THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. ISAGANI DESLATE AND ROMY FRANCISCO ALIAS “ROMEO FRANCISCO”, ACCUSED. ISAGANI DESLATE, APPELLANT.

The accused, lsagani Deslate, appeals from the decision of the Regional Trial
Court,^[1]
convicting him for the murder of Roberto Cipriano and
sentencing him to reclusion perpetua.

The accused was charged originally with Romy
Francisco; however, the latter has remained at large and has a warrant
out for his arrest.

The evidence for the prosecution shows that on December 7, 1980,
the victim was with Ben San Miguel in Barangay
Estancia, Kalibo, Aklan,
attending a town fiesta.  At or about
9:30 in the evening, the two were at a nearby store where San Miguel purchased
cigarettes.  The victim was then settled
on a bench when the accused Romy Francisco emerged
from behind, and thrust a knife on his back. 
By instinct, he rose to confront his assailant and as he faced him, the
accused, Isagani Deslate,
appeared and buried his own knife on his chest. 
As he fell down, his companion, San Miguel, scampered away.  Deslate gave him a
chase but lost him.

Placido Aguirre told the court further
that he saw Francisco and Deslate on the night in
question walking toward the store, and heard Deslate
tell Francisco:  “he is … the
one.”^[2]
Moments later, he saw Francisco knifing the victim at the back.  The latter, he said, was seated on a bench
facing Kalibo (meaning, the opposite direction), and
who, upon being hit, swung his head to the right.  As he turned, however, Deslate
lunged at him with a knife and hit him on his chest.  The victim fell down.

The victim was shortly dead, and:

xxx                            xxx                               xxx

It is established that the victim suffered two (2) stab wounds
which are as follows:  (1) Stab wound,
chest, anterior right one inch in length, 1/2 inch above the right nipple with
non-clotting blood oozing from it, (2) Stab wound back – one inch in length,
nine inches below the nape of the neck, with non-clotting blood oozing from it.

One of the internal findings is that the right lung, the inferior
lobe was hit and the presence of wound therein is one inch in length.

It is further established that the cause of death is hemorrhage,
severe due to penetrating stab wound, chest, right.^[3]

Deslate denied the above criminal
imputations and insisted that it was Francisco and a certain Boy Oquendo who killed Roberto Cipriano.  He admitted that he was there (at the scene
of the crime) but maintained that he never lifted a finger to harm the
victim.  He said that he did not render
the latter assistance because “[i]t did not come
to [my] mind because [I was] afraid.”^[4]

As we indicated at the outset, the trial court convicted Deslate of murder. 
He now urges a reversal, contending that the court a quo erred in
accepting the evidence for the prosecution and finding him guilty on the basis
thereof.  We are not, however, convinced
that a reversal is called for. 
Accordingly, we affirm.

lsagani Deslate
has been positively identified as one of the two assailants, who knifed the
victim to death.  He has shown no motive
whatsoever for the prosecution’s witnesses, Ben San Miguel and Placido Aguirre, to manufacture their testimonies at the
witness stand.

His defense is one of mere denial, and we have time and again
held that denial can not prevail over positive identification.  And so also, that credibility of witnesses is
left to the sound discretion of the judge and in accepting one testimony and
rejecting another, he can not be overturned by the appellate tribunal unless he
has seriously abused his discretion.  We
do not find that to be the case here, and quite to the contrary, the records
themselves reveal that he, truly, is guilty beyond reasonable doubt.

The trial court did not err in rejecting his story, which we
quote:

xxx                            xxx                               xxx

Accused lsagani Deslate’s
defense is a denial, imputing the killing not only to accused Romy Francisco who has been at large but also to another
person by the name of Boy Oquendo who had long been
dead and who can no longer protest against said imputation of a crime to him as
his lips had long been sealed by death.^[5]

xxx                            xxx                               xxx

Moreover, according to defense witness, Endelicio
Panado, Boy Oquendo (rather
than Deslate) stabbed the victim at the back;
however, Teresita Amaradora,
also a defense witness, testified that he, Oquendo,
hit him on the chest.  As the lower court
observed:

xxx                            xxx                               xxx

But then defense witness Endelicio Panado was asked in the direct examination, “when Robert
Cipriano fell after he was stabbed by Romeo Francisco
what happened?” Panado’s answer was, “Boy Oquendo stabbed Robert Cipriano
hitting Robert Cipriano at his back.”

On the other hand, defense witness Teresita
Amaradora was asked in the direct examination,
“When boy Oquendo stab Robert Cipriano, what part of his body was hit?” Her answer
was, “Robert Cipriano was hit on his
chest.”^[6]

The Court agrees with these findings and the appellant can not
now pretend that his version is better.

His parting shot that the trial judge erred in imposing reclusion
perpetua (there being no aggravating or mitigating
circumstances), can neither prosper. 
There is no merit in his contention that the penalty for murder, in view
of the provision of the Constitution banning death sentences, has been amended
to reclusion temporal maximum to reclusion perpetua,
for which reason, the proper penalty is allegedly the middle ground between
these two penalties.  In the case of
People v. Muñoz,^[7]
the Court held, over the dissent of six Justices,^[8]
that the penalty for murder is still reclusion temporal maximum to death,
although where death appears to be the proper penalty, the court shall not
impose it, but shall sentence the accused to reclusion perpetua.  Notwithstanding the aforementioned dissent,
Munoz has apparently gone down as the prevailing law.

There being no aggravating nor mitigating circumstances that
attended the offense, reclusion perpetua is the
proper penalty.^[9]

That Isagani Deslate
in killing Robert Cipriano, is guilty of murder, is
justified by the fact that the assault was attended by treachery, in which he
stabbed the latter with no warning and with no risk to himself.

WHEREFORE, the decision appealed from is AFFIRMED.  Costs against the appellant.

SO ORDERED.

Melencio-Herrera, (Chairman), Paras, Padilla, and Regalado, JJ., concur.

^[1]
Branch 3, Kalibo,
Aklan; Hon. Gerardo Pepito,
Presiding Judge.

^[2]
Rollo, 19.

^[3]
Id., 20.

^[4]
Id., 55.

^[5]
Id., 21-22.

^[6]
Id., 21-22.

^[7]
G.R. Nos. L-38968-70, February 9, 1989, 170 SCRA 107; Narvasa,
Melencio-Herrera, Paras, Sarmiento, Cortes, and Regalado,
JJ., dissenting.

^[8]
The ponente was one of them.

^[9]
See supra.