G.R. Nos. L-32957-58. July 25, 1984
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. PANTALEON PACIS, ELISEO (ELY) NAVARRO, GUILLERMO AGDEPPA, AND GINES DOMINGUEZ, DEFENDANTS, GUILLERMO AGDEPPA, DEFENDANT-AP…
CONCEPCION, JR., J.:
of First Instance of Cagayan finding him guilty of the crime of
Frustrated Murder and sentencing him and his co-accused Pantaleon Pacis
and Ely Navarro, to suffer an indeterminate penalty of from six (6)
years and one (1) day of prision mayor, as minimum, to twelve (12) years and one (1) day of reclusion temporal,
as maximum, and to indemnify, jointly and solidarily the victim,
Macario Basco, in the amount of a P1,003.90 as actual damages, plus
P8,000.00 for the diminution of his earning capacity, and P8,000.00, as
moral damages, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency and
to pay the costs.
The said accused, Guillermo Agdeppa, Pantaleon Pacis, Ely Navarro, and
Gines Dominguez were charged before the Court of First Instance of
Cagayan with the crimes of Murder and Frustrated Murder, docketed as
Crim. Case Nos. 288-S and 289-S, respectively, committed as follows:
1. Crim. Case No. 288-S:
“That on or about November 15, 1967, in the municipality of
Sanchez Mira, province of Cagayan and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the said accused Pantaleon Pacis, Ely Navarro,
Guillermo Agdeppa and Gines Dominguez, together with three other John
Does who are still at large and unidentified, conspiring together and
helping one another, armed with guns, with intent to kill, with
treachery and with evident premeditation and taking advantage of
superior strength, did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and
feloniously attack, assault and shot one Manuel Franco who was then
totally unarmed, inflicting upon him several gunshot wounds which caused
his instantaneous death.”2. Crim. Case No. 289-S:
“That on or about November 15, 1967, in the municipality of
Sanchez Mira, province of Cagayan, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the said accused Pantaleon Pacis, Ely Navarro,
Guillermo Agdeppa and Gines Dominguez, together with three other John
Does who are still at large and unidentified, conspiring together and
helping one another, armed with guns, with intent to kill, with evident
premeditation, with treachery and taking advantage of superior strength,
did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault
and shot one Macario Basco, inflicting upon him several gunshot wounds;
that the accused have performed all the acts of execution, which would
produce the crime of Murder as a consequence but which, nevertheless,
did not produce it by reason of causes independent of their own will.”
After hearing the evidence adduced by the parties during a joint trial,
the trial court found the accused Pantaleon Pacis and Elly Navarro
guilty of the crime of Murder, as charged in Crim. Case No. 288-S and
sentenced each of them to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, to
indemnify, jointly and severally, the heirs of the deceased Manuel
Franco in the amount of P1,200.00 plus P25,000.00 for the loss of
earning capacity, P12,000.00 indemnity for the death of the said Manuel
Franco and P10,000.00 as moral damages, without subsidiary imprisonment
in case of insolvency, and to pay the costs. Their co-accused
Guillermo Agdeppa and Gines Dominguez were acquitted of the charge.
Gines Dominguez was also acquitted in Crim. Case No. 289-S, a
prosecution for Frustrated Murder. Guillermo Agdeppa, however, and his
co-accused Pantaleon Pacis and Elly Navarro were found guilty of the
charge and sentenced to suffer the penalty heretofore stated.
From this judgment, the accused Pantaleon Pacis, Elly Navarro, and
Guillermo Agdeppa appealed to this Court. However, sometime later, the
accused Pantaleon Pacis and Elly Navarro withdrew their respective
appeals.[1] Under
consideration is the appeal of Guillermo Agdeppa from the judgment of
the trial court which found him guilty of Frustrated Murder.
The facts of the case, as summarized in the People’s Brief, are as follows:
“Pantaleon Pacis, one of the appellants herein and Atanacio Negre
were contenders for the position of Municipal Mayor in the Municipality
of Sanchez Mira, province of Cagayan on the elections of November 14,
1967. Pantaleon Pacis was the candidate of the Nacionalista Party and
he was then the incumbent mayor running for re-election (p. 1051, tsn,
March 12, 1970) and Atanacio Negre was the candidate of the Liberal
Party (p. 13, tsn, August 5, 1969).Manuel (Emmanuel) Franco, the deceased victim, was then the
incumbent vice-mayor having been elected as the running mate of accused
Pantaleon Pacis in the 1963 mayoralty elections but now the campaign
manager of candidate Atanacio Negre against accused Pantaleon Pacis (p.
