GR 98152 53; (October, 1992) (Digest)
G.R. No. 98152-53 October 26, 1992
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ARMANDO PASILIAO y GUTIERREZ Alias “MANDO” and TITO PASILIAO, accused-appellants.
FACTS
On December 6, 1988, at about 6:00 p.m., Dominador Lalata was drinking with others at a store in Salaan, Mangaldan, Pangasinan. Accused-appellants Tito Pasiliao and Armando Pasiliao arrived. Tito Pasiliao, without warning, hacked Dominador multiple times with a jungle bolo. The wounded Dominador ran towards his sister’s house. Tito and Armando caught up with him at the house landing. Tito held Dominador by the hair while Armando collared him, and both then shot him. Dominador died from his injuries. Two eyewitnesses, Ronald Broquel and Helen Lalata, positively identified the accused-appellants as the perpetrators. Armando Pasiliao was charged with Murder and Illegal Possession of Firearm and Ammunition. The Regional Trial Court found Armando Pasiliao guilty of both crimes, sentencing him to Reclusion Perpetua for Murder and an indeterminate penalty for Illegal Possession. Armando Pasiliao appealed, arguing the eyewitness testimonies were unreliable and asserting alibi and denial.
ISSUE
The main issues were whether the trial court erred in: 1) convicting Armando Pasiliao based on the eyewitness testimonies; 2) rejecting his defense of alibi and denial; and 3) not acquitting him based on reasonable doubt.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for Murder but modified the penalty for Illegal Possession of Firearm. The Court held that the positive and credible identification by eyewitnesses Ronald Broquel and Helen Lalata prevailed over the weak defense of alibi. Armando Pasiliao failed to prove it was impossible for him to be at the crime scene, as his shop was only three kilometers away. The Court found treachery present as the attack was sudden and without warning, qualifying the killing as Murder. However, the Court disallowed the aggravating circumstance of nighttime for lack of proof it was deliberately sought. For Illegal Possession of Firearm under P.D. No. 1866, where the unlicensed firearm is used in homicide or murder, the penalty is death. Since the death penalty cannot be imposed under the 1987 Constitution, and the Indeterminate Sentence Law does not apply, the proper penalty is Reclusion Perpetua. Thus, the Court affirmed the Reclusion Perpetua for Murder and modified the penalty for Illegal Possession to Reclusion Perpetua.