G.R. No. L-30487 August 24, 1984
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. PROTACIO DANES alias “Tesing” and AGAPITO ATUNDO alias “Pito”, alias “Pepito”, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

The accused, Protacio Danes and Agapito Atundo, were charged with the murder of Edencio Gorpido. The prosecution evidence established that on the evening of September 10, 1964, in Barrio Tangbo, Catubig, Samar, Gorpido was involved in a heated argument with the appellants. Later, as Gorpido was walking home, Atundo emerged and stabbed him with a bolo attached to a pole. When Gorpido attempted to flee, Danes appeared and pursued him, slashing him multiple times with a bolo. The attack was witnessed by Canuto de los Santos and Antonio Isanan. The victim gave an ante-mortem statement identifying his attackers before he died.
The autopsy report by Dr. Luz Desales revealed that Gorpido sustained several fatal incised and stab wounds, all located on the back of his body. At trial, Danes admitted inflicting the wounds but claimed self-defense. Atundo, for his part, denied participation and interposed the defense of alibi, claiming he was sick at home during the incident.

ISSUE

Whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellants of murder.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The claim of self-defense by Danes was untenable. The medical finding that all wounds were inflicted on the victim’s back completely negated the element of unlawful aggression from the victim, which is essential for self-defense. This manner of attack, from behind, clearly constituted treachery (alevosia), qualifying the killing as murder.
Atundo’s defense of alibi was rejected. It was positively overcome by the clear and credible testimonies of two eyewitnesses who identified him as a participant. The Court reiterated the doctrine that alibi cannot prevail over positive identification. Furthermore, Atundo failed to demonstrate the physical impossibility of being at the crime scene, as his house was established to be near the location of the killing.
The Court found no merit in the appellants’ challenge to the witnesses’ credibility and their identification. The fact that a witness did not know Atundo’s family name did not vitiate the positive in-court identification. The trial court’s assessment of witness credibility is accorded great respect. The decision was affirmed with the modification of increasing the civil indemnity to P30,000.00.