GR L 1512; (May, 1949) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-1512; May 12, 1949
EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FEDERICO (alias PEDRO BALLOCANAG), defendant-appellant.
FACTS
The accused, Federico alias Pedro Ballocanag, was a tenant of the victim, Mariano Balbin. After Balbin dismissed the accused and his family as tenants and turned the land over to another, the accused harbored resentment. In the early morning of March 4, 1946, the accused entered Balbin’s house and attacked Balbin’s son, Pacifico, with a bolo while he was asleep. When Mariano Balbin awoke to his son’s cries, the accused attacked and repeatedly stabbed him with the bolo. Mariano Balbin died from his wounds later that same day. The accused was convicted of murder (asesinato) by the Court of First Instance of Ilocos Sur and sentenced to reclusion perpetua, indemnification, and costs. He appealed, challenging his identification and presenting an alibi.
ISSUE
1. Whether the accused was properly identified as the perpetrator.
2. Whether the alibi presented by the defense is credible.
3. Whether the killing was attended by treachery (alevosia).
4. Whether nocturnity (nocturnidad) should be considered as an aggravating circumstance.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction.
1. Identification: The accused was positively identified by three eyewitnesses: the victim’s son (Pacifico), the victim’s wife (Anastasia), and the victim himself in his ante-mortem declaration. Their familiarity with the accused, having lived together for months, made identification reliable. The illumination in the house was sufficient for recognition.
2. Alibi: The defense’s alibi that the accused was at a different location was rejected. It was uncorroborated and primarily testified to by the accused’s relatives and friends. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is entitled to great weight.
3. Treachery (Alevosia): The killing was qualified by treachery. The accused attacked at night while the victims were asleep and defenseless, employing means that ensured the execution of the crime without risk to himself from any defense the victim might offer.
4. Nocturnity: Nocturnity was not considered a separate aggravating circumstance because it was absorbed in treachery, being an integral part of the treacherous plan to ensure the success of the attack and the assailant’s safety.
The Court imposed the accessory penalties and affirmed the sentence of reclusion perpetua and indemnity. A separate opinion suggested increasing the indemnity.
AI Generated by Armztrong.