PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ANTONIO LEGASPI AND OSCAR LEGASPI, ACCUSED-APPELLANTS.

This is an appeal from the decision dated September 20, 1985 of the
Regional Trial Court, Branch 46, at Masbate, Masbate which found accused
Antonio Legaspi and Oscar Legaspi guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime
of murder and sentenced them as follows:

“WHEREFORE, premises considered, the Court finds accused Antonio
Legaspi and Oscar Legaspi, GUILTY as charged beyond reasonable doubt of the
crime of murder and hereby sentences Antonio Legaspi to suffer a penalty of
SEVENTEEN (17) YEARS, FOUR (4) MONTHS and ONE (1) DAY to TWENTY (20) YEARS OF reclusion
temporal and Oscar Legaspi is hereby sentenced to reclusion perpetua,
to jointly and severally indemnify the heirs of the victim, Fausto Apalla, Jr., the amount of P30,000.00
as moral damages; in the amount of P70,000.00 and P3,000.00 as actual and
compensatory damages, without subsidiary imprisonment in case of insolvency;
together with all the accessory penalties provided for by law, and to
proportionately pay the costs.” pp. 41-42, Rollo).

Antonio Legaspi was credited with having surrendered to the
barangay captain right after the incident. The court appreciated the surrender as a mitigating circumstance. There being no, aggravating circumstance to offset it, accused Antonio
was sentenced to reclusion temporal in its maximum period.

Both Antonio Legaspi and Oscar Legaspi filed a notice of appeal
from the above cited decision (Original records, p. 88).

The Citizens Legal Assistance Office, counsel for the two
appellants has an alternative prayer for either the acquittal of both
appellants or, if the self-defense theory of Antonio Legaspi is rejected, for
incomplete self-defense and voluntary surrender to be credited in his favor.

The facts of the case are found in the decision of the trial
court as follows:

“It is uncontroverted that the incident at bar took place in
the early morning of September 16, 1983 at the barangay plaza of Miaga, Uson,
Masbate during the occasion of a dance and canvassing of votes for local
‘beauty queen candidates’, attended by the herein two accused Antonio Legaspi
and Oscar Legaspi who arrived at the plaza (from Dongon, Uson, Masbate, where
both reside) at about 8 to 8:30 o’clock the
preceding night. As the dance and/or
canvassing was in progress, a stabbing incident took place at
the said plaza at about 2:00 o’clock in the morning wherein the victim, Fausto
Apalla, Jr., suffered certain injuries resulting in his death nine (9) days
thereafter while confined for treatment in Alino Hospital at Poblacion,
Dimasalang, Masbate (Exhs. B & B-1).

“Dr. Alfonso Alino who attended and treated the victim until
the latter’s death confirmed his findings in his medical certificate issued on
February 10, 1984 (Exhs. A & A-1), to wit:

“‘1. punctured wound
2-1/2 inches deep on the 4th I.C.S, left chest;

“‘2. punctured wound,
2” deep intra-abdominal punctur­ing the stomach, epigastrum;

“‘3. punctured wound
1” deep, left lumbar;

“‘4. incised wound,
rt. hand, dorsal, 4” long;

“‘5. superficial
incised wound, left wrist, 2” long.’

xxx                            xxx                               xxx

“The prosecution asserts that (as witnessed by 13-year old
Fernando Sanchez, the victim’s companion during the incident and who was seated
with the latter on a bench near the gate of the plaza watching the dance and the canvassing), the herein two accused at about
2 o’clock that early morning, approached Sanchez and the victim and, without
any provocation or warning, accused Antonio Legaspi immediately stabbed the
victim, Fausto Apalla, Jr., with a ‘machete’, hitting the latter on his left
chest. When the victim stood up, accused
Antonio Legaspi delivered another blow of the ‘machete’ hitting the victim on
the stomach. Accused Oscar Legaspi
followed this up (using likewise a machete) by stabbing the victim on the left
wrist, then on the right hand. Moments
thereafter, the two accused chase the victim and overtaking the latter,
accused Antonio Legaspi stabbed him on the left buttock causing him to fall
down while prosecution witness Sanchez (who shouted to the accused ‘Don’t kill
my companion’) ran towards the victim’s house and informed the latter’s mother
and elder brother, David Apalla, about the incident. All these had been witnessed by Fernando Sanchez because at the
time of the incident, the plaza was well-lighted by several ‘Coleman’ mantle
lamps and Sanchez was barely 2-arms length away from the victim.

