People vs. Trinidad

Where the wound inflicted on the victim is not sufficient to cause death, the crime is only Attempted Murder, not Frustrated Murder, the accused not having performed all the acts of execution that would have brought about death. Additionally, with the abolition of capital punishment under the 1987 Constitution, the penalty for Murder is reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua.

Emeliano Trinidad was a member of the Integrated National Police assigned at the Nasipit Police Station in Agusan del Norte, residing at Baan, Butuan City. The victims, Lolito Soriano and Marcial Laroa, were fish dealers based in Davao City, with Ricardo Tan serving as their driver. On January 20, 1983, the group traveled from Butuan City toward Davao City aboard a Ford Fiera, with Trinidad boarding the vehicle in Buenavista after asking for a ride to Bayugan, Agusan del Sur. The incident occurred along the stretch between El Rio and Afga while the vehicle was en route.

On January 19, 1983, fish dealer Lolito Soriano, his helper Marcial Laroa, and driver Ricardo Tan arrived at Butuan City from Davao City aboard a Ford Fiera to sell fish. The following morning, Soriano drove the Fiera to Buenavista, Agusan del Norte, accompanied by Laroa and a helper of one Samuel Comendador, while Tan remained at the Langihan market in Butuan City to dispose of the remaining fish. Tan followed separately to Buenavista at around 11:00 a.m. aboard another fish car.

While at Buenavista, Emeliano Trinidad, a police officer in uniform carrying a carbine and a .38 caliber revolver, asked for a ride to Bayugan, Agusan del Sur, which was along the route to Davao City. The group departed Butuan City at about 5:20 p.m. on January 20, 1983, with Tan driving the Fiera. Soriano sat to Tan's right, with Laroa and Trinidad seated in that order. When they reached the stretch between El Rio and Afga, Trinidad advised them to drive slowly, claiming the place was dangerous. Suddenly, two gunshots rang out. Soriano and Laroa slumped dead, both hit on the head. Tan, alerted by the first gunfire, witnessed Trinidad shoot Soriano with the carbine. Although Tan did not see the shooting of Laroa, the latter was also killed.

Tan hastily jumped off the still-moving Fiera and hid in the bushes. He heard another shot emanating from the Fiera. After about twenty to thirty minutes, Tan hailed a passing passenger jeep and sat in the front seat. Shortly thereafter, he noticed Trinidad seated at the back. Trinidad ordered Tan to approach him, but Tan instead moved backward and ran around the jeep, with Trinidad in pursuit. As the jeep began to drive away, Tan clung to its side. Trinidad fired two shots, one of which struck Tan on the right thigh. Tan then jumped to a second passing jeep, but its passengers forced him out. He crawled until a member of the Philippine Constabulary found him and helped him board a bus for Butuan City.

Trinidad's defense rested on denial and alibi. He claimed to have been in Cagayan de Oro City on the date of the incident, it being his birthday. He testified that he left his residence at Baan, Butuan City, at about 3:00 p.m. on January 20, 1983, took a bus for Cagayan de Oro City, and arrived at around 8:00 p.m., proceeding to his sister's house at Camp Alagar to collect his subsistence allowance. He stated that Sgt. Caalim, Mrs. Andoy, and one Paelmo were present at his sister's house, and Sgt. Caalim corroborated having seen him there. Trinidad further claimed that he left Cagayan de Oro at lunchtime on January 21, 1983, arrived in Butuan at about 6:00 p.m., and was arrested at Buenavista while on his way to Nasipit to report for duty.

The trial court, after joint trial on the merits, was unimpressed by the defense and found Trinidad guilty beyond reasonable doubt of two counts of Murder and one count of Frustrated Murder, sentencing him to reclusion perpetua for each Murder count and prision mayor medium for Frustrated Murder, with corresponding indemnity awards.

• Insufficiency of Evidence: Petitioner contended that the adduced evidence was insufficient to prove his guilt beyond reasonable doubt for the crimes charged.
• Unreliability of Eyewitness: Petitioner alleged that prosecution witness Ricardo Tan was unreliable, citing alleged inconsistencies between Tan's testimony before the NAPOLCOM Hearing Officer and his testimony in open court, including whether Tan was in the vehicle when Trinidad boarded in Buenavista, and discrepancies regarding the uniform Trinidad wore.
• Absence of Gunpowder Burns: Petitioner argued that the absence of gunpowder burns on the deceased victims negated Tan's claim that they were shot "point-blank."
• Alibi: Petitioner maintained that he was in Cagayan de Oro City on the date of the incident, corroborated by Sgt. Caalim, and therefore could not have committed the crimes.

