accused-appellant pleaded guilty. The trial court conducted a searching inquiry and proceeded to receive evidence. Prosecution witnesses Agapito Dano and Edgar Regis testified that in the afternoon of December 25, 1994, they saw accused-appellant, armed with bolos, go to the victim’s house. Accused-appellant punctured the tires of Regis’s motorcycle to prevent him from reporting to the police. Later, they saw accused-appellant emerge from the house carrying the victim’s severed head, shouting that it was Leonardo Tagsa’s head. The cause of death was irreversible shock secondary to homicidal decapitation. The victim’s family incurred P28,000 in burial and embalming expenses. In his defense, accused-appellant admitted to the killing and decapitation but claimed he was drunk and not aware of his actions, having been drinking since he was 18 years old. He testified that a fight ensued with the victim, during which he sustained minor injuries. The trial court convicted him of murder and imposed the death penalty, considering the crime heinous and noting accused-appellant’s “hateful and angry eyes.” The case is now under automatic review.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court correctly imposed the death penalty upon accused-appellant, considering the presence or absence of mitigating and aggravating circumstances.

RULING

The Supreme Court modified the penalty. The qualifying circumstance of treachery could not be appreciated due to the absence of evidence detailing the manner of attack, as no one witnessed the killing inside the victim’s house. However, the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength was present, given the notorious inequality of forces between the accused, who was armed with a bolo, and the physically handicapped victim. The Court found two mitigating circumstances in favor of accused-appellant: (1) plea of guilty, and (2) voluntary surrender, as he surrendered to police authorities the day after the incident. Under Article 63 of the Revised Penal Code, when the penalty is death and there are mitigating and aggravating circumstances, the lesser penalty shall be applied if they offset each other. With two mitigating circumstances and one aggravating circumstance, the mitigating circumstances offset the aggravating one. Therefore, the penalty is reduced to reclusion perpetua. The Court affirmed the award of P50,000 as civil indemnity and P28,000 as actual damages. The award for moral damages was deleted due to lack of proof, but an award of P50,000 as moral damages was granted based on the violent and gruesome nature of the crime.