PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ARTEMIO BERNAL, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Charged with two (2) murders and attempted murder under three separate
informations docketed as Criminal Cases Nos. 3299, 3300 and 3301 of the
defunct Court of First Instance of Zamboanga del Sur, and thereafter
tried upon his plea of not guilty, Artemio Bernal was found guilty and
sentenced as follows:

“WHEREFORE, in Criminal Case No. 3299, the Court finds Artemio
Bernal guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Homicide and
hereby sentences him to an indeterminate sentence consisting of SIX (6)
YEARS of prision correccional as minimum to SEVENTEEN (17) YEARS of reclusion temporal
as maximum, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased in the amount of
P6,000.00, plus P30,000.00 for loss of earning capacity, P2,450.00 for
actual expenses in the litigation, and P4,000.00 for moral damages.

“In Criminal Case No. 3300, the defendant Artemio Bernal is
found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder against
Jimmy Peñaflor, Jr. and hereby sentences him to reclusion perpetua, to
pay the heirs of the deceased the amount of P6,000.00 as indemnity, plus
P5,000.00 for loss of earning capacity, and P5,000.00 as moral damages.

“In Criminal Case No. 3301, the defendant Artemio Bernal is
found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Attempted Murder,
and the Court hereby sentences him to an indeterminate penalty
consisting of FOUR (4) YEARS of prision correccional as minimum to EIGHT (8) YEARS of prision mayor as maximum, to suffer the accessory penalties of the law, and to pay the costs.”

The evidence for the prosecution tends to show the following facts:

Shortly after midnight of December 9, 1966, Eugenio Satajo, captain of
the vessel “MV San Antonio”, invited Jimmy Peñaflor, Jr., Ricarte
Monsanto, Warlito Ybañez and Marcial Ortega, all dockhands at the
Pagadian City wharf, to take a snack at a refreshment parlor located at
the national highway in Pagadian City. As they were walking along
Mabini St. on their way thereto, they saw appellant Artemio Bernal
approaching from the opposite direction. When appellant was about six
meters away from them, Monsanto accosted him by saying: “Good evening,
bay.” Appellant did not respond. Peñaflor likewise greeted him, “Good
evening, bay.” This time appellant countered by saying “Pusilon ta mo
ron (I’ll shoot you).” Whereupon he pulled out his gun, levelled it at
Monsanto who was about 4 meters away, and fired twice. The latter
ducked and was not hit.

At this juncture, Jimmy Peñaflor, Jr., with upraised hands, approached
appellant and said: “Don’t shoot, friend.” Appellant pushed Peñaflor
and fired two shots, hitting him on the head and the abdomen. As
Peñaflor fell on the pavement, Monsanto, Ybañez and Ortega ran away.
Roberto Romales, who was at the scene of the incident, testified that
after the trio had fled, appellant gunned down Capt. Satajo with three
successive shots.

Shortly after, Monsanto, Ybañez and Ortega, accompanied by Pat. Porfirio
Tejano of the Pagadian City Police Department, returned to the scene of
the crime. Patrolmen Tejano, Baton and Santos, who later arrived in a
patrol jeep, arrested appellant.

The victims, Captain Satajo and Peñaflor, were brought to the clinic of
Dr. Mateo Dayo, Jr. According to the doctor, Captain Satajo died about
five minutes after arrival at the clinic and that the victim’s death was
due to the following gunshot wounds:

“This is to certify that Eugenio Satajo, 40 years old, in command
of M.V. San Antonio, was given emergency treatment at the Nstra. Sra.
dela Paz Clinic on December 10, 1966 for the following wounds sustained:

– Bullet wound 3½ inches to the right and up of the umbilicus 2½ inches from the midline 2 mm in diameter.

– Bullet wound – left anterior axillary line 4 inches below to the left of the left nipple 3 mm. in diameter.

– Bullet wound – left mandibular area – 1 inch from the ear and down to the anterior (face) measuring 2 mm. in diameter.

Patient was admitted semiconscious, pale, weak and pulseless, was
pronounced dead at 12:50 am. 20 min. after he was rushed to our clinic.