• Credibility of Eyewitness: Whether the testimony of prosecution witness Ricardo Tan was credible and sufficient to sustain a conviction despite alleged inconsistencies.
• Sufficiency of Alibi: Whether the defense of alibi can prevail over the positive identification by the eyewitness.
• Frustrated vs. Attempted Murder: Whether the crime committed against Ricardo Tan is Frustrated Murder or only Attempted Murder.
• Penalty for Murder: Whether the penalty for Murder should be modified in light of the 1987 Constitution's abolition of capital punishment.

• Credibility of Eyewitness: Yes. Tan's testimony was found credible, the alleged inconsistencies being either satisfactorily explained or trivial in nature, and no ill motive was attributed to him to prevaricate the truth.
• Sufficiency of Alibi: No. Alibi is inherently weak and cannot prevail over the straightforward, detailed, and unshaken testimony of an eyewitness who was present at the scene and was himself a victim.
• Frustrated vs. Attempted Murder: The crime is only Attempted Murder. The wound on Tan's thigh was not fatal, and the accused did not perform all the acts of execution that would have produced the felony by reason of causes other than his own spontaneous desistance.
• Penalty for Murder: Yes. With the abolition of capital punishment under the 1987 Constitution, the penalty for Murder is now reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua, and the indeterminate sentence must be adjusted accordingly.

• Credibility of Eyewitness: The alleged inconsistency regarding Tan's presence in the Fiera when Trinidad boarded in Buenavista was explained by the fact that Tan was still at the Langihan market distributing fish when the Fiera first left for Buenavista; Tan only followed later in a separate vehicle and joined the Fiera on the return trip to Davao City. Tan's own testimony clarified this sequence. The other inconsistencies cited — whether Trinidad wore khaki or fatigue uniform, and whether he wore a cap — were trivial details that did not affect the positive identification of Trinidad or detract from Tan's overall credibility. Tan was in the vehicle where the killing transpired, witnessed the actual shooting of Soriano, and was himself a victim who narrowly escaped death. No ill motive was attributed to him to prevaricate the truth. His testimony remained unshaken even on cross-examination. The prosecution further presented Felimon Comendador, a fish vendor, who corroborated seeing Trinidad riding in the Fiera with Tan, Soriano, and Laroa.

• Sufficiency of Alibi: The defense of alibi is inherently weak, especially when weighed against the positive and detailed identification by an eyewitness who was present at the scene. Trinidad's claim that he was in Cagayan de Oro City, even if corroborated by Sgt. Caalim, could not overcome Tan's straightforward narration of the events. The physical impossibility of Trinidad being at the crime scene was not established with sufficient certainty, and alibi cannot prevail over the credible testimony of a witness who had no motive to lie.

• Frustrated vs. Attempted Murder: The defense itself correctly contended that the crime against Tan could only be Attempted Murder. Trinidad had commenced the commission of the felony directly by overt acts but was unable to perform all the acts of execution which would have produced the killing by reason of causes other than his own spontaneous desistance. The jeep to which Tan was clinging was in motion, and a spare tire shielded other parts of his body. Crucially, the wound on Tan's thigh was not fatal. The doctrinal rule is that where the wound inflicted on the victim is not sufficient to cause death, the crime is only Attempted Murder, the accused not having performed all the acts of execution that would have brought about death.

• Penalty for Murder: With the abolition of capital punishment in the 1987 Constitution, the penalty for Murder is now reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua. With no attending mitigating or aggravating circumstance, the penalty is imposable in its medium period — from eighteen years, eight months and one day to twenty years. The penalty next lower in degree for purposes of the Indeterminate Sentence Law is prision mayor maximum to reclusion temporal medium, or from ten years and one day to seventeen years and four months, pursuant to Article 61, paragraph 3 of the Revised Penal Code.