“Sanchez reported the matter to the police authorities and
subscribed and sworn to his affidavit on August 24, 1984 before Judge Jacinta
Tambago of the circuit court of Dimasalang-Uson-Palanas (Exhs. C to C-2), the
truthfulness of the contents of which he affirmed in Court.

“The victim’s family incurred an expense of P3,000.00 for his
medical attendance and hospitalization and the victim’s mother got sick and
later died because of mental anguish and anxieties. There was a delay in the filing of this case because the victim’s
brothers and sisters, except David Apalla, were then all in Manila and it took
them sometime to reply to David
Apalla’s communication concerning the incident.” (pp. 36-37, Rollo).

Antonio Legaspi admits having inflicted the fatal wounds but claims
self-defense while Oscar Legaspi interposes alibi.

The evidence for the
defense is summarized by their counsel as follows:

“Abundia Muana a classroom teacher, testified that she was at the plaza Miaga attending the
last canvassing of votes for local ‘Beauty Queen Candidates’. That at about 2:00 o’clock in the morning of
September 16, 1983, while she was dancing, a commotion took place inside the plaza. She left her partner in the dance hall and ran towards the
Chapel. When she arrived at the Chapel,
she saw Oscar Legaspi sleeping. She
woke up Oscar Legaspi and told the latter that there was a quarrel in the
plaza. She came to know that the
protagonists were Antonio Legaspi and Fausto Apalla, Jr. She proceeded to the house of her co-teacher
where she waited for the last counting of votes.

“Remedios Legaspi testified that she is the wife of Oscar Legaspi. That Fausto Apalla is the uncle of
Fernando Sanchez and the mother of Fernando Sanchez and Fausto Apalla, Jr., are
half-brother and half-sister on the mother’s side (TSN., p. 24, June 4, 1983
hearing).

“Romulo Capellan, testified that he was at Plaza Miaga
attending a
dance and the last canvassing of votes for ‘local queen candidates’ at
about 2:00 o’clock in the morning of September 16, 1983. While he was dancing with a certain woman,
he saw Fausto Apalla, Jr., and Antonio Legaspi, simultaneously requesting a woman for
a dance. Later, he saw Fausto Apalla, Jr., pulled out
a ‘machete’. He shouted at Antonio
Legaspi ‘Evitar Bebet’ (TSN., p. 28, June 24, 1983). Antonio Legaspi stepped backward and they grappled for the
possession of the ‘machete’.

“Oscar Legaspi, the accused himself testified that at the time
of the incident he was inside the chapel sleeping. On that night, he took two glasses of tuba and he felt
sleepy. He was woke up (sic) by Miss Abundia Muana, who took refuge in
the chapel because of the quarrel taking place in the plaza. Later he came to know that the persons
involved in the quarrel were Antonio Legaspi and Fausto Apalla, Jr. He denied that he participated in the killing
of Fausto Apalla, Jr.

