GR L 55831; (May, 1982) (Digest)
G.R. No. L-55831 May 31, 1982
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. GILBERT MEDRANO, ANTONIO POBLETE, MARCELO ARZADON and EDILBERTO ARZADON, defendants-appellants.
FACTS
The case involves the killing of Rogelio Berbano on August 20, 1977, in Barrio Bayabat, Amulung, Cagayan. The prosecution’s eyewitness, Lolita Palos, testified that Marcelo Arzadon lured the unarmed victim into a yard. There, as if by pre-arrangement, Gilbert Medrano suddenly stabbed Berbano in the nape with a bolo with such force it nearly decapitated him. Edilberto Arzadon and Antonio Poblete then also attacked the victim. The defense, led by Medrano, claimed self-defense, alleging Berbano initiated the assault with a bolo and that Medrano only struck back during a struggle for the weapon. The trial court rejected this version, finding the claim fabricated and noting the body was moved to simulate a different scene.
ISSUE
The primary issues were the credibility of the prosecution’s eyewitness and the correct criminal liability of each appellant—specifically, whether they acted in conspiracy as principals or in some lesser capacity.
RULING
The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction for murder, qualified by treachery, as Medrano’s sudden attack on the nape without risk to himself clearly constituted alevosia. The Court upheld the trial court’s assessment of Lolita Palos’s credibility, finding her delay in coming forward sufficiently explained by fear and noting no improper motive for her testimony. Regarding criminal liability, the Court differentiated among the appellants. It affirmed Marcelo Arzadon’s status as a principal, as he lured the victim and held him during the fatal attack, thus meriting reclusion perpetua. Gilbert Medrano’s penalty was increased to an indeterminate sentence (17 years of reclusion temporal medium as minimum to 20 years of reclusion temporal maximum as maximum) as the most guilty party. However, applying the rule that doubts are resolved in favor of the milder form of responsibility, the Court held that Antonio Poblete and Edilberto Arzadon, who wounded the victim after the mortal blow, were merely accomplices. Their acts were not indispensable to the killing but merely hastened death. They were thus sentenced to an indeterminate penalty (10 years of prision mayor medium as minimum to 14 years of reclusion temporal minimum as maximum) and a proportionate civil indemnity.