GR L 32957; (July, 1984) (Digest)
G.R. Nos. L-32957-8. July 25, 1984. THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. PANTALEON PACIS, ELISEO (ELY) NAVARRO, GUILLERMO AGDEPPA, and GINES DOMINGUEZ, defendants, GUILLERMO AGDEPPA, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
The case arose from a politically motivated shooting incident on November 15, 1967, in Sanchez Mira, Cagayan, the day after local elections. Incumbent Mayor Pantaleon Pacis (Nacionalista) and Atanacio Negre (Liberal) were rival candidates. The victims were Macario Basco, a political leader for Negre, and Vice-Mayor Manuel Franco, who was Negre’s campaign manager. Basco and Franco went to the Namuac Elementary School to obtain election results. An altercation ensued between Pacis and the victims over the election documents. Subsequently, several armed men, including appellant Guillermo Agdeppa and his co-accused, arrived and opened fire. Franco was killed, and Basco sustained serious gunshot wounds but survived.
Agdeppa and his co-accused were charged with Murder for Franco’s death and Frustrated Murder for the shooting of Basco. After a joint trial, the Court of First Instance convicted Pacis and Navarro of Murder for Franco’s death. In the Frustrated Murder case (Crim. Case No. 289-S) concerning Basco, the court convicted Pacis, Navarro, and Agdeppa, but acquitted Gines Dominguez. Agdeppa appealed his conviction for Frustrated Murder.
ISSUE
The primary issue is whether the prosecution proved beyond reasonable doubt that appellant Guillermo Agdeppa conspired with his co-accused in the attempted killing of Macario Basco, thereby making him guilty of Frustrated Murder.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed Agdeppa’s conviction. The Court upheld the trial court’s finding of conspiracy based on the coordinated actions of the assailants. Evidence established that Agdeppa was among the armed men who arrived with Pacis and actively participated in the shooting. Eyewitnesses positively identified Agdeppa as one of those who fired at Basco. The simultaneous attack by multiple armed individuals, acting in concert upon Pacis’s arrival and instigation, demonstrated a unity of purpose to kill Basco and Franco.
The Court rejected Agdeppa’s defense of alibi, which claimed he was at his office 18 kilometers away. This defense was supported only by dubious testimony and an uncorroborated time record. The Court ruled it could not prevail over the positive identification by prosecution witnesses. Furthermore, the distance was not insurmountable, making it physically possible for him to have been at the crime scene. The Court also dismissed arguments about the improbability of the shooting scenario, noting the prosecution evidence adequately established the sequence of events and the collective criminal intent. The judgment was modified only to grant Agdeppa credit for preventive imprisonment pursuant to Republic Act No. 6127.