“Accused Antonio Legaspi testified that at about 2:00 o’clock
in the morning of September 17, 1983, he attempted to dance with a lady. Unfortunately the victim Fausto Apalla, Jr.,
also attempted to dance with the same lady. The lady refused to dance with any of the duo. Immediately after the lady’s refusal, Fausto Apalla, Jr., pulled
out his ‘machete’ and stabbed him. He
was able to grab the ‘machete’ and he prepared to run. However, Fausto Apalla, Jr., pulled out
another ‘machete’ and stabbed him again. He was able to parry the thrust of the victim. While he was parrying the blow of the victim he hit the
latter. After hitting him, he
surrendered to the Brgy. Chairman. The
Brgy. Chairman surrendered him to the P.C., then the P.C. turned him over to
the police authorities of Uson, Masbate, where he was detained for 3 days. He further testified that he saw Oscar
Legaspi in the plaza Miaga at about 11:00 o’clock in the evening of September
16, 1983, and since that time, he did not see him anymore. He declared that he stabbed Fausto Apalla,
Jr., to disable the latter from further
attacking him with a ‘machete’.

“Conrado Garcia
testified that he is a P.C soldier. That on September 16, 1983, he was in Miaga to maintain peace and
order. At about 2:00 o’clock in the
morning of September 17, 1983, he went to plaza Miaga because of a reported
incident involving Antonio Legaspi and Fausto Apalla, Jr. Brgy. Captain Andeza turned over to him a ‘machete’ which was given to Andeza by Antonio Legaspi. When Antonio Legaspi was turned over to him,
he brought the former to the Municipal Building of Uson, Masbate (TSN., July 2,
1983). (pp. 3-5, Appellant’s brief).

According to the appellants, the trial court committed the
following errors:

I

THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED
IN GIVING CREDENCE TO THE TESTIMONY OF FERNANDO SANCHEZ WHO IS AN INTERESTED
PARTY.

II

THE COURT A QUO ERRED IN CONVICTING THE APPELLANTS OF THE CRIME CHARGED DESPITE
THE FAILURE OF THE PROSECUTION TO PROVE HIS GUILT BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT.

III

THE COURT A QUO GRAVELY ERRED
IN NOT APPRECIATING IN FAVOR OF ACCUSED ANTONIO LEGASPI THE MITIGATING
CIRCUMSTANCE OF INCOMPLETE SELF?DEFENSE
AND VOLUNTARY SURRENDER. (Appellant’s
brief, p. 1).

The appellants are correct in stating that the trial court’s
findings on the credibility of witnesses are generally not disturbed on appeal
but that this rule must yield to the “superior and immutable dictum”
that the guilt of the accused must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. (Chase v. Buencamino, Sr., 136 SCRA 365;
Phil. International Shipping Corp., v. National Labor Relations Commission, 136
SCRA 605; Minuchehr v. Court of Appeals, 129 SCRA 479; and People v. Grefiel,
125 SCRA 102). The records, however,
show that the evidence for the prosecution is more credible while that for the
defense defies logic.

The immediate cause of the killing is given by Antonio Legaspi
himself. At two o’clock in the morning
of September 17, 1983, he asked a lady to dance with him. The victim Fausto Apalla, Jr., tried to cut
in and have a dance with the lady
himself. The lady refused to dance with
either of the two.

The testimony of Antonio Legaspi regarding the stabbing incident
is inherently improbable. He stated
that Fausto Apalla, Jr., pulled out a machete and stabbed him but he was able
to grab the
machete and tried to run away with it. He alleges that Apalla pulled out another weapon, similar to an icepick,
and it was while Antonio was parrying the second weapon with the machete that
he unintentionally inflicted the wound which caused the death of the victim.

The number and location of the wounds found on the victim belie
the testimony of Antonio Legaspi. The
victim suffered three punctured wounds and two incised wounds. The stab wounds were on the left chest, the
stomach, and the left lumbar region. The wound on the left chest was 2-1/2 inches deep while the other wound
punctured the small intestines. The
incised wound on the right hand was 4 inches long while that on the left wrist
was 2 inches long. The physician
testified that the wounds were caused
by two different types of weapons thus negating the testimony of the
other accused, Oscar Legaspi, that he was peacefully sleeping in a nearby chapel
when the incident happened.

