G.R. No. L-25345 May 13, 1968
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. ROMULO GARCELLANO, ET AL., defendants, ROMULO GARCELLANO and OSCAR SEDANO, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

Romulo Garcellano, Genaro Garcellano, Oscar Sedano, Manuel Sedano, and Pedro Sedano were charged with murder in the Court of First Instance of Cagayan. Pedro and Manuel Sedano died during the trial. After trial, the court convicted Romulo Garcellano and Oscar Sedano of murder and sentenced them to reclusion perpetua, while acquitting Genaro Garcellano. The two convicted defendants appealed.
The prosecution evidence established that the victim, Basilio Rey, had a common-law wife, Raymunda Garcellano (sister of Romulo and Genaro), whom he later abandoned. On November 8, 1960, Basilio returned to Iguig, Cagayan, and had a heated argument with Romulo about the sale of Raymunda’s land. On November 13, 1960, Basilio attended a party at Manuel Sedano’s house. During the party, another argument ensued between Basilio and Manuel Sedano regarding the same land. Romulo Garcellano held Basilio, while Manuel Sedano clubbed him with bamboo. Basilio broke free but was then stabbed by Oscar Sedano. As Basilio rushed to escape via the backdoor, he was chased by Romulo, Manuel, and Oscar, and was blocked and stabbed by Pedro Sedano. Basilio’s body was later found under the house. Romulo surrendered to authorities that night, turning over a bolo. Investigation at Oscar’s house revealed him wounded, with a bolo and bloodstained clothes. A post-mortem examination showed Basilio suffered eight fatal wounds.
Romulo Garcellano admitted killing Basilio but claimed self-defense and defense of his sister Florfina’s honor, alleging Basilio attempted to assault her. Oscar Sedano claimed alibi, stating he was home asleep.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the appellants, Romulo Garcellano and Oscar Sedano, are guilty of murder or a lesser offense, and whether their defenses are valid.

RULING

The Supreme Court found both appellants guilty, but modified the crime from murder to homicide. The Court rejected Romulo Garcellano’s claim of self-defense and defense of a relative as uncorroborated, improbable, and contradicted by his own sister Florfina, who testified for the prosecution and denied any assault. The Court also rejected Oscar Sedano’s alibi, as he was positively identified by Florfina as one of the attackers.
However, the Court found no sufficient evidence of conspiracy or treachery (alevosia) to qualify the killing as murder. The attacks appeared unpremeditated, arising from the heat of the argument. Thus, the crime committed was homicide under Article 249 of the Revised Penal Code.
In imposing the penalty for homicide (reclusion temporal), the Court considered the mitigating circumstance of voluntary surrender in favor of Romulo Garcellano, imposing the penalty in its minimum degree. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, Romulo was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of 8 years and 1 day of prision mayor, as minimum, to 12 years and 1 day of reclusion temporal, as maximum.
For Oscar Sedano, with no modifying circumstances, the penalty was imposed in its medium degree. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, he was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty of 10 years of prision mayor, as minimum, to 14 years, 8 months, and 1 day of reclusion temporal, as maximum.
The decision of the lower court was affirmed in all other respects, including the joint and several indemnity to the heirs of Basilio Rey.