GR L 3780; (March, 1908) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-3780
THE UNITED STATES, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. PEDRO SELLANO, Defendant-Appellant.
March 23, 1908 | Torres, J.
—
FACTS:
1. Parties Involved:
– Pedro Sellano (accused-appellant) lived with Hilaria Almero as husband and wife, though they had separated temporarily.
– Graciano Tinasa (deceased) had an illicit relationship with Hilaria Almero, which continued even after Sellano reconciled with her.
– Jose Aslarona was another resident in the same house where the crime occurred.
2. Incident:
– On April 21, 1906, Sellano and Aslarona left for Aparri, but Tinasa visited Hilaria’s house that night.
– Sellano returned and found Tinasa in the house. A struggle ensued, resulting in Tinasa’s death from four stab wounds.
– Sellano fled, and his body was discovered the next morning.
3. Investigation & Trial:
– Initial accusations pointed to Sellano, but the case was initially dismissed due to procedural issues.
– A new complaint was filed by the provincial fiscal, charging Sellano with murder (with premeditation and treachery).
– The trial court downgraded the charge to homicide and sentenced Sellano to 17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal, plus indemnity to the victim’s widow.
4. Evidence:
– Circumstantial evidence strongly implicated Sellano:
– His sudden disappearance after the crime.
– His confession to Alejandro Alvarado (municipal president).
– Witnesses (Hilaria Almero, Faustina Almero, and Jose Aslarona) initially accused Sellano but later retracted, blaming Aslarona instead.
– The court found the retractions unreliable, attributing them to Sellano’s influence.
—
ISSUE:
Whether Pedro Sellano is guilty of homicide or murder, and whether the penalty imposed by the trial court was proper.
—
RULING:
1. Crime Classification:
– The crime was homicide, not murder, as there was no conclusive proof of qualifying circumstances (e.g., treachery or premeditation) under Article 403 of the Penal Code.
2. Guilt of the Accused:
– The court upheld Sellano’s conviction, finding the circumstantial evidence sufficient to establish his guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
– The retractions of witnesses were deemed not credible, and their initial statements were given more weight.
3. Penalty:
– The medium penalty for homicide (17 years and 4 months of reclusion temporal) was affirmed.
– No aggravating or mitigating circumstances were applied.
– Sellano was also sentenced to accessory penalties under Article 59 of the Penal Code (e.g., civil interdiction).
4. Final Disposition:
– The Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s judgment in full.
Arellano, C.J., Mapa, Johnson, Carson, Willard, and Tracey, JJ., concurred.
—
Key Takeaway: The case illustrates the importance of credibility of witness testimony and the distinction between homicide and murder based on qualifying circumstances. The court relied on circumstantial evidence when direct proof was lacking but found it sufficient for conviction.