Sunteți pe pagina 1din 16

Republic of the Philippines

Court of Appeals
Manila

SPECIAL SEVENTH (7TH) DIVISION

PEOPLE OF THE CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697*


PHILIPPINES,
Plaintiff-Appellee,

Members:
- versus -
CASTILLO, M., J.,
Chairperson
PEREZ, P.A., &
ELISEO PANTE, JR. y **
FIEL-MACARAIG, G.C., JJ.
CABILES,
Accused-Appellant.
Promulgated:

18 Oct. 2018

DECISION
PEREZ, J.:

Before us is an Ordinary Appeal1 under Rule 122 of the


Rules of Court from the Decision2 dated September 13, 2016 of the
Regional Trial Court, National Capital Judicial Region, Branch
140, Makati City (“RTC”), in Criminal Case No. 00-2044 finding
accused-appellant Eliseo Pante, Jr. y Cabiles guilty beyond
reasonable doubt of Murder qualified by Evident Premeditation
under Article 248 (5) of the Revised Penal Code (“RPC”).

* This case was raffled to the undersigned ponente on September 6, 2017, as part of his initial caseload.
** New member, vice J. M.E. Sempio Diy (on leave), who replaced J. D. Bueser (on leave) Office Order
No. 479-18-RFB dated October 5, 2018
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 2 of 16
Decision

Factual Antecedents

Accused-appellant Eliseo Pante, Jr. y Cabiles (“Pante,


Jr.”), together with Jonathan Millet y Miralles (“Millet”)
and AAA* were charged with murder committed as follows3:

That on or about the 29th days of August, 2000,


in the City of Makati, Philippines and within the
jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-
named accused, conspiring and confederating
and all of them mutually helping and aiding
with one another, while armed with bladed
weapon, with intent to kill and with evident
premeditation, did then and there willfully,
unlawfully, and feloniously attack and stab one
HAROLD PASILIAO Y BILILAN, thereby
inflicting upon the latter mortal wound which
directly caused his death.
CONTRARY TO LAW.

Accused AAA was tried and convicted of the offense


charged in the Decision dated August 2, 2003. 1 AAA who
was a minor at the time the crime was committed did not
appeal. Judgment was suspended and he was committed to
the Department of Social Welfare and Development
pursuant to A.M. No. 02-1-18-SC.

Accused Millet remained at large whereas accused


appellant, Pante, Jr. was arrested on March 6, 2014 2, and
was arraigned on March 18, 2014. 3 Trial of Pante, Jr.
thereafter ensued after he was arraigned and pleaded not
guilty.
* The real name of the accused is withheld to protect the confidentiality of proceedings against
the minor accused, pursuant to Amended Administrative Circular No. 83-15 on the use of
fictitious initials and A.M. 02-1-18-SC, Rule on Juveniles in Conflict with the Law.
1 Records, pp. 157-168
2 Records, p. 197
3 Records, p. 203
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 3 of 16
Decision

The facts as narrated by prosecution witnesses,


follow.

On August 27, 2000, at around 11:00 pm, the victim


Harold Pasiliao y Bililan (“Pasiliao”), his girlfriend Myleen
Francisco (“Francisco”), and his friends John Paul
Salvacion (“Salvacion”) and three (3) others, were watching
a dance contest in Barangay Rizal, Makati City.4

Also present were two minors, AAA and one Tiban,


who were horsing around. Francisco got pushed by them so
she transferred and stood on a chair three to four steps
away from the two. Pasiliao then asked the two to behave.5

AAA and Tiban continued to horse around and


sideswiped Francisco who fell from her chair. Pasiliao was
irked so he punched the two. A tanod came and pacified
them. Pasiliao apologized and left with Francisco and his
friends.6

Two days later, or on August 29, 2000, around 7:30


p.m., Salvacion was on his way to Aqua Zero-B (“Aqua”) in
Pembo, Makati City when he noticed that his friends
Pante, Jr., Millet and AAA were standing beside Aqua.
Salvacion approached them and asked if they were waiting
for Pasiliao. They ignored Salvacion who proceeded to Aqua
to get his water containers refilled.7