13, tsn, August 5, 1969). Macario Basco was one of the political
leaders of Atanacio Negre (p. 12, tsn, August 5, 1969).In the morning of November 15, 1967, the day after election day,
Manuel (Emmanuel) Franco and Macario Basco with their companions went to
Namuac Elementary School, Sanchez Mira, Cagayan to get the election
results from precincts that were located in that school (p. 16, tsn,
August 5, 1969). They were riding on a jeep and upon arrival there,
they parked the jeep in front of the stairs of the Namuac Elementary
School about a meter from the first step west end of the stairs (p 17,
tsn, August 5, 1969). Macario Basco and Manuel (Emmanuel) Franco
ascended the stairs and entered a precinct which turned out to be
precinct No. 20. As Basco’s authority to get election results was only
for precinct Nos. 18 and 19, he went out and Franco was left there (pp.
18-23, tsn, August 5, 1969). While Basco was in the porch, he saw
Pantaleon Pacis who asked, “why are you here”, to which he (Basco)
answered, “the elections are over and we are entitled to get the
results of the elections”, and he went down with the intention to show
Mayor Pacis his (Basco) authority to get election results (pp. 22-23,
tsn, August 5, 1969) but Pacis grabbed the papers from him and so Basco
went to sit on the elevated cemented portion of the stairs (p. 24, tsn,
August 5, 1969). Later on Franco came out shouting that he already got
the election results in precinct No. 20 (p. 25, tsn, August 5, 1969).
When Pacis saw Franco, Pacis asked him “why are you here”, and he
(Pacis) beckoned him (Ibid). Franco went downstairs to go to
Pacis. Pacis who was sitting on the hood of the jeep went down from the
hood of the jeep and met Franco on the first step of the stair of the
Namuac Elementary School and grabbed the papers from Franco. Franco
went to sit at the right side of Basco (p. 26, tsn, August 5, 1969).After looking at the papers, he had grabbed from Basco and Franco,
Pacis then went upstairs to where his co-accused Elly Navarro and
Guillermo Agdeppa were, and Pacis with Navarro looked again at the
papers which the former had grabbed from Basco and Franco (p. 33, tsn,
August 5, 1969).Basco and Franco still seated on the stairs looked down towards
the direction where they had parked their jeep and saw two men on the
right side of the jeep and another man on the left side (Ibid).
When Basco looked at his back, he saw accused Pantaleon Pacis, Elly
Navarro and Guillermo Agdeppa with drawn guns pointed at him and Franco,
and moments later the accused started firing (pp. 34-37, tsn, August 5,
1969). Basco was hit. Then another volley of fire came from the three
named-accused and Basco was hit again. He then lie prone between the
jeep and the first step of the stairs. While in that position, there
was continuous firing coming from his left and right and he was hit
again. He suffered several gunshot wounds (pp. 37-40, tsn, August 5,
1969, Exhibits “F” and “F-1”).After the second volley of fire, Basco heard the deceased Franco
say “I am already hit Manong”, (p. 37, tsn, August 5, 1969). Later on
Basco heard Pantaleon Pacis in a commanding voice, “never mind that now,
he (referring to Basco) is already dead. Vice-Mayor Franco was able to
escape, you go after him and kill him”, (pp. 40-41, tsn, August 5,
1969) and this was addressed to Elly Navarro, Guillermo Agdeppa and the
three men beside the jeep who responded to the command by running
towards the gate of the school (p. 42, tsn, August 5, 1969).After three or four minutes, Basco heard gunshots, east of the
direction where he was lying prone. Later on after about fifteen
minutes he shouted for help and he was brought to Northern Cagayan
Provincial Hospital, and one day after, to the Veterans Memorial
Hospital at Quezon City where he was confined until December 31, 1967
(Exhibit “A”, pp. 51-54, tsn, August 5, 1969). He suffered six gunshot
wounds described in Exhibits “F” and “F-1”, his left arm was disabled
(p. 55, tsn, (p. 55, tsn, August 5, 1969) and the small bone on his
right foot was fractured (p. 56, tsn, August 5, 1969).Manuel (Emmanuel) Franco died due to gunshot wounds described in
Exhibits “C” and “C-1″ (pp. 255260, tsn, August 26, 1969). His
assailants were Pantaleon Pacis, Guillermo Agdeppa, Elly Navarro, Gines
Dominguez and three other unidentified persons (p. 203, tsn, August 27,
1969).”