• Frustrated vs. Attempted Murder (Non-fatal wound) — Where the wound inflicted on the victim is not sufficient to cause death, the crime is only Attempted Murder, the accused not having performed all the acts of execution that would have brought about death. Applied in this case: the wound on Tan's thigh was not fatal, and external factors (the moving jeep and the spare tire shielding his body) prevented Trinidad from completing all acts of execution; accordingly, the conviction for Frustrated Murder was downgraded to Attempted Murder.

• Weakness of Alibi Against Positive Identification — Alibi is inherently weak and cannot prevail over the straightforward, detailed, and unshaken testimony of a credible eyewitness who was present at the scene. Applied here: Trinidad's alibi that he was in Cagayan de Oro City could not overcome Tan's positive identification, which was corroborated by an independent witness.

• Trivial Inconsistencies Do Not Impair Credibility — Minor discrepancies in a witness's testimony on trivial details (e.g., type of uniform, wearing of a cap) do not affect the witness's overall credibility or the positive identification of the accused, especially where the core of the testimony is consistent and straightforward.

• Effect of the 1987 Constitution's Abolition of Capital Punishment — With the abolition of capital punishment under the 1987 Constitution, the penalty for Murder is reduced to reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua, and the corresponding indeterminate sentence must be computed accordingly under the Indeterminate Sentence Law.

• "the doctrinal rule is that where the wound inflicted on the victim is not sufficient to cause his death, the crime is only Attempted Murder, the accused not having performed all the acts of execution that would have brought about death" — This passage states the ratio decidendi for downgrading the conviction from Frustrated Murder to Attempted Murder, articulating the controlling distinction between frustrated and attempted felonies based on the fatal character of the wound.

• "with the abolition of capital punishment in the 1987 Constitution, the penalty for Murder is now reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua" — This passage reflects the Court's application of the newly ratified 1987 Constitution to pending criminal cases, reducing the penalty for Murder from reclusion perpetua and adjusting the indeterminate sentence accordingly.

• "TAN's testimony remained unshaken even during cross-examination. No ill motive has been attributed to him to prevaricate the truth. He was in the vehicle where the killing transpired was a witness to the actual happening, and was a victim himself who managed narrowly to escape death despite the weaponry with which TRINIDAD was equipped." — This passage summarizes the Court's assessment of eyewitness credibility, emphasizing the absence of ill motive and the witness's presence at the scene as factors sustaining the conviction.

• People vs. Phones, L-32754-5, July 21, 1978, 84 SCRA 167 — Cited as authority for the doctrine that where the wound inflicted is not sufficient to cause death, the crime is only Attempted Murder. Followed in this case to downgrade the conviction from Frustrated Murder to Attempted Murder.

• People vs. Garcia, L-40106, March 13, 1980, 96 SCRA 497 — Cited alongside People vs. Phones for the same doctrine on non-fatal wounds and attempted murder. Followed.

• People vs. Lopez, et al., G.R. No. 71876-76, January 25, 1988 — Cited as authority for the proposition that with the abolition of capital punishment under the 1987 Constitution, the penalty for Murder is reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua. Followed to modify the penalty imposed by the trial court.

• People vs. Gavarra, No. L-37673, October 30, 1987 — Cited within People vs. Lopez as supporting authority for the reduced penalty for Murder post-1987 Constitution. Followed.

• People vs. Masangkay, G.R. No. 73461, October 27, 1987 — Similarly cited within People vs. Lopez as supporting authority for the effect of the abolition of capital punishment on the penalty for Murder. Followed.

• Article 61, paragraph 3, Revised Penal Code — Provides the rule for computing the penalty next lower in degree for purposes of the Indeterminate Sentence Law. Applied to determine the minimum of the indeterminate sentence for Murder: prision mayor maximum to reclusion temporal medium, or from ten years and one day to seventeen years and four months.

• 1987 Constitution (abolition of capital punishment) — The 1987 Constitution's prohibition on the death penalty reduced the penalty for Murder from reclusion perpetua (as the maximum under the old regime) to reclusion temporal in its maximum period to reclusion perpetua, requiring modification of the penalties imposed by the trial court.

Paras, Padilla, Sarmiento, and Regalado, JJ., concurred.