Moments later, Salvacion saw Pasiliao walking


towards Aqua. Immediately, Pante, Jr., Millet and AAA
surrounded Pasiliao and pulled out ice picks. Pante, Jr.
stabbed Pasiliao with his ice pick and the three scampered.
Tricycle drivers were able to bring Pasiliao to a hospital
where he was pronounced dead on arrival.8
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 4 of 16
Decision

Dr. Romeo Tagala Salen (“Dr. Salen”) performed an


autopsy on Pasiliao's body and issued Pasiliao's Death
Certificate.9

Dr. Salen's Medico-Legal Report disclosed that


Pasiliao died from one (1) stab wound on the mid-portion of
his abdomen, measuring 2 x 0.5 centimeters and twelve
(12) centimeters deep.10 Dr. Salen testified that the wound
might have been inflicted using a sharp-bladed
instrument.11

Pante, Jr. denied knowledge of Pasiliao's killing and


insisted that he only learned of the case for murder when
he was arrested for a gambling violation in 2014. 12 Pante,
Jr. also denied knowing Pasiliao, Millet and AAA 13 and
denied use of the aliases “Jun-Jun” and “Kulit.”14

As defense, Pante, Jr. presented an alibi, which his


older brother, Enrique Pante (“Enrique”) corroborated, that
Pante, Jr. was working as a dishwasher in his uncle's
canteen in Dasmariñas, Cavite from 7:00 a.m. – 9:00 p.m
on the date of the killing and it was impossible for him to
leave the canteen because it was then understaffed.15

Ruling of the Regional Trial Cout

On September 13, 2016, the RTC rendered the


assailed decision convicting accused-appellant, the
dispositive portion16 of which reads:

WHEREFORE, the court hereby finds the


accused Eliseo Pante, Jr. y Cabiles a.k.a. Jun-
Jun or Kulit guilty beyond reasonable doubt of
the the crime of murder for the killing of Harold
Pasiliao y Bililan. The court hereby sentences
him as follows:
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 5 of 16
Decision

1. To suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua


under Article 248 of the Revised Penal Code
without eligibility for Parole pursuant to R.A.
9346.

2. To pay the heirs of Harold Pasiliao y


Bililan the amount of Twenty Three Thousand
and Five Hundred Pesos (P23,500) as actual
damages, One Hundred Thousand Pesos
(P100,000) as civil indemnity, One Hundred
Thousand Pesos (P100,000) as moral damages,
One Hundred Thousand Pesos (P100,000) as
exemplary damages and One Million Nine
Hundred Eighty Four Thousand Pesos
(P1,984,000) as damages for loss of earning
capacity.

Said damages shall earn legal interest at


the rate of six percent (6%) per annum to be
reckoned from the date of finality of this
judgment until fully paid.

SO ORDERED.

The RTC gave credence to Salvacion's testimony


identifying Pante, Jr. as the one who stabbed Pasiliao. The
RTC held that since Salvacion was also friends with Pante,
Jr., he had no motive to wrongly accuse the latter of
murder. Moreover, Salvacion was able to point to a person,
who identified himself as Pante, Jr. during the trial which
was held fifteen (15) years after the stabbing incident. The
RTC was thus convinced that Salvacion could not have
mistakenly tagged Pante, Jr. as the one who stabbed
Pasiliao.17

The RTC also ruled that the killing of Pasiliao is


qualified to Murder by evident premeditation.18
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 6 of 16
Decision

The RTC dismissed Pante, Jr.'s denial and alibi for


being inherently weak defenses against the positive
identification of Salvacion. Further, the RTC noted that it
takes less than two (2) hours to travel from Dasmariñas to
Makati and that Pante, Jr. frequently visited his live-in
partner and children in Makati. Thus, the RTC held that it
was not physically impossible for Pante, Jr. to be at the
locus delicti on the date and time in question.19

Undaunted, Pante, Jr. filed this present appeal.