The appellant, Guillermo Agdeppa, denied participation in the
commission of the crimes and interposed the defense of alibi. According
to him, he was in Taguiporo, Sanchez Mira, where he was employed in the
Agricultural Extension Office, at the time the shooting incident
occurred in Namuac, Sanchez Mira, and learned of it only upon his return
to Callungan in the evening. He declared that he left his house at
Callungan at about 7:00 o’clock in the morning of November 15, 1967, for
his office at Taguiporo; that he rode on a motorcycle which he borrowed
from his brother, with his daughter as passenger, whom he brought to
the Divine Word High School in time for her 7:30 a.m. class; that after
dropping off his daughter at the school, one Jose Tabian came to him and
asked for a ride; that they arrived at his office at Taguiporo at 7:40
o’clock in the morning where he found Faustino Sadama and Placido Lagran
who wanted palay seedlings, waiting for him; that he stayed in his
office preparing his monthly report and left at 12:05 o’clock in the
afternoon to eat his lunch and returned at 12:45 p.m., and finally went
home at past 5:00 o’clock in the afternoon.[2] To support his claim, he presented in evidence the time record he had accomplished,[3]
and the testimony of Jose Tabian who allegedly rode with him on his
motorcycle from the Divine Word High School up to his office at
Taguiporo that morning of November 15, 1967.
The trial court, however, rejected the defense saying that the
evidence for the prosecution is more worthy of credence, more natural in
the light of human conduct and behavior, more credible, than that for
the defense. The trial court specially cited the testimony of Macario
Basco which, to its mind, is very natural, credible and from a witness
who told nothing but the truth.
Counsel for the appellant now contends that the trial court erred in
convicting the appellant on the testimonies of the witnesses for the
prosecution which the lower court itself considered to be incredible and
unworthy of belief. Counsel argues that all the witnesses for the
prosecution implicated Gines Dominguez in the shooting of Basco and
Franco but the trial court gave no credence to their testimonies and
acquitted Gines Dominguez; however, the trial court gave credence to the
testimonies of the same witnesses in convicting the appellant for the
shooting of Basco. Counsel cites the maxim of “falsus in uno falsus in omnibus.”
The maxim of “falsus in uno falsus in omnibus,” however, is
not a positive rule of law. Neither is it an inflexible one of
universal application. If a part of a witness’ testimony is found true,
it cannot be disregarded entirely. The testimony of a witness may be
believed in part and disbelieved in part.
Counsel for the appellant also claims that the trial court erred in
convicting the accused on the highly improbable, contradictory, and
incredible tale of the witnesses for the prosecution, since all the
bullet “pock” marks on the cement wall show conclusively that the
shooting came from the street where the gravel and sand truck was, and
not from the top of the stairs where Pacis, Navarro, and Agdeppa were
standing; and that the said witnesses failed to notify the authorities
or anyone until after the lapse of several months.
The trial court, however, discounted the defense theory that the shots
came from the gravel and sand truck. The trial court said:
“From these photographs, with Macario Basco and Manuel Franco
sitting on the elevated cemented portion facing a little to the
southeast, back of them would be just behind the railing of the porch
(p. 75 of Criminal Case No. 288-S; pp. 230 and 231 of the petition to
bail; pp. 160-165 of Criminal Case No. 289-S) where Pantaleon Pacis,
Eliseo Navarro and Guillermo Agdeppa were when they started to fire
their guns. This is borne by the evidence.
