G.R. No. L-9346; October 30, 1957
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. NICANOR SESPEÑE, APOLINARIO LEONARDO, PEDRO CALIZO, BIENVENIDO SAJERA and DOMINGO SAJONA, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

In the afternoon of June 23, 1953, Leonardo Enerio left his home in barrio Tagbaya, Ibajay, Capiz. That evening, his sister Priscila arrived to fetch him due to their mother’s illness. While Priscila waited with Leonardo’s wife Gloria and another, appellants Bienvenido Sajera and Domingo Sajona arrived. Sajona sat inside the house, while Sajera hid on the balcony. Upon hearing noises outside, Gloria and Priscila saw three individuals hiding. When Leonardo Enerio arrived home, Jesus Mangilog (at large) suddenly attacked him from behind with a bolo. Appellants Nicanor Sespeñe, Apolinario Leonardo, and Pedro Calizo, each armed with a firearm, then arrived and fired four shots at the victim. After seeing him fall, Sajona removed the ladder from the house. When the victim stood up, Sajona fired his revolver at him, and Sajera knifed him on the nape. As the victim tried to flee and leaned against a fence, Sespeñe shouted “kill him” and one of them fired another shot. The assailants then fled. The victim, before dying, identified his assailants as the appellants and Jesus Mangilog. An autopsy revealed multiple fatal wounds from sharp instruments and bullets. The defendants were convicted of murder by the Court of First Instance of Capiz and sentenced to reclusion perpetua. They appealed, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence and credibility of witnesses.

ISSUE

Whether the evidence presented by the prosecution is sufficient to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the appellants are guilty of the crime of murder, qualified by treachery.

RULING

Yes. The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction. The evidence for the prosecution, provided by eyewitnesses Gloria Enerio and Priscila Andrade who had no motive to falsely testify, clearly and positively identified the appellants as the perpetrators. Their testimonies were consistent and detailed regarding the concerted attack. The defense of alibi presented by the appellants was weak and uncorroborated. The court found that the crime was committed with treachery (alevosia), as the attack was sudden and from behind, ensuring the victim’s defenselessness. The court did not appreciate the separate aggravating circumstances of superior strength, aid of armed men, or nighttime, as these were considered included in treachery. The court also expressed doubt regarding the aggravating circumstance of dwelling, as the initial attack occurred just as the victim was about to ascend his house ladder. The penalty of reclusion perpetua imposed by the trial court was affirmed.