Issues

Insisting on his innocence, Pante, Jr. assigns the


following errors:20

I. WHETHER PANTE, JR. WAS


POSITIVELY IDENTIFIED AS THE
PERPETRATOR OF THE CRIME;

II.WHETHER PASILIAO IS A CREDIBLE


AND RELIABLE WITNESS;

III.WHETHER THE RTC ERRED IN


DISREGARDING PANTE, JR.'S DEFENSE
OF DENIAL AND ALIBI; AND

IV. WHETHER THE RTC ERRED IN


FINDING THAT THE PROSECUTION
PROVED EVIDENT PREMEDITATION.
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 7 of 16
Decision

The Court's Ruling

This appeal is DENIED.

Salvacion's positive identification of Pasiliao as


assailant deserves full credit

The elements of murder that the prosecution must


establish are (1) that a person was killed; (2) that the
accused killed him or her; (3) that the killing was attended
by any of the qualifying circumstances mentioned in Article
248 of the Revised Penal Code (RPC); and (4) that the
killing is not parricide or infanticide.21

In the present case, the prosecution has sufficiently


established that Pasiliao was killed 22 and that the killing is
neither parricide nor infanticide. What Pante, Jr. disputes
is the existence of the second element, claiming that the
prosecution's eyewitness Salvacion did not positively
identify him as the perpetrator of the offense.23

Pante, Jr.'s assertion is bereft of basis. Salvacion in


his Salaysay,24 direct examination25 and cross-
examination, consistently identified Pante, Jr. as the one
26

who stabbed Pasiliao. The records of this case is thus


teeming with positive identification of Pante, Jr. as the
principal perpetrator of the offense.

Salvacion had a clear line of sight of the killing as he


was then in front of Aqua which was elevated 27 and was
only about ten-steps away from the crime scene28. The light
from the nearby market and lamp post 29 made it easy for
Salvacion to identify Pasiliao's assailants, Pante, Jr., Millet
and AAA, who were his friends and to whom he had spoken
prior to the stabbing incident. With the proximity and
attention afforded Salvacion, coupled with the relative
illumination of the surrounding area, We rule that
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 8 of 16
Decision

Salvacion's positive identification of Pante, Jr. as the one


who stabbed Pasiliao deserves full credit.

Salvacion gave reliable, credible and consistent


testimony

In an effort to discredit Salvacion, Pante, Jr. claims


that Salvacion's testimony that an ice pick was used to stab
Pasiliao is inconsistent with Salvacion's previous Salaysay
that he could not remember the weapon used in the murder
because it happened too fast.30 For his part, Salvacion
explained that he remembered that Pante, Jr. used an ice
pick to stab Pasiliao when he read the Medico-Legal
report.31

The credibility of a witness is not necessarily


damaged or weakened “[w]henever a witness discloses in
his testimony in court facts which he failed to state in his
affidavit ante litem motem.” If what were stated in open
court are but details or additional facts that serve to
supplement the declarations made in the affidavit, these
statements cannot be ruled out as inconsistent and may be
considered by the court.32

Salvacion's court testimony merely specifies the


murder weapon used; hence, Salvacion's court testimony is
not irreconcilably inconsistent with his Salaysay ante litem
motem when at that time he was unable to remember the
exact weapon used. His testimony was properly considered
by the RTC.

Pante, Jr. also claims that Salvacion's testimony that


he became friends with Pante, Jr. through basketball is
belied by Salvacion's previous Salaysay where he made no
mention that Pante, Jr was his friend.33
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 9 of 16
Decision

We are not persuaded. A closer look at the Salaysay


reveals that no question was posed to Salvacion to describe
the nature of his relationship with Pante, Jr. Salvacion was
only asked to identify other persons who were with Pante,
Jr. at the time of the incident, viz:34

T: Maliban kay JUNJUN PANTE, alias Kulit,


may iba pa bang nasasangkot sa pag saksak kay
HAROLD PASILIAO?

S: Mayroon po, si AAA na hindi ko alam ang


buong pangalan nito at si JONATHAN MILET
na barkada ko din po.

Salvacion was only asked to describe the nature of his


relationship with Pante, Jr. for the first time during direct
examination. Thus, the inconsistency ascribed by Pante, Jr.
is more apparent than real.

