G.R. No. L-9723; June 28, 1957
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. GERONIMO SOLIMAN Y BUENAVENTURA alias EMONG and SOFRONIO PALIN Y PAZ alias POLONIO, defendants-appellants.

FACTS

Appellants Geronimo Soliman and Sofronio Palin were charged with murder and sentenced to death by the Court of First Instance of Manila. The case was elevated to the Supreme Court for automatic review. The prosecution’s evidence established that in the early morning of April 29, 1955, on Sto. Cristo Street, Manila, eyewitness Ernesto Balaktaw was sleeping near the victim, Ernesto Basa, who was sleeping in a pushcart. Balaktaw was awakened when someone kicked his hand. He saw appellant Palin hold Basa by the shoulder, and then appellant Soliman approached and stabbed Basa multiple times with a balisong. The assailants fled. Balaktaw took Basa to a police outpost, and Basa was later pronounced dead at the hospital. An autopsy revealed seven stab wounds, two of which were fatal. Appellant Soliman claimed self-defense, testifying that Basa had previously assaulted him and that on the night of the incident, Basa demanded money, boxed him, and a fight ensued during which he stabbed Basa. He claimed Palin merely intervened to separate them. Palin corroborated Soliman’s account, stating he only acted to separate the two and advised Soliman to surrender.

ISSUE

The primary issue is whether the trial court erred in convicting the appellants of murder based on the credibility of the eyewitness testimony and in imposing the death penalty, and whether the defense’s claims regarding newly discovered evidence and the character of the deceased warrant a new trial or acquittal.

RULING

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction but modified the penalty. The Court found the testimony of eyewitness Ernesto Balaktaw credible, noting the trial court’s careful observation of his demeanor and the corroboration provided by the nature of the victim’s wounds, which indicated they were inflicted while the victim was lying down, consistent with Balaktaw’s account and inconsistent with Soliman’s claim of a grappling fight. The Court rejected the defense’s challenges to Balaktaw’s credibility, including alleged inconsistencies in his testimony and initial confusion in identifying the appellants, as these were minor and satisfactorily explained. The Court also held that the defense’s motion for a new trial based on the newly discovered evidence of Balaktaw’s criminal record was properly denied, as such record was available before trial and prior convictions do not automatically disqualify a witness. Furthermore, the Court ruled that evidence of the deceased’s violent character was inadmissible in this murder case, as such evidence is only pertinent in homicide cases to support a claim of self-defense. However, for lack of the necessary votes for the death penalty, the Supreme Court modified the sentence and imposed the penalty of reclusion perpetua. The decision was affirmed in all other respects.