The records support the
findings of the trial court which stated:

“Tested against the foregoing criteria, the Court finds the
defense’ posture totally shattered and rendered unworthy of credence it having
been clearly and convincingly shown by the prosecution that it was the accused as the unlawful aggressors
for having suddenly and without any warning attacked and wounded on the left
chest with a machete the victim Fausto Apalla, Jr., while the latter was seated on a bench with
Sanchez near the gate of the plaza. In
fact, when Apalla was about to stand, the latter was again stabbed by the
accused hitting him on the stomach. Moments thereafter, accused Oscar Legaspi lost no time in performing his
own part in the conspiracy by stabbing the victim on the left wrist and on the right hand; and, both accused
thereafter chased the victim who, upon being overtaken, was stabbed for the
third time by accused Antonio Legaspi, hitting him on the left buttock causing
him to fall to the ground. All these
indubitably established that not one of the elements of self-defense has been
proved and consequently the defense submission must fail. In the case of People v. Martija,
112 SCRA 528, it was held:

“‘One who rests his case on self-defense must prove the same
by clear and convincing evidence and in so doing, he must rely on the strength of his own evidence and not on the
weakness of that of the prosecution. Even if the evidence of the prosecution is weak, it could not be
disbelieved after the accused himself had admitted the killing.’

The crime committed here is murder qualified by treachery. While abuse of superiority was likewise
proven in this case, the same, like nocturnity, is absorbed in treachery and
cannot be estimated as an independent
aggravating circumstance.” (p. 41, Rollo).

Oscar Legaspi’s defense of alibi that he was asleep inside the
chapel while the stabbing incident was taking place cannot prevail over the
positive testimony that he was also hacking the victim on the right hand and
left wrist while Antonio was using the machete to inflict fatal wounds. The
chapel where Miss Abundia Muana allegedly saw Oscar after the killing is only
around 20 meters from the site of the stabbing. It was an easy thing to walk into the chapel and
be seen there after the incident. Alibi
in this case is an extremely weak defense (People v. Surban, 123 SCRA 218;
People v. Lakandula, 123 SCRA 415; People v. Sambangan, 125 SCRA 726; People v.
Catipon, 139 SCRA 192; People v. Canturia, 139 SCRA 280; People v.
Martinez, 127 SCRA 260; People v. Regato, 127 SCRA 287; and People v. Benaraba,
129 SCRA 266).

The relationship of the key prosecution witness to the victim
does not necessarily disqualify him as biased and interested. A nephew is not incompetent to act as a
witness simply because of his relationship to either the accused or the victim
of a crime (People v. Vengco, 127 SCRA 242; People v. Ibasan, Sr., 129 SCRA 695; People v. Centeno, 130 SCRA
198; People v. Maruhom, 132 SCRA 116; People v. Lopez, 132 SCRA 188; People v.
Cielo, 133 SCRA 117; People v. Cruz, 133 SCRA 426; People v. Gacho, 124 SCRA
671; and People v. Jabeguero, 125 SCRA 144).

The first and second assignments of errors are, therefore,
without merit.

The third assignment of error is based on mistaken premises. The appellants state that the trial court
should have appreciated in favor of Antonio Legaspi the mitigating circumstances of incomplete self-defense and voluntary
surrender.

The fact is that Antonio Legaspi was credited with the
circumstance of voluntary surrender. Hence, while he was the one who inflicted the first blow and the wounds
which actually caused the victim’s death, he was given a lighter penalty than
his co-principal.

The plea of incomplete self-defense is unavailing. The killing was a one-sided affair. Antonio and Oscar Legaspi were the aggressors. They simultaneously attacked the victim. The latter had no chance to defend himself or to escape
the sudden aggression. There was no
opportunity to interpose a defense against the treacherous attack by the two
assailants.

The appellants do not question the damages imposed by the lower
court which, in the light of the records, appear to be correct.

WHEREFORE, the judgment appealed from is hereby AFFIRMED.

SO ORDERED.

Fernan, (Chairman), Paras, Padilla, Bidin, and Cortes, JJ., concur.