PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. RAUL GALLEGO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

People versus Gallego

The Case

This is the People of the Philippines against Raul Gallego, a criminal appeal from a conviction for murder. A man was stabbed to death in his own home by a visitor who had gained entry by claiming to be a long-lost relative from Negros. The case matters for two reasons a reviewee must hold onto: it is a clean teaching case on the totality of circumstances test for out-of-court identification, and it shows how positive identification defeats denial and alibi where the distance between the two places is short and easily travelled.

Procedural History

Raul Gallego was charged with murder by information filed in the Regional Trial Court. After trial, the trial court gave credence to the prosecution evidence, convicted him of murder, sentenced him to reclusion perpetua with all its accessory penalties, and ordered him to pay the heirs of Wilfredo Lamata 50,000 pesos as damages plus the costs of suit. Gallego appealed to the Supreme Court, raising a single assignment of error: that the trial court erred in finding him guilty beyond reasonable doubt of murder. The appeal therefore reached the Supreme Court directly from the trial court's judgment of conviction.

Facts

At about 7:30 in the evening of February 8, 1995, Raul Gallego appeared at the house of spouses Wilfredo and Lucia Lamata in Barangay Sebaste, Jordan, Guimaras. Their twelve-year-old granddaughter Avelyn and their daughter Lina Echavez were watching television in the living room, which was lit by a fluorescent lamp. Gallego called Avelyn through the window and said he was a relative from Negros. When Lucia came out, he said he was a military man named Colonel Latumbo and a relative of Wilfredo whom he had not seen for seven years. Lina spoke with him at the door, about two feet away, in the light spilling from the living room.

Wilfredo, who was ill and had been in bed upstairs, came down with Lucia and headed for the main door. Seeing Wilfredo about five feet away, Gallego rushed to him saying, here is my relative whom I am very anxious to see. He embraced Wilfredo with his left hand, then suddenly drew a knife with his right hand and stabbed Wilfredo on the lower left chest. Lucia embraced her husband to shield him and was slashed on the upper left arm as Gallego withdrew the knife. Lina, standing about one meter away, saw the stabbing and shouted that her father had been stabbed. Gallego ran out and fled on a motorcycle. Wilfredo was pronounced dead on arrival at the hospital; the cause of death was the stab wound on the left chest.

The next day Lucia went to the Jordan police station, was asked to identify her husband's assailant, and pointed him out from among several persons at the porch. Lina later identified him at the station as well, and Avelyn recognized him when she passed by his detention cell on her way to Iloilo. All three positively identified him in court. Gallego set up denial and alibi, claiming he was at a store and then at a family gathering in Barangay Dasal at the time, but the defense's own witnesses placed the two barangays only a few kilometers apart and reachable by motorcycle in a short time.

Issues

• Whether or not the prosecution established the identity of Raul Gallego as Wilfredo Lamata's assailant beyond reasonable doubt, despite the out-of-court show-up identification at the police station.
• Whether or not the defense of denial and alibi can prevail against the positive identification by the prosecution witnesses.
• Whether or not treachery qualified the killing to murder.

Applicable Provisions

Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code defines and penalizes 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.

Treachery is the qualifying circumstance the Court examines to raise the killing from homicide to murder.

Article 14 of the Revised Penal Code lists the aggravating circumstances, including treachery:

Article 14. Aggravating circumstances. The following are aggravating circumstances: 16. That the act be committed with treachery, that is, the employment of means of execution that gives the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or to retaliate, and that said means of execution be deliberately or consciously adopted.

The Court uses this definition to test whether the sudden stabbing of an unarmed, ill man constituted treachery.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the identification was credible under the totality of circumstances test. That test weighs the witness's opportunity to view the criminal at the time of the crime, the degree of attention, the accuracy of any prior description, the level of certainty at identification, the length of time between the crime and the identification, and the suggestiveness of the identification procedure. Here the living room was well lighted, the door was open, and the light illumined the area where Gallego stood; Lucia and Lina spoke with him at close range before the attack; Lucia was beside her husband and Lina about one meter away when he stabbed. The Court stressed that identification does not require knowledge of the name:

Experience shows that precisely because of the unusual acts of bestiality committed before their eyes, eyewitnesses, especially the victims to a crime, can remember with a high degree of reliability the identity of criminals.

On the second issue, the Court ruled that positive identification prevails over denial and alibi, and that alibi must fail unless it was physically impossible for the accused to be at the scene at the time of the crime. The defense's own witnesses placed the two barangays only three to four kilometers apart, reachable by motorcycle in about ten minutes, so physical impossibility was not shown.

On the third issue, the Court held that treachery qualified the killing to murder, because the means of execution gave the unarmed and ailing victim no opportunity to defend himself or retaliate, and the means were deliberately chosen.

Doctrine

First, out-of-court identification, including a show-up at a police station, is tested by the totality of circumstances, not by any single factor. Second, identification of a person is not solely through knowledge of his name; familiarity with physical features, especially the face, is the best way to identify a person. Third, positive identification by witnesses who had a clear view and no ill motive to testify falsely prevails over denial and alibi. Fourth, alibi prospers only where it was physically impossible for the accused to be at the scene at the approximate time of the crime. Fifth, treachery under Article 14 requires that the means of execution give the person attacked no opportunity to defend himself or retaliate, and that the means be deliberately or consciously adopted.

Disposition

The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction of Raul Gallego for murder and upheld the penalty of reclusion perpetua and the award of 50,000 pesos in damages to the heirs of Wilfredo Lamata.

Remember This

The one line to memorize: identification is not knowledge of the name, and positive identification prevails over denial and alibi. Examiners use this case on the totality of circumstances test for show-up identification and on the physical impossibility requirement that defeats alibi.