(SGD.) MATEO DAYO, JR., M.D.


Pagadian, Zamboanga del Sur”


[EXHIBIT “C”]

Peñaflor expired at about 5:50 in the morning of the following day. Dr.
Dayo likewise ascribed his death to gunshot wounds which he described
in the autopsy report as follows:

“This is to certify that Jimmy Peñaflor, Jr., 18 years old, of San
Pedro District, Pagadian, Zamboanga del Sur, was treated at the Nstra.
Sra. dela Paz Clinic on 12-10-66 for the following wounds sustained:

1. Bullet wound 2 mm in diameter 2½ inches above umbilicus – 1 inch to the right of the midline

2. Bullet wound 3 mm in diameter 6 inches to the right at the
same level of the umbilicus – Distance between the 2 wounds is 5½
inches.

3. Head injury – Bullet wound occipital region leftside 3
inches from the back of the left ear – measuring approximately 2 mm in
diameter.

Whitish material simulating brain matter was expressed out of the
wound while applying pressure dressing to control the bleeding.

The patient was admitted unconscious with a normal pulse and blood
pressure. He never regained consciousness. Was pronounced dead at 7:50
am 12/10/66 seven hours after admission.

(SGD.) MATEO DAYO, JR., M.D.


Pagadian, Zamboanga del Sur”

[EXHIBIT “E”]

The appellant admitted having shot to death Captain Satajo and Jimmy
Peñaflor, Jr., but pleaded self defense to justify his act. He
vehemently denied having fired at Monsanto. He alleged that on the
night in question, a group of six or seven men tried to stage a hold-up
while he was on his way home. His version of the incident, as
summarized by the trial court, is as follows:

“On the other hand, the defense consists mainly of the testimony
of the defendant Artemio Bernal. He declared that at about midnight
during the incident in question, he was going home towards his house at
the Bernal Hotel. On his way, he met people who were all armed to
commit robbery against him. There were six or seven of them armed with
knives and pistols. One of them said, ‘This is a holdup.’ At first, he
did not recognized who uttered these words but he found out in the
morning that his name was Capt. Eugenio Satajo. The companions of Capt.
Satajo said, ‘We will kill this person because he knows us’. That
person who said that was Ricarte Monsanto. At this juncture, Bernal
grabbed the weapon of Capt. Satajo and ran away. Ricarte Monsanto
blocked his way and so he fired two warning shots. Then Jimmy Peñaflor
who was armed with a bladed weapon blocked his way. Because Jimmy was
near Bernal, he shot him, and after shooting Jimmy, Bernal continued
running to the Bernal Hotel. The group of men chased him and almost
overtook him. So he turned back and shot Capt. Satajo who was among the
pursuers. After Satajo fell, he threw away the pistol. The companions
of Satajo ran away when Capt. Satajo fell. At this juncture, Adriano
Bernal, father of the defendant, approached the latter and said, ‘Boy,
you surrender; we will surrender to the police checkpoint’. But they
could not surrender because at the precise moment a police wagon arrived
precisely to arrest the defendant. The policeman who arrested the
defendant were Pat. Porfirio Tejano, Pat. Baton and Pat. Santos. The
defendant admits that there has never been any grudge or
misunderstanding between him on the one hand and Jimmy Peñaflor, Ricarte
Monsanto, and Warlito Ybañez on the other. He never saw Capt. Satajo
before the incident. He denies the version of both Ricarte and Warlito.
The gun which was used by the defendant in shooting jimmy Peñaflor,
Jr. and Capt. Satajo was never recovered. This testimony of Artemio
Bernal is substantially corroborated by the witness Artemio Lagbunan and
his father Adriano Bernal.