To follow the defense theory that the firing came from the sand and
gravel truck that was passing by would be absurb and downright
preposterous for the following reasons:
1. The defense claim that those aboard the truck were armed
partisans of Negre whose campaign manager Franco and political leader
Basco were sitting by the stairs clearly visible from the truck a
distance of forty meters.2. If the armed partisans fired at Pacis as claimed by the
defense at the time that the truck was moving slowly on the national
road and at a time when Pacis had just gone up the stairs one to two
minutes just after greeting Franco and Basco (testimony of Pacis) then
it is incredible that these armed partisan would fire indiscriminately
at Pacis from a moving vehicle when Basco and Franco their political
leaders ware very close to Pacis and could be shot.3. The defense could assume too much credulity and childish
credibility to the Court to make the Court believe that the alleged
armed partisans of Negre were the same persons who fired at and wounded
his own political leaders Manuel Franco and Macario Basco at the time
these two were sitting by the stairs.4. The testimony of Macario Basco is to the Court very natural,
credible and from a witness who only told nothing but truth. In spite
of thorough and provoking cross examination Basco was calm and very
natural. He gave answers directly, never evasively, a sure and
unmistaken sign that he was faithfully relating to the Court the actual
events and factual circumstances. The defense failed to show cause or
motive on the part of Basco why he should so testify against Pacis with
whom he had cordial relations and who was born and a native of Namuac,
Sanchez Mira, Cagayan, the birth place of Pacis – where his father and
other relatives still reside nor against Eliseo Navarro and Guillermo
Agdeppa.5. On the defense theory that the evidence and theory of the
prosecution is incredible because of the nature and number of wounds
sustained by Macario Basco and Manuel Franco the evidence shows that
Basco suffered fourteen (14) wounds, seven bullet wounds of entry, six
wounds of exit and abrasions; and Basco suffered three gunshot wounds.
The defense assumes (a) that if Pacis, Navarro, Agdeppa and three others
as claimed by Basco and Bagasol were the ones who fired at both Basco
and Franco – these six persons the defense assume are all good, dead
shots, marksmen but there is no evidence to that effect – could have
inflicted more wounds – Franco would not have been able to run away.
(b) The defense also claims that these persons – three in front and
three behind – with Franco and Basco in between could have shot each
other.
With regards to the first, there is no showing that these persons are
good shots or marksman; neither is there evidence that they concentrated
their fire on both so that Franco could have suffered more wounds right
at the stairs and would not have been able to run. It is apparent that
the gunshots was more concentrated on Basco because of the evidence
that the accused Pantaleon Pacis had to say never mind that he is
already dead go after the vice mayor he was able to escape and kill him.
To show that the three who fired from the front were not good shots
the Court can appreciate the exhibits more particularly the pictures
(previously cited) with pop marks. The pop marks on the exhibits
evidently were fired by the three men in front.”
It is not true that the witnesses for the prosecution did not notify the
authorities about the shooting incident, as claimed by the appellant.
As early as November 19, 1967, Rogelio Bagasol executed a sworn
statement before one Capt. Liganor and another one before CIS agents on
December 9, 1967.[4] Macario Basco also executed an affidavit on December 8, 1967.[5] Other eyewitnesses were afraid to notify the authorities because Pantaleon Pacis and his men were in power.[6]
It should be stated, in conclusion, that the appellant’s defense of
alibi has nothing to support it except the doubtful testimony of Jose
Tabian and the uncorroborated time record he had allegedly filled up
that day, which certainly cannot prevail over the positive testimony of
the witnesses for the prosecution who saw him shoot Macario Basco.
Besides, there is no conclusive proof that it was physically impossible
for him to be at the Namuac school building on that fateful morning of
November 15, 1967. The place is only 18 kilometers from his office at
Taguiporo,[7] and he could
have left his office on his motorcycle after accomplishing the time
record for arrival, go to Namuac, and be back in his office in time for
his lunch break without his absence being noted.
WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from should be as it is hereby,
AFFIRMED, with the modification that the accused-appellant should be
given 4/5 credit for the period of preventive imprisonment he had
undergone, pursuant to Rep. Act No. 6127, approved on June 17, 1970.
With proportionate costs against the appellant in this instance.
Makasiar, (Chairman), Aquino, Guerrero, Abad Santos, Escolin, and Cuevas, JJ., concur.
[1] Rollo, pp. 131, 148.
[2] tsn of March 13, 1970, pp. 1286-1306.
[3] Exhibit “12”.
[4] tsn of Aug. 26, 1969, pp. 239-240.
[5] tsn of Aug. 5, 1969, p. 124.
[6] tsn of Oct. 7, 1969, pp. 630-631.
[7] tsn of March 13, 1970, p. 1306.