G.R. No. L-38095. August 10, 1981
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. CARLOS MELENDRES, ANTONIO GERODIAS AND SOFRONIO GONZALES, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
ABAD SANTOS, J.:
Automatic review of the decision of the Circuit Criminal Court,
Pasig, Rizal, in CCC-VII-1226 RIZAL, convicting CARLOS MELENDRES, ANTONIO
GERODIAS and SOFRONIO GONZALES of murder and frustrated murder, for the death
of Angel Montero and the serious wounding of Aniano Catipay, and imposing on
them the death penalty for the murder.
At about 4:00 o’clock in the afternoon of September 28, 1971, a
stabbing took place at Brigade 2-A of the New Bilibid Prison in Muntinlupa,
Rizal. Aniano Catipay and Angel Montero
were assaulted inside Cell No. 1 by their fellow inmates who belonged to the
OXO-KKK gang. Angel Montero died near
the door. The necropsy report shows that
he sustained 9 stab wounds, 4 of which were fatal. Dr. Ernesto Brion, NBI medico-legal expert, testified
that the stab wounds could have been inflicted with any one of the improvised
bladed weapons on exhibit (Exhibits “B”, “F”, and
“G”) or all of them used simultaneously. Aniano Catipay survived despite 11 stab
wounds, the wound on his abdomen being almost fatal as it caused multiple
perforations in the small intestine.
Were it not for the immediate exploratory surgery performed on him by
Dr. Ricardo de Vera (of the NBP Hospital), he would have died of peritonitis
and hemorrhage.
In the investigation conducted by NBP guard-investigator,
Primitivo Arias, immediately after the incident, Nimrod Egonia, another inmate,
disclosed that he witnessed the stabbing of Catipay and Montero. He pointed at Carlos Melendres alias
“Jr. Blackie”, Rodolfo Molina alias “Bilat,” Antonio
Gerodias alias “Demonyo,” and Sofronio Gonzales alias
“Ponyong”, as the assailants.
Later, he executed an affidavit (Exhibit “K”) affirming what
he had said to Primitivo Arias. The four
were then in the prison hospital, having been injured when they resisted the
prison guards who subÂdued them after the incident. However, according to Arias he was able to
interview Sofronio Gonzales who admitted verbally his participation in the
stabbing. On November 22, 1971,
Primitivo Arias investigated these four suspects who executed their respective
affidavits (Exhibit “G” for Rodolfo Molina, Exhibit “F” for
Carlos Melendres, Exhibit “H” for Antonio Gerodias, and Exhibit
“I” for Sofronio Gonzales).
Whereupon, the following information was filed:
“The undersigned Special Prosecutor, by authority of
Administrative Order No. 22, series of 1971, of the Secretary of Justice,
hereby accuses CARLOS MELENDRES, No. 52492-P; RODOLFO MOLINA, No. 49198-P;
ANTONIO GERODIAS, No. 56618-P; and SOFRONIO GONZALES, No. 40631-P, all
prisoners confined at the New Bilibid Prison, Muntinlupa, Rizal, of having
committed the crime of MURDER, in violation of Article 248 of the Revised Penal
Code, committed as follows:
“That on or about September 28, 1971, in the New Bilibid
Prison, Muntinlupa, Rizal, Philippines, and within the jurisdiction of this
Honorable Court, the said accused, while then serving sentences in the said
institution, conspiring, confederating, acting together and mutually helping
each other, with intent to kill and with treachery and evident premeditation,
did then and there willfully, unlawfully and feloniously attack, assault and
stab Angel Montero, No. 54319-P and Aniano Catipay, No. 61469-P, all convicted
prisoners confined in the said institution, thereby inflicting upon Angel
Montero, multiple stab wounds in the different parts of his body, which wounds
directly produced his death, and simulÂtaneously inflicting upon Aniano
Catipay, stab wounds, thus performing all the acts of execution which would have
produced the crime of Murder as a consequence thereof but nevertheless, did not
produce it by reason of causes independent of their will, that is by the timely
medical assistance extended by the New Bilibid Prison Hospital.”
Arraigned on October 21,
1972, the accused pleaded not guilty.
Rodolfo Molina alias “Bilat” died on March 12, 1973, in the
course of the trial.
After trial, the Circuit Criminal Court rendered the decision of
January 18, 1974, with the following dispositive portion:
“WHEREFORE, finding the accused, Carlos Melendres, Antonio
Gerodias and Sofronio Gonzales, GUILTY, beyond reasonable doubt, of the crime
of Murder, as defined under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as charged
in the information, the Court hereby sentences them to suffer the penalty of
DEATH; to indemnify the heirs of the victim the amount of P10,000.00, jointly
and severally; to pay moral damages in the amount of P5,000.00 and another
P5,000.00, as exemplary damages, jointly and severally; and to pay their
proportionate shares of the costs.