We find no error committed by the trial court in rejecting the
appellant’s theory of self defense. It is a settled principle that an
accused who admits having inflicted the injuries which caused the death
of another has the burden of proving self defense with clear and
convincing evidence; and if such evidence is of doubtful veracity, the
defense must fail. The trial court characterized the evidence adduced
in support of appellant’s plea as unconvincing and improbable. It
explained why:

“x x x The story of Artemio Bernal that Captain Satajo was the
leader of a gang of six or seven who staged a hold-up against him is
highly incredible. It is admitted that Captain Satajo, who is the
captain of an inter-island vessel ‘San Antonio’, is a stranger of the
place, being a resident of Manila. He has a wife and family of three
children and earns a salary of P450.00 a month. The court refuses to
believe that a man with a stable income and who is a stranger in
Pagadian would lead a group of hold-uppers to commit robbery against the
defendant. Besides, the defendant is only a student, 22 years old at
the time he testified in court. What thing of value can be robbed from a
man who is still dependent for his own livelihood from his own father?”

We agree with the trial court’s conclusion that appellant is criminally
liable for the death of Capt. Satajo and Jimmy Peñaflor. We have
carefully and painstakingly reviewed the evidence and We find no reason
to discredit the eyewitnesses for the prosecution, whose testimonies
appear to be a candid and truthful narrative of the incident.

But while the lower court correctly convicted appellant of homicide for
the death of Capt. Satajo, it erred in finding him guilty of the crime
of murder for the slaying of Jimmy Peñaflor, Jr. According to the trial
court, the crime was attended by the qualifying circumstance of
treachery because “the killing of Peñaflor was sudden and unexpected.”
In the People’s brief, however, the Solicitor General submits a contrary
view.

To constitute treachery, it is essential that the method, form or means
adopted must be deliberately chosen to insure its execution without the
risk to the offender arising from the defense which the victim might
make. In the case at bar, while the appellants’ attack on the deceased
Peñaflor was sudden and unexpected, it does not appear that he had
consciously intended such mode of attack to facilitate the perpetration
of the homicide without risk to himself. Appellant pulled out his gun
after he was greeted by Monsanto and Peñaflor. There is however no
evidence to even intimate that before their meeting appellant had
already formed the intention to kill Peñaflor. On the contrary, it is
undisputed that their meeting was wholly accidental. There is no
showing that prior to the incident there was any misunderstanding or bad
blood between appellant and the deceased Peñaflor. If appellant drew
out his gun and fired at his victim, it was made wholly on impulse, as
he was apparently irritated by the greetings made by Monsanto and
Peñaflor.

The Solicitor General further disputes the trial court’s finding that
appellant actually fired at Monsanto and missed, and thus recommends
that appellant be acquitted of the charge for attempted homicide in
Criminal Case No. 3301. We sustain the position taken by the Solicitor
General. Thus –

“Moreover, this brief entertains serious doubts that appellant actually
fired at Ricarte Monsanto but missed. Monsanto’s testimony (t.s.n.,
Stenog Villamero, pp. 22-23) that he ducked and thus avoided the shots
that were fired at him from a mere four meters away strains belief. A
.22 caliber bullet, according to ballistic tables, travels at a speed of
1335 ft. per sec. and in flight is imperceptible to the naked eye. It
would take some pretty fancy ducking to avoid it.”

WHEREFORE, judgment is hereby rendered as follows:

[a] The lower court’s decision in Criminal Case No. 3299 convicting
appellant Artemio Bernal of homicide is hereby affirmed with the
modification that appellant shall suffer an indeterminate penalty
ranging from SIX (6) YEARS AND ONE (1) DAY OF prision correccional,
as minimum, to TWELVE (12) YEARS AND ONE (1) DAY of prision temporal,
as maximum, and to indemnify the heirs of Eugenio Satajo in the amount
of P30,000.00

[b] The judgment in Criminal Case No. 3300 is hereby set aside
and, in lieu thereof, another one is entered finding appellant guilty of
the crime of homicide and sentencing him to an indeterminate penalty
ranging from SIX (6) YEARS AND ONE (1) DAY of prision correccional,
as minimum, to TWELVE (12) YEARS AND ONE (1) DAY of prision temporal,
as maximum, and to indemnify the heirs of Jimmy Peñaflor, Jr. in the sum
of P30,000.00

[c] In Criminal Case No. 3301, appellant is hereby acquitted of the crime of attempted murder, with costs de oficio.

SO ORDERED.

Makasiar, (Chairman), Aquino, Concepcion, Jr., Guerrero, Abad Santos, and De Castro, JJ., concur.