PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. MANILYN TAMAYO, ACCUSED,

People versus Tamayo

The Case

This is People versus Tamayo, a criminal appeal from a conviction for murder. The People of the Philippines prosecuted Victoriano Tamayo and his niece Manilyn Tamayo for the stabbing death of a sixteen-year-old girl, Diana Visperas, in Mapandan, Pangasinan. The trial court convicted both of murder, and only Victoriano appealed. The case matters for the bar because it is a clean illustration of two workhorses of criminal review: the elements of murder, and the rule that alibi, even when corroborated, crumbles against positive identification by an eyewitness.

Procedural History

An information for murder was filed against both accused. Both pleaded not guilty at arraignment, and after pre-trial, trial proceeded. On November 22, 2010, the Regional Trial Court, Branch 43, Dagupan City, rendered its decision finding both accused guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder, appreciating the aggravating circumstance of abuse of superior strength. Manilyn, a minor over fifteen but under eighteen at the time, was sentenced to an indeterminate penalty and committed to the Department of Social Welfare and Development rehabilitation center, with the service of her sentence suspended under Republic Act Number 9344. Victoriano was sentenced to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole, and both were ordered jointly and severally to pay the heirs of the victim seventy-five thousand pesos as civil indemnity, fifty thousand pesos as moral damages, and thirty thousand pesos as exemplary damages.

Victoriano filed a notice of appeal. Manilyn also filed a notice of appeal, but the trial court rejected it. The appeal of Victoriano went up to the Supreme Court, which reviewed the assessment of his guilt.

Facts

On January 12, 2007, at around half past one in the afternoon, Marlon Aquino was walking along an earthen dike in Barangay Jimenez, Mapandan, Pangasinan. He saw Manilyn Tamayo, armed with a kitchen knife, stab Diana Visperas seven times, hitting the victim on her breasts, abdomen, and back. As Manilyn was stabbing the victim, Victoriano was holding the victim's right arm.

The victim was brought to the Mapandan Community Hospital, where she was declared dead on arrival. The autopsy report of Doctor Cristina Quintos showed seven wounds, several of them penetrating, one of which hit the left upper lung and the left atrium of the heart.

For his defense, Victoriano offered denial and alibi. He claimed that on the morning of January 12, 2007, he went with his employer to Dagupan City to canvass the market price of mangoes, then to Santa Barbara, Pangasinan, to check the mangoes they had sprayed, and stayed there until eight o'clock in the evening. He learned only later that neighbors were accusing him of using the alias Dencio in a stabbing incident, so he went to the police station to clarify his name. He denied involvement and claimed he had not seen his niece Manilyn except on January 10, 2007.

Issues

• Whether or not the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt for the crime of murder.
• Whether or not the killing was attended by the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength.
• Whether or not the defense of alibi can prevail over the positive identification of the accused by an eyewitness.

Applicable Provisions

Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended by Republic Act Number 7659, defines and penalizes murder. The information charged the accused under its first paragraph, and the Court used it to test whether the killing was murder:

Article 248. Murder. — Any person who, not falling within the provisions of Article 246, shall kill another, shall be guilty of murder and shall be punished by reclusion temporal in its maximum period to death, if committed with any of the following attendant circumstances: 1. With treachery, taking advantage of superior strength, with the aid of armed men, or employing means to weaken the defense, or of means or persons to insure or afford impunity.

The Court anchored the conviction on the qualifying circumstance of abuse of superior strength, which the trial court appreciated against both accused.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court affirmed the finding of guilt. To be liable for murder, the prosecution must prove that a person was killed, that the accused killed him, that the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 248, and that the killing is neither parricide nor infanticide. All four were present. Diana was stabbed to death, succumbing to seven stab wounds, one of which perforated her heart, and the killing was neither parricide nor infanticide. The Court found it beyond cavil that the appellant and his co-accused killed the victim.

On the second issue, the Court held that abuse of superior strength was present. There is abuse of superior strength when the aggressors purposely use excessive force rendering the victim unable to defend himself, and the notorious inequality of forces creates an unfair advantage for the aggressor. The eyewitness testified that Manilyn stabbed the victim seven times with a kitchen knife while Victoriano held the victim's right arm. That depiction of the physical assault indubitably demonstrated abuse of superior strength.

On the third issue, the Court rejected the alibi. For alibi to prosper, it must be proved not only that the assailant was in another place when the crime was committed, but that it was physically impossible for him to be present at the crime scene or its immediate vicinity at the time of its commission. Here, it was not physically impossible for the appellant to be at the scene. The trial court noted that Mapandan could be reached from Santa Barbara or Dagupan in a short period, and that physical impossibility refers not only to geographical distance but to the facility of access between two places. The appellant himself informed Jerry Tamayo, the father of Manilyn, of what happened to Diana and warned Manilyn to be cautious, so he could not feign ignorance of the killing. Against the positive identification by the prosecution witness, all the appellant could offer was a shaky alibi, which is a weak defense. There was no showing that the eyewitness was harboring any ill motive to falsely testify. The Court found no basis to overturn the findings of the trial court that Manilyn repeatedly stabbed the victim while the appellant held the victim's arm, making both criminally accountable as principals by direct participation.

Doctrine

First, the elements of murder are: a person was killed; the accused killed him; the killing was attended by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article 248; and the killing is neither parricide nor infanticide.

Second, there is abuse of superior strength when the aggressors purposely use excessive force rendering the victim unable to defend himself, and the notorious inequality of forces creates an unfair advantage for the aggressor. Holding the victim's arm while another stabs her is the classic case.

Third, for alibi to prosper, it must be proved not only that the assailant was in another place when the crime was committed, but that it was physically impossible for him to be present at the crime scene or its immediate vicinity at the time of its commission. Physical impossibility refers not only to geographical distance but to the facility of access between two places.

Fourth, alibi, even when corroborated, cannot prevail over the positive identification of the accused as the author of the crime by a credible witness.

Disposition

The appeal was denied, and the decision of the Regional Trial Court of Dagupan City convicting Victoriano Tamayo of murder and sentencing him to reclusion perpetua without eligibility for parole was affirmed.

Remember This

Memorize this line: alibi cannot prevail over positive identification, and it fails unless it was physically impossible for the accused to be at the crime scene. Examiners use this case to test the elements of murder, the concept of abuse of superior strength, and the strict requirements for the defense of alibi.