GR 96549; (March, 1991) (Digest)
G.R. No. 96549; March 22, 1991
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. CARMELO BOLIMA, LEOPOLDO BRITANICO, ROGELIO BRITANICO, defendants-appellants.
FACTS
On May 7, 1986, Generoso Lelis and Carmelo Bolima, both collectors for the Tabaco Municipal Treasurer’s Office, had a dispute over collection territories, which they attempted to settle at the local police station. Bolima left the station at 5:00 p.m. Later that evening, while Lelis was drinking with friends near the Tabaco supermarket, he was suddenly attacked. Carmelo Bolima first stabbed him with a bolo. When Lelis stumbled and ran, he was intercepted and hacked several times by Leopoldo Britanico. As Lelis fled further towards Mary’s Place, he was again hacked by both Leopoldo and Rogelio Britanico, who uttered threats against his life. The assailants fled upon hearing a whistle. Lelis succumbed to his wounds while being transported to the hospital. An autopsy revealed multiple incised and stab wounds, with the cause of death being internal hemorrhage.
ISSUE
Whether the trial court and the Court of Appeals erred in convicting appellants Carmelo Bolima, Leopoldo Britanico, and Rogelio Britanico of murder despite the alleged existence of a dying declaration from the victim pointing to another assailant and alleged inconsistencies in the prosecution’s evidence.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The legal logic centered on the credibility of eyewitness testimony and the establishment of conspiracy. The Court found that the testimonies of prosecution witnesses Rodolfo Villegas and Magdalena Sancopan were credible and consistent in identifying all three appellants as the perpetrators of the attack. The alleged inconsistencies in their accounts were deemed minor and, rather than detracting from their credibility, were considered badges of truthfulness. The Court also explained the witnesses’ initial reluctance to report the crime to the police as understandable due to fear of reprisal, which does not impair their credibility.
Regarding conspiracy, the Court ruled it was sufficiently proven by the appellants’ coordinated and simultaneous actions in attacking the victim, which resulted in multiple fatal wounds. The manner of the attack—a sudden and concerted assault with lethal weapons—conclusively established the qualifying circumstances of treachery and abuse of superior strength, warranting a murder conviction. The alleged dying declaration was not given credence as it was not sufficiently proven and was contradicted by the positive identification of the appellants by eyewitnesses. The indemnity to the heirs was increased to P50,000.00.