PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLEE, VS. MANUEL GUTIERREZ (AT LARGE); JUANCHO GUTIERREZ (AT LARGE); ESTING CARIÑO (AT LARGE) AND ZACARIAS CASTILLO, ACCUSED-APPELLANT.

People of the Philippines versus Castillo

The Case

This is a criminal appeal in a case of multiple murder and multiple frustrated murder. The People of the Philippines prosecuted four men for the ambush of a passenger jeep at dawn in Barangay Sanlibo, Bayambang, Pangasinan, on the eighth of January 1992. Three passengers died and four were wounded by gunfire. Three of the accused remained at large, so trial proceeded only against Zacarias Castillo, who set up the defense of alibi. The case matters because it is a compact review of several doctrines tested together: the deference owed to the trial court on the credibility of witnesses, the weight of affidavits and police blotter entries against open court testimony, the inference of conspiracy from the acts of the perpetrators, the nature of treachery, the weakness of alibi, and the fine grading line between frustrated and attempted murder.

Procedural History

An information for multiple murder and multiple frustrated murder was filed against Manuel Gutierrez, Juancho Gutierrez, Esting Cariño, and Zacarias Castillo. Castillo pleaded not guilty. His three co-accused remained at large, so trial proceeded only against him. The trial court, the Regional Trial Court, found Castillo guilty beyond reasonable doubt of three counts of murder and four counts of frustrated murder, and acquitted him of illegal possession of firearm for failure of the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. Castillo appealed to the Supreme Court, assigning as errors the crediting of the testimony of the spouses Lorenzo de Leon and Catalina de Leon, the rejection of his alibi, and his conviction for the crime charged.

Facts

At about five o'clock in the morning of the eighth of January 1992, Lorenzo de Leon was driving a Sarao passenger jeep owned by his father, Vicente de Leon, toward San Carlos City to attend a hearing in an attempted murder case. With him were Vicente, Catalina, Gregoria, Aldrin, Racquel Agbuya, and Guillermo Tapiador. While the jeep moved slowly on a bumpy and rugged road in Sanlibo, four men fired at the right side of the jeep from about three meters away. The headlights illuminated the assailants, whom Lorenzo and Catalina knew: Castillo and Cariño were from their barangay, and the Gutierrezes were from an adjacent barrio. Lorenzo and Castillo are cousins.

Lorenzo jumped off the jeep and crawled to the grass, then ran to Barangay Idiong, from where he was rushed to the hospital. Catalina was hit in the arm. Vicente de Leon, Aldrin de Leon, and Guillermo Tapiador died of gunshot wounds. The police recovered at the scene twenty empty shells of an M-16 rifle, seven empty shells of a carbine or thirty caliber, and four empty shells of a Springfield 1903 or garand rifle. The physician testified that Catalina's wounds could have been fatal without timely medical treatment, while the wounds of Gregoria, Lorenzo, and Racquel were not shown to be fatal.

Castillo denied participation and claimed he was working as a painter in Antipolo, Rizal, on the day of the incident, corroborated by co-workers and his live-in partner. The trial court upheld the prosecution's version and convicted him. On appeal, the Supreme Court affirmed the finding of guilt but modified the characterization of the offenses.

Issues

• Whether or not the trial court erred in giving credence to the testimonies of Lorenzo de Leon and Catalina de Leon over their affidavits and the police blotter entry.
• Whether or not the trial court erred in rejecting the accused's defense of alibi.
• Whether or not conspiracy and treachery attended the killing.
• Whether or not the accused is guilty of four counts of frustrated murder, or of one count of frustrated murder and three counts of attempted murder.

Applicable Provisions

Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code, as referred to in the information, 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.

This is the crime charged, qualified by treachery, which the Court found present.

Article 6 of the Revised Penal Code, also invoked in the information, distinguishes the stages of execution:

Article 6. Consummated, frustrated, and attempted felonies. Consummated felonies, as well as those which are frustrated and attempted, are defined in this article. A felony is consummated when all the elements necessary for its execution and accomplishment are present; and it is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony as a consequence but which, nevertheless, do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the will of the perpetrator. There is an attempt when the offender commences the commission of a felony directly by overt acts, and does not perform all the acts of execution which should produce the felony by reason of some cause or accident other than his own spontaneous desistance.

This provision governs the Court's recharacterization of the wounds of the three surviving victims as attempted, not frustrated, murder.

Ruling

On the first issue, the Court held that the credibility of witnesses is best left to the trial court, which observed their demeanor. Affidavits are subordinate to open court declarations, and police blotter entries are not conclusive proof of the identities of assailants. The witnesses testified to what actually happened: they saw Castillo among the four men who fired at them.

On the second issue, the Court held that alibi is inherently weak and easily fabricated, especially when corroborated by relatives and friends. The voucher showing Castillo worked on the day of the crime was not identified by its issuer and had no probative value as hearsay. Alibi cannot prevail over positive testimonies.

On the third issue, the Court found conspiracy unmistakable, inferred from the acts of the perpetrators before, during, and after the crime, which indicate a common design, concerted action, and concurrence of sentiments. When conspiracy is shown, the act of one is the act of all. The attack was treacherous, being sudden and unexpected on unsuspecting victims who had no chance to defend themselves.

On the fourth issue, the Court held that while the information charged a complex crime, prevailing jurisprudence required three separate counts of murder. It found error in convicting Castillo of four counts of frustrated murder. Only Catalina's wounds could have been fatal without timely medical treatment, so the accused is guilty of one count of frustrated murder. As there was no evidence that Gregoria, Lorenzo, and Racquel sustained fatal wounds, the accused did not perform the last act necessary to produce the consummated crime, and he was convicted of three counts of attempted murder.

Doctrine

A Bar candidate should retain these rules. First, the trial court's assessment of witness credibility is accorded deference, and affidavits and police blotter entries are subordinate to open court testimony. Second, alibi is inherently weak, especially when corroborated by relatives and friends, and cannot overcome positive identification. Third, conspiracy may be inferred from the acts of the perpetrators before, during, and after the crime, and when conspiracy is shown, the act of one is the act of all. Fourth, treachery is the sudden and unexpected attack on an unsuspecting victim, depriving the victim of any chance to defend himself. Fifth, under Article 6, a felony is frustrated when the offender performs all the acts of execution which would produce the felony but which do not produce it by reason of causes independent of the perpetrator's will; there is an attempt when the offender commences the commission directly by overt acts but does not perform all the acts of execution. Thus, absent proof of fatal wounds, the crime is attempted, not frustrated, murder.

Disposition

The Supreme Court modified the trial court's decision, finding Castillo guilty of three counts of murder, one count of frustrated murder, and three counts of attempted murder, with corresponding penalties and civil indemnity, and affirmed his acquittal of illegal possession of firearm.

Remember This

The single line worth memorizing is that when conspiracy is shown, the act of one is the act of all, and the stage of execution turns on whether the wounds inflicted were fatal but for timely medical intervention. Examiners like to use this case to test the grading of frustrated versus attempted murder and the weight of alibi against positive identification.