“Likewise, finding the accused, Sofronio Gonzales, Carlos
Melendres, and Antonio Gerodias, GUILTY, beyond reasonable doubt, of the crime
of Frustrated Murder, as defined under Article 250 of the Revised Penal Code,
in relation to Article 248 thereto, as charged in the information, the Court
hereby sentences each one of them to suffer the penalty of TEN (10) YEARS and
ONE (1) DAY of prision mayor, as minimum to SEVENTEEN (17) YEARS and FOUR
MONTHS of prision mayor, as maximum; to indemnify the heirs of the offended
party the amount of P5,000.00; to pay moral damages in the amount of P3,000.00,
and another P3,000.00 as exemplary damages, jointly and severally, and to pay
their proportionate shares of the costs.”
For this review, Melendres, Gerodias and Gonzales through counsel
de oficio, point as errors, the trial court’s finding that they killed Montero and seriously wounded
Catipay, or what amounts to the same thing, that the guilt of the accused had
been proved beyond reasonable doubt.
And, arguing on the assumption that the crime charged had been
committed, it is asserted that the death penalty should not have been
imposed. However, a scrupulous scruÂtiny
of the records discloses no circumstance or fact of substance which could justify
a reversal of the trial court’s finding.
On the contrary, such finding is amply supported by clear, convincing
and conclusive evidence which allows no reasonable doubt as to the
participation of the accused-appellants in the crimes imputed to them.
During the trial, Carlos Melendres admitted having stabbed Aniano
Catipay, but denied having stabbed Angel Montero. He affirmed the execution of his affidavit
dated November 22, 1971, Exhibit “F”, whereÂin he admitted the
stabbing of Catipay and Montero, but claimed that he admitted the stabbing of
Montero because he was afraid that if he did not he would be harmed by the
prison guards. Antonio Gerodias and
Sofronio Gonzales, also affirmed the execution of their respective affidavits
both dated November 22, 1971, (Exhibits “H” and “I”)
wherein they disowned any part in the stabbing incident.
Aniano Catipay positively recognized and identified those who
attacked him and Montero. He named them
as “Rodias” (Antonio Gerodias), “Ponyong” (Sofronio
Gonzales), “Bilat” (the deceased Rodolfo Molina) and
“Blackie” (Carlos Melendres).
Referring to “Rodias” and “Ponyong” he pointed at
two persons who answered by the names of Antonio Gerodias and Sofronio
Gonzales. Though he did not know Carlos
Melendres by his real name, it turned out that “Blackie” was no other
than Carlos Melendres.
Aniano Catipay could not have failed to recognize the accused,
because he was himself a victim of the assault.
A truism founded on the ordinary course of things is that victims of
criminal violence often strive hard to recognize and identify their
assailants. And, so it was with Aniano
Catipay.
Thus, he testified:
“DIRECT EXAMINATION BY FISCAL SANTOS
Q Where were you on September 28, 1971, at
about 4:00 p.m.?
A I was in our brigade, 2-a, sir.
Q You are a prisoner in the NBP?
A Yes sir.
Q When you were
there on that date and time, was there anything unusual that happened?
A I was stabbed.
Q By whom?
A By Rodias,
Ponyong, Bilat and Blackie.
Q If these persons
you mentioned are here, will you point to them?
A Only two
are here. One is already dead and the
other one is not here. (Witness going
down and tapping the shoulders of two persons who when asked answered by the
names of Antonio Gerodias and Sofronio Gonzales.)
Q The accused who
was already dead, who is that?
A He is known by
the name Bilat but I do not know the real name.
Q How many stabs
did you receive?
A 11.
Q From these two?
A No, they were
four. One is already dead.
Q You are
referring to Carlos Melendres and Antonio Gerodias?
A Yes sir.
Q And Sofronio
Gonzales?
A No, the other
one called Blackie, the bigger one.
Q What happened
there in the brigade?
A I was stabbed
and also Montero.
Q What
happened to Montero when he was stabbed?
A He ran to the
pasilio.
Q Do you
know if he is already dead because of that stabbing?
A I know
that he is already dead.
Q When you were
stabbed, where were you brought?
A To the
hospital. I was treated.
Q Were you
operated on?
A Yes, I was
operated on for a big scar reaching about 4 inches (surgical). It was explorotomy surgery. I was also treated of a scar at the right
side of my body and at the back.
(Witness showing his scars.) I received three stab wounds at the back,
two at the right side and two in front; one at the upper right chest; one at
the stomach and two at the upper right arm; one at the forearm and one at the
knee.
