G.R. No. L-683 and L-684; February 26, 1948
EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS vs. ANASTACIO IMSON y NICOLAS IMSON (G.R. No. L-683) and EL PUEBLO DE FILIPINAS vs. ANASTACIO IMSON (G.R. No. L-684)

FACTS

On December 21, 1945, in Baguio City, Anastacio Imson and his brother Nicolas Imson approached Mayor Isidoro Siapno at a gas station. Anastacio, who had been arrested for gambling and whose case required the mayor’s approval, confronted the mayor. He placed his hand on the mayor’s shoulder and asked him not to proceed with the complaint. The mayor, offended by the familiarity, identified Anastacio as a gambler and declared he would “clear Baguio of gamblers.” Anastacio then drew his revolver. Guillermo Paraan, a special agent of the mayor, intervened, and the mayor hid behind him. Anastacio ordered Paraan to move and then fired shots. Paraan was hit in the abdomen and died the next day. The mayor fled but was shot by Anastacio and Nicolas. The mayor sustained multiple gunshot wounds to his back and died two days later. Anastacio and Nicolas were convicted of murder for the death of the mayor (G.R. No. L-683), and Anastacio was separately convicted of murder for the death of Paraan (G.R. No. L-684). They appealed.

ISSUE

The main issues were: (1) the admissibility of an alleged ante-mortem statement of Paraan (Exhibit G); (2) the credibility of witnesses; and (3) the sufficiency of evidence to convict Nicolas Imson.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the convictions of Anastacio Imson but acquitted Nicolas Imson in G.R. No. L-683 due to reasonable doubt.
1. The Court excluded Exhibit G, the alleged ante-mortem statement of Paraan, due to serious doubts about its authenticity, as the signatories did not match the persons listed as present, and a key witness did not testify about it.
2. However, the exclusion of Exhibit G did not affect the core factual findings. The testimony of prosecution witness Engineer Quinto, deemed credible, clearly established that Anastacio shot Paraan and that both Anastacio and Nicolas fired at the fleeing mayor.
3. Regarding Nicolas Imson, the Court found reasonable doubt as to his participation. The evidence did not sufficiently prove a conspiracy between the brothers. The assault appeared to be a sudden decision by Anastacio after the mayor’s provocative statement. Testimonies from defense witnesses placed Nicolas elsewhere (at a cafe) during the shooting, and prosecution witness Gonzaga gave inconsistent statements. Therefore, Nicolas Imson was acquitted.
The Court affirmed Anastacio Imson’s convictions and sentences for both murders.

AI Generated by Armztrong.