GR L 47686; (June, 1983) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-47686 June 24, 1983
The People of the Philippines, plaintiff-appellee, vs. Benjamin Balbas, defendant-appellant.
FACTS
In the afternoon of December 21, 1970, Florencio Yamongan and his son were plowing their ricefield in Currimao, Ilocos Norte. The accused, Benjamin Balbas, whose house was nearby, arrived and confronted Florencio harshly regarding a land transaction. As it grew dark, the son left, leaving his father and the accused still talking. Later that evening, around 7:00 PM, passengers on a bus discovered Florencio lying wounded by the roadside. Upon being asked, the victim identified Benjamin Balbas as his assailant. This report was relayed to the police and Municipal Mayor Cirilo Quilala, who proceeded to the scene. The mayor and his companions found the victim, who again identified Balbas as the shooter. A dying declaration was taken, thumbmarked by the victim with his own blood. The victim died while being transported to the hospital. An autopsy revealed he died from shock due to hemorrhage from four gunshot wounds entering his back. The accused presented an alibi, claiming he was elsewhere during the incident.
ISSUE
The core issue is whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellant of murder based on the admissibility and sufficiency of the victim’s ante-mortem statements identifying him as the assailant, and in rejecting the defense of alibi.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The victim’s statements, made immediately after the shooting to the bus passengers and later to the mayor and police at the scene, are admissible as part of the res gestae and as a dying declaration. For a statement to be admissible as part of the res gestae, it must be made spontaneously while the declarant is under the stress of a startling occurrence, without time to contrive. Here, the statements were made while the victim was under the stress of the shooting and severe wounds, just hours before his death, satisfying the requisites. The Court emphasized that motive, while present from the land dispute, is not an essential element for conviction when the identity of the culprit is established beyond doubt, as in this case. The defense of alibi was correctly rejected, as the appellant failed to demonstrate it was physically impossible for him to be at the crime scene, given the proximity of his residence to the ricefield and the location where the body was found. The positive identification by the dying victim prevails over the weak alibi.