G.R. No. 124705 January 20, 1998
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. GERRY SUMALPONG, JOSEPH LUMUNGGO, MELCHOR FERNANDO and BILLY LAKSINTO, accused, GERRY SUMALPONG and MELCHOR FERNANDO, accused-appellants.

FACTS

On January 12, 1994, in Cotabato City, Arola Dilangalen and Mohammad Managuili were stabbed after alighting from a service vehicle and taking merienda at 4J Pizza House. Dilangalen died, while Managuili survived. An Information charged Gerry Sumalpong, Joseph Lumunggo, Melchor Fernando, and Billy Laksinto with murder and frustrated murder, alleging conspiracy, treachery, and evident premeditation. Sumalpong and Fernando pleaded not guilty; Lumunggo and Laksinto remained at large. The prosecution’s version, as summarized by the trial court, stated that the victims were waiting for a tricycle when four men near an electric post suddenly and simultaneously stabbed them. Managuili later identified Sumalpong as one of the assailants when presented by police. The defense presented alibis: Fernando claimed he was working at his employer’s shop making balusters from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., with his father and employer corroborating. Sumalpong claimed he was at home reading, corroborated by his father and a witness, and asserted that Managuili initially failed to identify him. The trial court convicted both appellants, finding conspiracy and treachery, and imposed the death penalty for murder and reclusion temporal maximum for frustrated murder.

ISSUE

The main issues, as framed by the appellants’ assigned errors, involve: (1) the credibility of the prosecution witness’s identification of the appellants; (2) the validity of the appellants’ alibi defenses; (3) the existence of conspiracy; (4) whether guilt was proven beyond reasonable doubt; and (5) the propriety of the penalties and damages imposed, including the finding of aggravating circumstances.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalties. It upheld the trial court’s findings on the credibility of Managuili’s positive identification, which prevailed over the appellants’ alibis, as the crime scene was near their residences/school/workplace. The Court also found conspiracy based on the simultaneous attack by four individuals. However, it ruled that the generic aggravating circumstance of evident premeditation was not proven with concrete evidence of the time when the appellants determined to commit the crime, an act manifestly indicating that determination, and a sufficient lapse of time to reflect on the consequences. Treachery was properly appreciated as the attack was sudden and unexpected, rendering the victims defenseless. Consequently, the penalty for murder is reclusion perpetua to death. In the absence of any proven generic aggravating circumstance, the lesser penalty of reclusion perpetua was imposed, not death. The penalty for frustrated murder was also modified to an indeterminate sentence. Civil indemnity for death was increased to P50,000.00, and moral damages were awarded. Actual damages for burial expenses were not awarded due to lack of competent proof, but temperate damages were granted. The award of exemplary damages was deleted due to the absence of aggravating circumstances.