THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 205377. January 29, 2014.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. PORFIRIO AGUILA, JR. Y LEONA @ "DAYO", accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution dated January 29, 2014, which reads as follows:
"G.R. No. 205377 (People of the Philippines v. Porfirio Aguila, Jr. y Leona @ "Dayo"). — On August 29, 2000 the Provincial Prosecutor of Oriental Mindoro charged the accused Porfirio Aguila, Jr. a.k.a. "Dayo" (Aguila) with murder before the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of that province in Criminal Case C-6212.
Eduardo Manahan testified that at about 8:00 p.m. on June 4, 2000 he was urinating by a coconut tree outside his house in Malayas, Victoria, Oriental Mindoro, when he saw his neighbor, accused Aguila, suddenly appear from a grassy area five meters front where he stood and stabbed Ricardo Solano twice on his back with a small bolo called "gulokan." Although wounded, Solano managed to run some five meters towards the house of Arman Matining. Aguila caught up with him and, holding him by the neck with one hand, stabbed him on his chest. Aguila said, "Pinipilit akong magalit pero nagbabago na ako." He then left Solano and walked towards his house which was five meters away. CcaASE
At this point, with the help of Domingo and Arturo Santos, Manahan brought Solano to the St. Lawrence Hospital in Poblacion III, Victoria, Oriental Mindoro, but he soon died. Because Solano had no relative in Victoria, Manahan and others contributed money for his wake and burial.
The medico-legal officer who autopsied Solano's body reported that the latter sustained two stab wounds on the left and right parts of his chest, two stab wounds on the upper portion of his back, one stab wound on the upper part of his abdomen, and one stab wound on the lateral aspect of the thoracic area. The immediate cause of his death was massive blood loss secondary to multiple stab wounds.
In his defense, accused Aguila denied killing Solano. He claimed that at about 8:00 p.m. on June 4, 2000, he and one Fatima Sulit were in his sister's store in barangay Malayas III, Victoria, Oriental Mindoro, waiting for a ride that would take them to the terminal of buses bound for Pinamalayan, Oriental Mindoro. After an hour at the store, Aguila heard his friend Ferdinand Gonzales shouting from about five meters away, "Takbo kayo, may nag-aaway!" He then saw several people, also shouting, run towards the Poblacion.
Accused Aguila further claims that, since he had no interest in what was going on, he did not bother to follow and find out what it was all about. He left his sister's store and accompanied Sulit to the bus terminal. He then went home to Quezon province to work as a miner for his uncle. Aguila also claimed that he knew Manahan who testified against him since he worked in a shop near Aguila's house. He was puzzled, however, why Manahan testified against him. Aguila had not met Solano. TaCEHA
On February 3, 2010 the RTC found accused Aguila guilty of murder with the qualifying circumstance of treachery and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua and to pay Solano's heirs P150,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P50,000.00 as exemplary damages and to pay the costs. Aguila appealed to the Court of Appeals (CA) in CA-G.R. CR-HC 04609. On February 3, 2010, however, the CA affirmed in toto the judgment of the trial court, hence, the present appeal.
Accused Aguila contends that it was unnatural for Manahan when he witnessed the killing of Solano to be outside his house, publicly exposing himself as he urinated. But it was nighttime and Manahan did not urinate in the street but in the cover of a coconut tree just outside his house. This practice still takes place in certain rural areas in the country.
Accused Aguila also contends that Manahan had serious inconsistencies in that he claimed in his affidavit that Solano was driving a tricycle when he was attacked, whereas Manahan later testified that the attack occurred while Solano was alighting from a tricycle. But, as the RTC said, this is but a minor discrepancy that does not diminish the fact that Manahan witnessed the slaying of Solano. Testimonial inconsistencies in minor details strengthen rather than weaken a testimony since they preclude the likelihood that it had been rehearsed. 1 Besides, affidavits seldom reproduce with accuracy what the witness had in mind, since their declarations are often put on paper with the help of other persons. 2
True, Solano was killed during nighttime but the fluorescent lamp from a nearby welding shop cast light on the commotion taking place on the street and Manahan saw the thing happen from just five meters away. DaTICE
The Court agrees with the CA that the matter of weighing the credibility of the testimonies of the witnesses is best left to the trial judge who heard such testimonies and sensed the ease, the tension, or the difficulty that accompanied them. Only when the judge's appreciation of the evidence is clearly not warranted by the evidence and the recorded testimonies will the Court step in to correct the error. 3 This is not the case here.
Accused Aguila's alibi actually weighs against him for it places him at the vicinity of the crime when it took place. By his own estimate, the commotion tools place about 20 meters from her sister's store where he and Sulit were supposedly waiting for a ride.
WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the Decision of the Court of Appeals in CA-G.R. CR-HC 04609 dated May 8, 2012 that in turn affirmed the Decision of the Regional Trial Court of Oriental Mindoro in Criminal Case C-6212 dated February 3, 2010, finding accused-appellant Porfirio Aguila, Jr. y Leona, a.k.a. "Dayo" GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of murder, imposing on him the penalty of reclusion perpetua, and ordering him to pay the heirs of Ricardo Solano P150,000.00 as civil indemnity, P75,000.00 as moral damages, and P50,000.00 as exemplary damages as well as to pay the costs.
SO ORDERED." SAHEIc
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) LUCITA ABJELINA SORIANODivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1. People v. Navarro, 404 Phil. 290, 308 (2001).
2. People v. Lusa, 351 Phil. 537, 544 (1998).
3. People v. San Juan, 337 Phil. 375, 385 (1997).