The rule is that inconsistencies between the


testimony of a witness in open court, on one hand, and the
statements in his sworn affidavit, on the other hand,
referring only to minor and collateral matters, do not affect
his credibility and veracity and the weight of his testimony
as they do not touch upon the commission of the crime
itself.35 Inconsistencies on minor details do not impair the
credibility of the witnesses where there is consistency in
relating the principal occurence and positive identification
of the assailant.36

In prosecutions for murder, what is vital is not the


witnesses' knowledge of the weapon used, but that they
saw the accused stab the victim. As a matter of fact, the
presentation of the murder weapon is not even
indispensable to the prosecution of an accused. 37
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 10 of 16
Decision

As We have previously discussed, Salvacion has


consistently identified Pante, Jr. as the one who stabbed
Pasiliao. His credibility and reliability as witness can not
be doubted.

The findings of the trial court on the credibility of


witnesses deserve great weight, given the clear advantage
of the trial judge (an opportunity not available to the
appellate court) in the appreciation of testimonial evidence.
The trial court is always in the best position to assess the
credibility of witnesses and their testimonies because of its
unique opportunity to observe the witnesses, their
demeanor, conduct and attitude on the witness stand.
These are the most significant factors in evaluating the
reliability of witnesses and in ferreting out the truth,
specially in the face of conflicting testimonies. Although
this rule admits of certain exceptions, We find no reason to
depart from this rule in the case at bar.38

Defenses of denial and alibi must fail

Positive identification where categorical and


consistent and without any showing of ill-motive on the
part of the eyewitness testifying on the matter prevails
over a denial which, if not substantiated by clear and
convincing evidence is negative and self-serving evidence
undeserving of weight in law. They cannot be given greater
evidentiary value over the testimony of credible witnesses
who testify on affirmative matters.39

We agree with the finding of the RTC that the defense


has not proven any ill-motive on the part of Salvacion to
accuse Pante, Jr. of killing Pasiliao. Salvacion was friend
with both the victim and the accused and merely testified
for he wanted to see justice be done. 40 Salvacion's
friendship with Pasiliao does not disqualify him from
taking the witness stand. Rather, Salvacion's desire to
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 11 of 16
Decision

bring to justice those whom he personally knew committed


a crime against a close friend makes his identification of
the accused all the more credible. Salvacion's positive and
consistent identification of Pante, Jr. as the one who
stabbed the victim inevitably trumps the latter's defense of
denial.41

On the other hand, to establish alibi, the accused


must prove (a) that he was present at another place at the
time of the perpetration of the crime, and (b) that it was
physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the
crime. Physical impossibility “refers to the distance
between the place where the accused was when the crime
transpired and the place where it was committed, as well
as the facility of access between the two places.42

Pante, Jr. alleged that he was working in his uncle's


canteen in Dasmariñas at the time of the incident, and that
the canteen was understaffed. There is no proof of this in
the records. Pante, Jr. thus fails to convince this Court that
he was at his uncle's canteen at the time of the killing.
Enrique who also worked in the canteen 43 and is accused-
appellant's older brother cannot by his testimony favorable
to a sibling overcome the positive identification of the
accused-appellant by a disinterested witness. Pante, Jr.'s
alibi became even less plausible, corroborated as it was by
a close relative who is predisposed to lie on the witness
stand.44

We also agree with the finding of the RTC that, with


the current means of land transportation, it would take less
than two (2) hours to negotiate Dasmariñas to Makati.
Given the proximity between the two places and the
availability of transportation it was not physically
impossible for Pante, Jr. to be in Makati on that fateful
night of August 29, 2000. 45 Clearly, Pante, Jr. did not
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 12 of 16
Decision

satisfy the two (2) requirements to establish alibi as a


defense.

