THE PEOPLE Of THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE VS. PACIFICO CLOMA, DEFENDANT AND APPELLANT.

Appeal, by defendant Pacifico Cloma, from a decision of the Court of
First Instance of Iloilo convicting him of the crime of murder and
sentencing him to life imprisonment, with the corresponding accessory
penalties, to indemnify the heirs of Hilarion Magbanua in the sum of
P6,000, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency, owing to
the nature of the principal penalty, and to pay one-half (1/2) of the
costs.

It is not disputed that, while Hilarion Magbanua, a former
policeman, was seated on the floor—seemingly made of bamboo—of the
house of Felipe Sales, in the barrio of Pughanan, municipality of
Lambunao, province of Iloilo, on April 23, 1956, at about 7:00 p.m.,
chatting with said Felipe Sales and Alberto Pancer and Federico Sales,
several shots rang from under the house. Thereupon Magbanua fell down
face upward, although slightly leaning against a basket of palay, and
moaned for help. He had: (1) a wound caused by a .45 caliber bullet
that entered his right side, at the level of the eighth rib, fracturing
the same, and, after traversing the right lung, destroying big blood
vessels at the base of the neck, fracturing the cervical vertebrae and
injuring the spinal cord, lodged beneath the skull, just medial, to the
left of the left mandibular joint; (2) another gunshot wound caused by
a .45 caliber bullet that entered the posterior side of the right
forearm, with exit at the anterior side thereof. Soon thereafter, a
voice was heard near the door demanding that the same be opened. As
nobody did it, the door was broken open and two (2) men entered. One
was Ciriaco Latoza, Jr., who carried a Thompson sub-machine gun, and
the other whose name was then unknown, had a butt-less carbine. The
latter asked the former: “is this the one?” pointing to Magbanua. Upon
receipt of an affirmative answer, the unknown person fired his carbine
twice at Magbanua. One of the bullets, 30 caliber, entered the right
eye of Magbanua and blew out the occipital region of his skull. As
Latoza and his companion left the house, Pancer approached Magbanua and
found, in his opinion, that he was dying. Meanwhile, the two (2)
intruders had run towards the open field, where they were joined by a
third man. After a while, Pancer went to the house of one Fortunato
Maestral, to whom he related the occurrence and asked to accompany him
to the poblacion. A son of Maestral took Pancer to the house of the
barrio lieutenant, Rustico Mapalim, who, in turn, brought them to that
of assistant barrio lieutenant Ignacio Tonato. Then the four (4) of
them proceeded to the poblacion and reported the matter to the police.
Several policemen accompanied the group to the scene of the crime,
where they found

Magbanua already dead and near his body two (2) empty shells,
caliber .30, Exhibits L and L-I. Imbedded, in one of the bamboo beams
of the house, a .30 slug, Exhibit M, was, also, found. Under the house
they picked up two (2) empty Thompson sub-machine gun shells, caliber
.45, Exhibits H and H-I.

On April 30, 1956, a complaint for murder was filed against Ciriaco
Latoza, Jr. and a John Doe, but for reasons not stated in the record,
the case was dismissed. Over two months later, or on July 18, 1956,
Ruperto Cloma, a brother of Pacifico Cloma, was apprehended in
connection with several cattle rustling incidents in the locality. A
hand grenade and an empty carbine magazine were found in his house.
Upon investigation, he revealed the location of the buttless carbine,
Exhibit J—which was found hidden in a foxhole, inside a bamboo clump,
50 yards away from said house—and stated, among other things, that it
was the weapon brought by his brother Pacifico Cloma to Lambunao on
April 23, 1956 and used by him in killing Hilarion Magbanua (see
Exhibit E). Upon examination by a ballistic expert of the National
Bureau of Investigation, the empty shells, caliber .30, Exhibits L and
L-I, found near the body of Magbanua, and the slug Exhibit M, were
verified to have been fired from said carbine, Exhibit J (see, also,
Exhibits C, N, N-I, N-2, O, O-1, O-2, P, P-l, P-2, Q, Q-l, Q-2, R, R-l
to R-4).

