GR 77686; (May, 1989) (Digest)
G.R. No. 77686 May 4, 1989
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. SEDAN ALEGARBES, RICHARD AGBU, RAMIL CESAR, ALVIN UCAB and DODONG VEVARES, accused. SEDAN ALEGARBES, accused-appellant.
FACTS
On June 30, 1984, Nino Velez joined a drinking session on the lawn of accused Sedan Alegarbes’s house. Later that night, Velez returned home bleeding from multiple stab wounds. Before being taken to the hospital, he identified his assailants to his brother and father, naming “Sedan, Richard and others.” He died approximately two hours later. An autopsy revealed six stab wounds. Of the five accused charged with murder, only Alegarbes and Alvin Ucab were apprehended and tried. The trial court acquitted Ucab on reasonable doubt but convicted Alegarbes as a principal for murder, qualified by treachery, based primarily on the victim’s dying declaration. Alegarbes appealed, contesting the admissibility and reliability of this declaration.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the trial court erred in convicting appellant Sedan Alegarbes based on the victim’s dying declaration and in rejecting his defense of alibi.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The Court upheld the admissibility and credibility of the victim’s antemortem statement as a valid dying declaration under Rule 130, Section 31 of the Rules of Court. All requisites were met: the statements concerned the cause and circumstances of his death; he was competent to testify; and he made them under a consciousness of imminent death, which was substantiated by the nature and number of his wounds and the fact he lived for about two hours after the assault. The appellant’s argument that the victim’s fatal wounds and 250-meter journey made speech improbable was refuted by the medico-legal testimony that the victim could have remained conscious and communicative for 30 minutes to an hour. The Court found the declaration credible, noting the spontaneous reaction of the victim’s father, who immediately sought police and went to Alegarbes’s house upon hearing the identification, lending natural corroboration.
The defense of alibi was correctly rejected. Alegarbes claimed he was indoors with his wife, who was in labor, but the child was born fourteen days later, undermining his claim. His proximity to the crime scene—his house was near the lawn where the stabbing occurred—did not physically preclude his participation. The Court also noted evidence of a prior grudge between the appellant and the victim. The award of actual and moral damages to the heirs was sustained based on the evidence of hospital and funeral expenses and the emotional suffering inflicted. The penalty of reclusion perpetua and the damages were affirmed in toto.