Q What was
your position at the time you received these stabs at the back?
A I
was leaning by the window.
Q With
what were you stabbed?
A A sharp
instrument.
Q How many
persons stabbed you?
A At first I was
stabbed by one and when I ran towards the wide pasilio, 3 persons blocked my
way.
Q Who was that
first person who stabbed you?
A Bilat,
the one who died already, or Rodolfo Molina.
Q And the
persons who blocked your way?
A Rodias,
Blackie and Ponyong.
Q Is this
Blackie you mentioned in Court now?
A No sir.
Q Who were the
others who blocked your way?
A Remito and
Villamor who were already released.
Q What did Antonio
Gerodias do to you?
A He stabbed me,
on my right side.
Q Where was
Gerodias in relation to you at the time he stabbed you on your right side?
A He was in front
of me.
Q How many times
did Gerodias stab you?
A Two times when
he was able to enter the brigade. I was
lying face downward.
Q How about
Sofronio Gonzales, how many times did he stab you?
A Three of them
stabbed me at the same time and Sofronio was one of them.
Q With what did
Sofronio Gonzales stab you?
A Buriki or lead pipe,
sharpened at the tip.
Q I am showing
you several weapons, will you show to the Court this buriki which according to
you was used by Gonzales in stabbing you?
A That big
one. (Witness pointing to a splitted
lead pipe with sharp tip covered with an orange colored cloth which serves as a
handle.)
Q We would like
to request that this weapon identified by the witness be marked as Exhibit
“A” for the prosecution.
COURT:
Mark it.”
(TSN, December 11, 1973,
pp. 2-4).
That the accused stabbed to death Angel Montero is established by
the testimony of Aniano Catipay. And he
should have known beÂcause Angel Montero was with him in cell No. 1, and they
were stabbed together.
“FISCAL SANTOS
Q When you were stabbed, do you know where
Angel Montero was at that time?
A He was with me, inside Dormitory 2-a.
Q Who stabbed Montero?
A The group of Gerodias, but I only know
their nick names, as Blackie, Saging, Ponyong, Bilat and Roger.
Q Is Blackie in court now?
A No, only two are here, Rodias and
Ponyong.
Q Is Carlos Melendres here?
A I do not know Carlos Melendres.
Q When Montero was stabbed, what was he
doing?
A None, he just came from his work and he
had just entered.
Q Do you know what cell these accused
belong?
A Cell 1.
Q Where did this stabbing occur?
A In their cell because they talked to me.
Q Do you know whether Montero was armed
when he was stabbed? And did you hear
him say anything when he was stabbed?
A No, because he suddenly looked up.
Q Where was he facing?
A We were talking with Blackie.
COURT
Q When you were stabbed, what did you say?
A I was not able to say anything. I was just trying to evade them.
Q Why, was the attack sudden?
A Yes, sir, we were attacked suddenly at
the same time. Myself and Montero.”
(TSN, December 11, 1973, pp. 5-6).
On cross-examination, Aniano Catipay declared that he and Rodolfo
Montero were called and brought by the accused to cell No. 1. He stood beside Montero, and rested his hand
on a post. Montero was then looking
upward. “Blackie” told him
that “something happened” to them (the accused) at cell No. 7, to
which he answered that he had nothing to do with it. Just then, “Rodias” stabbed
Montero. He saw Blackie blink his eyes;
and “Bilat” stabbed him.
Montero ran to the door but collapsed.
“Ponyong” stabbed Montero again. He ran past Montero, intending to reach the
corridor, but “Rodias,” “Blackie,” and Ponyong blocked his
way. And they ganged up on him. He received 11 stab wounds.
He stated that he was stabbed because he refused to have his
“BCJ” (Batang City Jail) tatoo, erased. But, he did not know why Montero was stabbed.
He said that he went to cell No. 1 confidently and unsuspectingly, since the accused were also
from the Visayas, and they all belonged to OXO gang. The accused, however, had “OXO-KKK”
tatoo, while he was marked “OXO-BCJ-32”. It was this “BCJ” that the accused
wanted to erase.
Nimrod Egonia was another eyewitness. Corroborating Aniano Catipay, he stated that
he saw Rodolfo Molina (“Bilat”) and Carlos Melendres
(“Blackie”) stab Catipay, and Antonio Gerodias (“Rodias” or
“Demonyo”) and Sofronio Gonzales (“Ponyong”) stab Angel
Montero.
As aforesaid, Egonia disclosed the identity of the assailants to
Primitivo Arias, the prison guard-investigator, immediately after the
incident. His statement may well be
deemed part of res gestae.