Consequently, a warrant for the arrest of Pacifico Cloma was issued,
but it could not be served, because he could not be found. Several days
later, upon arrangements made by the mayor of Cabatuan, appellant
surrendered, on July 26, 1956. Then he was investigated by the
Constabulary, to whom he admitted that he was one of those who killed
Magbanua, stating that he had acted upon instigation of one Manuel
Torre, who had allegedly been threatened by Magbanua if his candidate
was defeated in the elections, and that he (appellant) and one Ignacio
Solania had brought the aforementiomed carbine to the scene of the
occurrence inside a valise (Exhibit F), which, upon his (appellant’s)
indication; was recovered from one Elias or Zacarias Talamor (Exhibit
D).

Thereupon, a criminal complaint for murder was filed against Manuel
Torre, Ignacio Solania and Pacifico Cloma, but Solania could not be
located and Pacifico Cloma retracted his testimony implicating Manuel
Torre. So the case was dismissed as against the latter and Solania, and
Pacifico Cloma was left alone to stand trial. In due course, the Court
of First Instance of Iloilo rendered the decision aforementioned, from
which Pacifico Cloma has appealed.

The case hinges on the sufficiency of the evidence to establish that
appellant is one of the killers of Magbanua. In this connection,
appellant was identified by Alberto Pan-cer, who stated positively that
appellant was the man, then unknown to him, who, armed with a buttless
carbine, entered the living room of the house of Felipe Sales, and,
after ascertaining that the person lying on the floor wounded was
Magbanua twice fired at him with said weapon. This testimony was
decisively corroborated by the following circumstances, namely:

(a) The empty carbine shells, Exhibits L and L-l found by the
authorities beside the dead body of Magbanua, and the slug, Exhibit M,
found imbeded in a beam of the house of Felipe Sales, are of the same
caliber as the butt-less carbine, Exhibit J, and it has been
satisfactorily proven that said shells and slug had been fired from
said carbine.

(b) The latter was found in the possession and under the control of
Ruperto Cloma—in a foxhole within a clump of bamboo trees, near the
house of said Ruperto Cloma— who, upon investigation, declared that
said carbine was the weapon used by his brother, appellant herein, in
killing Magbanua.

(c) Upon his apprehension and investigation by the Constabulary,
appellants made and signed the statement Exhibit D, which was sworn to
by him before the local justice of the peace. Appellant testified that
the data contained in Exhibit D were supplied, not by him, but by one
of his investigators, and that his signature thereon was obtained
through duress. Yet, he said nothing to this effect when, after reading
to him the contents of Exhibit D, the justice of the peace inquired
whether the same was his statement, whether the signature thereon was
his—a fact he admitted on the witness stand—and whether said statement
was made, and his aforementioned signature affixed, voluntarily. On the
contrary, his answers to these queries of the justice of the peace were
all in the affirmative.

Moreover, Exhibit D contains information that only appellant could
have supplied. Thus, for instance, Exhibit D states, among other
things, that he and his companion met at Talaytayom; that his companion
brought a valise in which the carbine he (appellant) had borrowed from
his brother was placed; that they went to Lambunao, Iloilo, by
passenger bus; that they alighted at the railroad crossing in Misi and
went to the house of one Iyas Talamor where they took their dinner;
that, thereafter, they took the valise from under a coconut tree where
they had left it; that appellant’s companion opened the valise, got the
carbine and gave it to him; that appellant inquired why the carbine was
being given to him, since he (appellant’s companion) was the one who
has asked him (appellant) to borrow it; that his companion got from the
valise a Thompson wrapped with an old mat and said that it was the
firearm he would use; that appellant and his companion left the valise
in the house of Talamor; and that it was appellant’s companion who bade
him (appellant) to shoot Magbanua in the eye. It is clear that these
details could have been given by appellant only, not by one of his
investigators.

The defense put up by appellant is an alibi. He would have us
believe that, at the time of the occurrence, he was in his house, in
the barrio of Janipan, municipality of Cabatuan. Obviously, however,
his uncorroborated testimony to this effect is insufficient to offset
the proof for the prosecution, or even to raise a reasonable doubt as
to his guilt.

Wherefore, the decision appealed from is hereby affirmed, with costs against appellant Pacifico Cloma. It is so ordered.

Bengzon, C. J., Padilla, Bautista Angelo, Labrador, Reyes, J. B. L., Barrera, and Paredes, JJ., concur.