Evident Premeditation was proven

To establish the qualifying circumstance of evident


premeditation, there must be proof of (1) the time when the
offender determined to commit the crime, (2) an act
manifestly indicating that the culprit has clung to his
determination, and (3) a sufficient lapse of time between
the determination and execution to allow him to reflect
upon the consequences of his act and to allow his
conscience to overcome the resolution of his will had he
desired to hearken to its warnings.46

Evident premeditation must be based on external acts


and must be evident, not merely suspected, indicating
deliberate planning. Otherwise stated, there must be a
demonstration by outward acts of a criminal intent that is
notorious and manifest. When it is not shown as to how
and when the plan to kill was hatched or what time had
elapsed before it was carried out, evident premeditation
cannot be considered.47

In the present case, the prosecution was able to show


that the accused were standing beside Aqua immediately
prior to the stabbing incident as if in wait for someone; that
the accused were all armed with ice picks; that the accused,
acting as one, surrounded Pasiliao when he arrived at the
scene and blocked his way ostensibly to prevent escape,
enabling Pante, Jr. to stab the latter; that the accused
attacked Pasiliao without any provocation from the latter;
that Pante, Jr.'s younger brother, Tiban and AAA got in an
altercation with Pasiliao two (2) days prior to the stabbing
incident. All these evince deliberateness and planning. It
was not spontaneous violence; the attack was a deliberate
act of revenge. We rule therefore that the prosecution
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 13 of 16
Decision

sufficiently established the qualifying circumstance of


evident premeditation.

Penalty and Awards

Under Article 248 of the RPC, as amended, the


penalty imposed for the crime of murder is reclusion
perpetua to death. There being no aggravating or
mitigating circumstance, the penalty imposed on accused-
appellant is reclusion perpetua pursuant to Article 63,
paragraph 2 of the RPC48. However, accused-appellant is
disqualified under R.A. No. 934649, in relation to Resolution
No. 24-4-1050 to avail of the benefits of Parole.51

Conformably with People v. Jugueta, G.R. No.


202124, April 5, 2016, as the circumstances surrounding
the murder of Pasiliao call for the imposition of reclusion
perpetua only, there being no ordinary aggravating
circumstance, We modify the awards by granting civil
indemnity of Seventy-five Thousand Pesos (Php 75,000.00),
moral damages of Seventy-five Thousand Pesos (Php
75,000.00), and exemplary damages of Seventy-Five
Thousand Pesos (Php 75,000.00).

We sustain the award for actual damages in the


amount twenty-three thousand five hundred pesos (Php
23,500.00) as funeral and burial expenses being supported
with receipts (Ex. H-1 – H-2)52 and the award for loss of
earning capacity in the amount of One Million Nine
Hundred Eighty-four Thousand Pesos (Php1,984,000.00) 53
it being established that Pasiliao was eighteen (18) years
old54 at the time of his death and was earning a gross
annual income of ninety-six thousand pesos (Php
96,000.00) as a Disco Jockey at Audio Bass Mobile in
Comembo, Makati City (Ex. I – I-2).55
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 14 of 16
Decision

The foregoing damages shall earn six percent (6%) per


annum interest from the finality of this judgment until full
satisfaction.56

WHEREFORE, the appealed Decision dated


September 13, 2016 of the Regional Trial Court, National
Capital Judicial Region, Branch 140, Makati City (“RTC”),
in Criminal Case No. 00-2044 is AFFIRMED with
MODIFICATIONS.

Accused-appellant ELISEO PANTE, JR. Y


CABILES is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the
crime of Murder qualified by Evident Premeditation under
Article 248 (5) of the Revised Penal Code and is hereby
sentenced to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua
without eligibility for Parole pursuant to R.A. No. 9346, in
relation to Resolution No. 24-4-10, with MODIFICATION
accused-appellant is ORDERED TO PAY to the heirs of
the late Harold Pasiliao Y Bulilan civil indemnity of
Seventy-five Thousand Pesos (Php 75,000.00), moral
damages of Seventy-five Thousand Pesos (Php 75,000.00),
exemplary damages of Seventy-five Thousand Pesos (Php
75,000.00). The award of actual damages for funeral and
burial expenses of Twenty-three Thousand Five Hundred
Pesos (Php 23,500.00), and indemnity for loss of earning
capacity in the amount of One Million Nine Hundred
Eighty-four Thousand Pesos (Php 1,984,000.00), plus six
percent (6%) per annum interest on all such items of civil
liability from the finality of the judgment until full
satisfaction, is AFFIRMED.

SO ORDERED.

