G.R. No. L-72476 February 14, 1989
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ARMANDO MACABENTA y AGOTE, alias MANDING, defendant-appellant.

FACTS

On the evening of November 11, 1980, Jose Loaton, Jr. was walking with Hermogenes Doroja, Jr. along Marcos Bridge in Tondo, Manila. Without warning, appellant Armando Macabenta stabbed Loaton. Macabenta’s companion, Wilfredo Asis, followed with another stab thrust to Loaton’s chest. The entire incident was witnessed by Tito de Alagdon, who was about six arms’ length behind the victim. The wounded Loaton fled to a nearby police outpost, was rushed to the hospital, but was pronounced dead on arrival from a fatal chest wound.
Police officers, responding to the scene, apprehended Macabenta hiding in a pile of debris on a vacant lot. He was found in possession of a blood-stained double-bladed knife and was wearing a T-shirt matching the description given by witnesses. At the police station, Macabenta, without counsel, gave a statement admitting presence but pointing to Asis as the one who delivered the fatal blow. Asis was later arrested and executed an extrajudicial confession admitting they took turns stabbing the victim. Macabenta was charged with and convicted of murder by the trial court.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting appellant Armando Macabenta of murder based on the evidence presented.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court held that the trial court correctly found conspiracy based on the credible and positive testimony of eyewitness Tito de Alagdon, not on the extrajudicial confession of Wilfredo Asis. De Alagdon clearly testified that Macabenta initiated the attack by stabbing the victim first, immediately followed by Asis, and that both then chased the fleeing victim. This sequence of acts demonstrated a unity of purpose and concerted action, establishing conspiracy and making Macabenta a co-principal. The Court found no reason to doubt the eyewitness account, which was consistent and detailed.
The Court further ruled that the crime was murder qualified by treachery. The attack was sudden and unexpected, directed at an unsuspecting victim who was merely walking, giving him no opportunity to defend himself. This mode of attack ensured the execution of the crime without risk to the assailants. The corpus delicti was proven by the autopsy report and the recovery of the blood-stained knife. The penalty of reclusion perpetua was affirmed as proper, with the civil indemnity increased to P30,000.00. The defense’s denial could not overcome the positive identification and evidence of conspiracy.