THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. GORGONIO MACABUHAY, JUAN MACABUHAY, MAXIMO MACABUHAY, ALEJANDRO SALVADOR, AND PERFECTO BACASNO, DEFENDANTS AND APPELLA…

For having murdered Fidel Saborrido, the five appellants were
sentenced, last July, in the Court of First Instance of Samar to suffer life
imprisonment and to indemnify his surviving heirs.

In the municipality of Basey, same province, early in the
evening of March 16, 1947, Fidel Saborrido met bloody death at the point, of a
bolo wielded by the accused Gorgonio Macabuhay. A few minutes before the
encounter the victim was enjoying a song feast in the house of Alfredo Aclesto,
in the company of Luis Graboso, Alfredo Graboso, Sofronio Distrajo and Fernando
Regala. At the same time, while the five accused were making pilipig in
the home of Felix Ramos about forty yards away, someone threw a stone that
almost hit Perfecto Bacasno. Wherefore all said accused marched to the residence
of Aclesto obviously suspecting the culprit was there. And what happened
afterwards, Guillermo Graboso (corroborated by Luis Graboso) describes as
follows:

“After Sofronio Distrajo, a girl of the house and myself had
rendered vocal selections, Perfecto Bacasno and the other accused arrived at the
yard. Perfecto entered the house and asked who had cast the stone. We all denied
having done it. He scrutinized each of us. Then he climbed downstairs.
Immediately thereafter Alejandro Salvador called on Fidel Saborrido to go down.
Fidel approached the door and inquired, “What is it Tata.” Alejandro replied,
“Just come down.” Fidel did as requested; but once on the ground he was all of a
sudden seized and held fast by Perfecto, Juan, Maximo and Alejandro even as
Gorgonio stabbed him on the right nipple with a small bolo. Thus wounded, Fidel
was released by his attackers and he ran to the beach where he fell and
expired.”

The local health officer declared in open court that the wound
caused the death of Fidel.

In an attempt to clear himself and his conferees Gorgonio
Macabuhay told the judge that he killed Saborrido because the latter had boxed
him twice. And to be consistent, he swore that his co-accused took no part in
the fight. However he failed to explain how and why the quarrel took place, and
his tale of self-defense was not corroborated by anybody.

The other appellants except—Maximo Macabuhay—also testified
denying all culpable connection with the unhappy incident. They even denied
having witnessed it. Yet, they unwittingly confirmed some material points of the
people’s version, to wit: the presence of Guillermo Graboso and Luis Graboso in
the scene of the crime; the stoning of Ramos’ residence which showed the motive
for the assault; the search for the unknown stone-thrower by Perfecto Bacasno
and Alejandro Salvador; and the attendance at the pilipig party of Juan
Macabuhay and Maximo Macabuhay, attendance which Gorgonio had stubbornly denied
in an unfortunate try to save his two brothers from just punishment.

Indeed after closely examining the contradictory declarations
of these defendants we found it easy to accept the prosecution’s theory,
notwithstanding the apparent defects which the attorney-de-officio has indicated
in a conscientious discharge of his official duty. We are persuaded that
appellants, incensed at the stone-throwing took vengeance upon Fidel Saborrido,
by attacking him in the form described by Guillermo Graboso. That all of them
were rounded up that very night is added evidence of their known participation
in the tragic occurrence.

And this brings up the question whether, like Gorgonio, the
other appellants are responsible authors of the killing. The Solicitor General
abl sustains the affirmative, and previous decisions of this court in parallel
situations support his view.^[1] It seems
clear from the evidence that all the accused, animated by one motive (to avenge
the stone-throwing) proceeded to the Aclesto house for a showdown, and there
simultaneously attacked Fidel Saborrido in pursuance of such purpose. Therefore,
all and each of them were in fact and in law the cause of his untimely demise.
Pity that one life should be forfeited in consequence of a youngster’s
prank.

In view of the foregoing, the verdict of the trial judge that
appellants are guilty of murder^[2] must
be and is hereby affirmed. The penalty imposed must also be approved, it being
in accordance with law (art. 248 Rev. Penal Code). However we agree with counsel
on both sides that Gorgonio Macabuhay is entitled, to mitigation, because he was
less than eighteen when he committed the offense. His term of imprisonment is
therefore fixed as not less than fourteen (14) years and eight (8) months and
not more than twenty (20) years. Thus modified the appealed judgment is affirmed
in all other respects. With costs. So ordered.

Paras, Feria, Pablo, Tuason, Montemayor, and Reyes, JJ.,
concur.

---

[1] United States vs. De la Cruz, 17 Phil., 527;
United States vs. Cueva, 23 Phil., 553; People vs. Manalo, 52 Phil., 484.

[2] United States vs. Feria, 2 Phil., 45; United
States vs. De la Cruz, supra; United States vs. Manalo,
supra.

---

CONCURRING

PERFECTO, J.:

Our concurrence in the decision is subject to our consistent
opinion that the indemnity should not be less than P6,000 in accordance with the
doctrine set in People vs. Amansec (80 Phil., 424).

PARAS, J.:

I hereby certify that Chief Justice Moran voted to modify the
decision as above indicated.