(original signed)
PABLITO A. PEREZ
Associate Justice
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 15 of 16
Decision

WE CONCUR:

(original signed)
MARIFLOR P. PUNZALAN-CASTILLO
Associate Justice

(original signed)
GERALDINE C. FIEL-MACARAIG
Associate Justice

CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to Article VIII, Section 13 of the


Constitution, it is hereby certified that the conclusions in
the above decision were reached in consultation before the
case was assigned to the writer of the opinion of the Court.

(original signed)
MARIFLOR P. PUNZALAN-CASTILLO
Associate Justice
Chairperson, Special Seventh Division

1 Rollo, p. 11
2 Rollo, pp. 45-57
3 Records, p. 3
4 Rollo, p. 46
5 Ibid.
6 Rollo, p. 47
7 Ibid.
8 TSN, pp. 1 – 21, at p. 7
9 TSN, pp. 1 – 17, at p. 6
10 TSN, pp. 1 – 17, at p. 10
11 TSN, pp. 1 – 17, at p. 15
12 TSN, pp. 1 – 9, at pp. 6-7
13 TSN, pp. 1 – 9, at p. 5; p. 8
14 TSN, pp. 1 – 6, at p. 4
CA-G.R. CR-HC No. 08697 Page 16 of 16
Decision

15 TSN, pp. 1 – 20, , at pp. 6-7


16 Rollo, pp. 45-57
17 Rollo, p. 52
18 Rollo, pp. 54-55
19 Rollo, pp. 51-54
20 Rollo, p. 5
21 People v. Casas, G.R. No. 212565, February 25, 2015
22 Records, p. 259-260
23 Rollo, p. 28
24 Records, p. 13
25 TSN, pp. 1 – 21, at p. 7
26 TSN, pp. 1 – 21, at p. 14
27 TSN, pp. 1 – 21, at p. 19
28 TSN, pp. 1 – 21, at p. 17
29 TSN, pp. 1 – 21, at p. 6
30 Records, p. 13
31 TSN, pp. 1 – 21, at p. 14
32 Kummer v. People, G.R. No. 174461, September 11, 2013
33 Rollo, pp. 34-35
34 Records, p. 13
35 Kummer v. People, supra.
36 People v. Calara, G.R. No. 197039, June 5, 2013
37 Ibid.
38 People v. Lindo, et. al., G.R. No. 134506, December 27, 2002
39 People v. Lansangan, G.R. No. 201587, November 14, 2012
40 TSN, pp. 1 – 21, at p. 17
41 People, v. Guanson, et.al., G.R. No. 1309966, December 13, 2001
42 People v. Mosquerra, et.al., G.R. No. 129209, August 9, 2001
43 TSN, pp. 1 – 20, at p. 9
44 TSN, pp. 1 – 20, at p. 19
45 People v. Baroquillo, G.R. No. 184960, August 24, 2011
46 People v. Derilo, et.al., G.R. No. 117818, April 18, 1997
47 Ibid.
48 People v. Gutierrez, G.R. No. 188602, February 4, 2010
49 Sec. 3 thereof states that “[p]ersons convicted of offenses punished with reclusion
perpetua...shall not be eligible for parole under Act No. 4103, otherwise known as the
Indeterminate Sentence Law, as amended.
50 Entitled “RE: AMENDING AND REPEALING CERTAIN RULES AND SECTIONS OF
THE RULES ON PAROLE AND AMENDED GUIDELINES FOR RECOMMENDING
EXECUTIVE CLEMENCY OF THE 2006 REVISED MANUAL OF THE BOARD OF
PARDONS AND PAROLE.” Pertinent portion of the rule reads:

RULE 2.2 Disqualifications for Parole – Pursuant to Sec. 2 of Act 4103, as amended,
otherwise known as the “Indeterminate Sentence Law,” parole shall not be granted to the
following inmates:
xxx xxx xxx
i.Those convicted of offenses punished with reclusion perpetua...

51 People v. Asamuddin, G.R. No. 213913, September 2, 2015


52 Records, pp. 101-102
53 Records, p. 56
54 Records, p. 98
55 Records, p. 103
56 People v. Dasmarinas. supra.

S-ar putea să vă placă și