It was given spontaneously and immediately subsequent to the stabbing
incident when there was yet no opportunity for fabrication.
Some two hours later, Egonia executed a sworn statement (Exhibit
“K”) before Primitivo Arias, reciting what he had previously told
Arias. He affirmed the voluntary
execution of Exhibit “K” in court.
That Angel Montero was stabbed by several assailants, finds
support in the testimony of Dr. Ernesto Brion (NBI medico legal expert). Testifying that Montero died of multiple stab
wounds, Dr. Brion stated that such wounds were simultaneously inflicted in
rapid succession by several assailants.
And, describing the relative position of the victim and the assailants, he said that “one assailant must
have been in front at the right of the victim, while the other must be at the
back to the left of the victim.”
On the other hand, the accused Antonio Gerodias
(“Rodias” or “Demonyo”) and Sofronio Gonzales
(“Ponyong”) denied any participaÂtion in the incident. According to Gerodias, he was near the door
of Brigade 2-A when the incident occured, and he went at once to his cell in
Brigade 2-A. According to Gonzales, he
was between cell Nos. 1 and 2, and he also ran to his cell, cell No. 1.
Such denial cannot, however, prevail over the positive and
conclusive identification made by Aniano Catipay and Nimrod Egonia. It should also be recalled that immediately
after the stabbing incident, Sofronio Gonzales confessed, though, orally, his
guilt to Primitivo Arias. Besides, Gonzales and Gerodias only betrayed
themselves when they said that they repaired to their cells. It should be noted that Catipay and Montero
were assaulted inside cell No. 1 at Brigade 2-A. The uncontradicted testimony of Aniano Catipay
is that the accused where cellmates in cell No. 1. It was the same cell to which Gonzales and
Gerodias allegedly ran. Conzales,
himself, said, he ran to cell No. 1.
And, Gerodias said he ran to his “cell in [Brigade] 2-A.” In
other words, while they were saying that they had nothing to do with the
criminal assault on Catipay and Montero, they were also saying that at the time
of the assault, they ran to the very place of the assault.
For his part, Carlos Melendres “Blackie”, admitted
having attacked Aniano Catipay. He,
however, denied having assaulted Angel Montero, pointing to Rodolfo Molina
(“Bilat”) as the assailant. He
said, he attacked Catipay, because the latter was blocking Molina who was about
to stab Montero. And, he wanted Montero
to die because he was a “squealer” (inmates’ term for a gang
turncoat). Thus, he repudiated his
affidavit (Exhibit “F”, dated November 22, 1971), wherein he stated
that he stabbed Aniano Catipay and Angel Montero several times. He stated that he was only forced to admit
the stabbing of Montero because he was “afraid to get hurt.” He,
however, admitted that he voluntarily executed the sworn statement before
Primitivo Arias who did not intimidate nor coerce him into signing his
statement. Suffice it to say that the
sworn statement taken together with the other evidence of the prosecution
clearly establish the culpability of Carlos Melendres.
We, therefore, see no compelling reason to reverse the finding of
the court a quo that Angel Montero died and Aniano Catipay was
seriously wounded in the concerted assault made by the accused-appellants,
(including the deceased Rodolfo Molina).
It also correctly found that the concerted assault was qualified by
treachery. The attack was so sudden, and
at a time when it was least expected, as the victims were talking face to face
with the accused. Catipay and Montero
were caught off-guard, a situation which, for the accused, insured the
consummation of the assault without risk to themselves. It did not appear that anyone of the accused
was wounded.
The accused-appellants are quasi-recidivists. Jus strictum, death penalty as
the maximum penalty for the murder of Angel Montero should be imposed on them.
But, justice is not blind to compassion. The wretched conditions in the National
Bilibid Prison, i.e., congested cells, meager allowance for meals, and sheer
boredom of routinary activities, are matters of judicial notice. Such miserable conditions far from
rehabilitating the inmates, only drive the bestial in them.
As in People vs. Garcia, et al., (G.R. L-40106, March 13, 1980,
96 SCRA 497) citing People vs. de los Santos, (L-19067-8, July 30, 1965, 45
SCRA 702), the death penalty should be commuted to recluÂsion perpetua.
WHEREFORE, the judgment of the court a quo
is modified in that instead of the death penalty each of the appellants is
hereby sentenced to suffer reclusion perpetua for the murder but
affirmed in all other respects. No
special pronouncement as to costs.
SO ORDERED.
Teehankee, Acting C.J., Barredo, Aquino, Concepcion, Jr.,
Fernandez, Guerrero, De Castro, and Melencio-Herrera,
JJ., concur.
Fernando, C.J., on leave.
Makasiar, J., votes for total
affirmance of the judgment of the trial court.