ADVERTISEMENT
THIRD DIVISION
[G.R. No. 219110. April 25, 2018.]
PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee,vs. ALFREDO ANDAYA, accused-appellant.
NOTICE
Sirs/Mesdames :
Please take notice that the Court, Third Division, issued a Resolution datedApril 25, 2018, which reads as follows: CHTAIc
"G.R. No. 219110 (PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ALFREDO ANDAYA, Accused-Appellant.) — This review revisits the decision promulgated on July 31, 2014, 1 whereby the Court of Appeals (CA) affirmed the decision issued on July 23, 2012 by the Regional Trial Court (RTC), Branch 38, in Maddela, Quirino finding appellant Alfredo Andaya guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of parricide for the fatal stabbing of his wife Josie Andaya in the evening of August 20, 2009. 2
On November 4, 2009, the Office of the Provincial Prosecutor of Quirino charged Andaya with parricide through the information that alleged as follows:
That on or about 11:30 o'clock in the evening of August 20, 2009, at the Public Market of Maddela, Poblacion Sur, Maddela, Quirino, Philippines and within the preliminary jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the said accused with intent to kill did then and there wilfully, unlawfully and knowingly stab with the use of a knife Josie Andaya hitting her on the different parts of her body, the latter being his legitimate wife, thereby inflicting upon her fatal wounds which caused his (sic) death shortly thereafter.
CONTRARY TO LAW.
The CA gave the following factual and procedural antecedents, viz.:
During trial, the prosecution presented the testimonies of Racquel Agapen, Wilfredo Bolhayon and Abe Nicolas in evidence while the defense presented appellant as its lone witness. In the appealed decision, the trial court gave a summary of the witnesses' testimonies as follows:
RACQUEL AGAPEN, of legal age and a restaurant owner testified that at dusk of August 20, 2009, she and her husband (Wilfredo Bolhayon), including their lone helper (Joy Andaya) were at their restaurant near the lagoon at Poblacion Sur, Maddela, Quirino. Alfredo Andaya, Joy's husband who was intoxicated, arrived. Wilfredo and Alfredo then drunk one bottle of gin which lasted until 10:30 p.m. Thereafter, they all left the restaurant to eat "lugaw" at the highway. Subsequently, they returned to their restaurant at around 11:00 p.m. to sleep. The witness and her live-in partner slept at the kitchen, while Joy and Alfredo where (sic) on top of a large serving table. There is a walling between them. Shortly, the Bolhayons heard a commotion and Wilfredo stood up to verify, with Racquel in tow. Racquel saw Alfredo pressing his wife to the wall and Joy had a stab wound. Alfredo pulled out a 14 inches knife from Joy's chest near the armpit and he told them that he will kill them all. Wilfredo backed off and pulled a table to block the accused, but the latter was still able to injure the former's right shoulder. Racquel screamed and because of this, the accused left the restaurant. She reported the incident to a certain Police Officer Dela Cruz of the Maddela Police Station and immediately, policemen went with her to the restaurant. They saw the victim being cradled by the accused who was uttering, "If you die, I will also kill myself." The accused also stabbed himself in the abdomen. The victim, the accused and Wilfredo Bolhayon were all brought to the hospital for treatment but on the way thereto, the victim expired. In the course of her testimony, Racquel identified her sworn statement (Exhibit "B") and also the accused.
On cross-examination, the witness clarified that Joy and Josie are one and the same person. She also recalled that the accused arrived at the restaurant with Rey Nicolas who drank with them for awhile and then left. Rey did not sleep at the restaurant with them.
WILFREDO BOLHAYON, of legal age, testified that in the evening of August 20, 2009, he was at his bar cum restaurant ("RWW") which was being managed by his then live-in partner, Racquel Agapen. At past 9 p.m., Alfredo Andaya came with one Rey Nicolas and they had a drinking spree. Racquel and Josie Andaya served them with Red Horse beer. Thereafter, the witness and Racquel together with Alfredo and Josie went to the highway to eat "lugaw." Rey was left behind because he fell asleep after drinking beer. When they returned to his restaurant, they all went to sleep. He woke up with his live-in partner when they heard a scream and they saw Alfredo stabbing his wife, Josie. At this juncture, he tried holding Alfredo, but the latter stabbed him on the shoulder forcing him to retreat. His live-in partner screamed and the accused went out. Rey Nicolas was awaken (sic) by the noise and he ran away. The witness and his live-in partner went to the police station to report the incident. Policemen came with them to their restaurant where they saw the accused holding his wife. When the authorities were about to arrest him, the accused stabbed himself in the abdomen saying, "I will also commit suicide because I stabbed my wife to death." The accused even pulled out his intestine. They were brought to the hospital, but Josie died on the way thereto. The witness identified the accused in open court in the course of his testimony.
On cross-examination, the witness testified that he did not turn off the lights at the dining area when he slept and it was lighted all thru out that night.
ABE NICOLAS, 60 years old, and a resident of Muyudan, Manglad, Maddela, Quirino, testified that he is the father of the victim Josie Nicolas-Andaya. His daughter died on August 20, 2009 and it was his nephew, Rolly Leaño, who informed him about her death. They went to the Diduyon Hospital and there they saw his daughter already dead. They brought the cadaver to an embalmer after which they took her home to Muyudan. They made the casket themselves. His daughter's wake lasted for 4 days and 4 nights. They then buried her at the municipal cemetery. All in all, they actually spent around P26,000.00. He was emotionally in pain for what happened to his daughter. His wife even fainted because of what happened to their child. Josie had 4 minor children and they are all living with the witness and his wife. He said that what they need is justice for his daughter.
ALFREDO ANDAYA, of legal age and married, testified that at around 9 p.m. of August 20, 2009, he was at the stall of Racquel Agapen beside the lagoon at Poblacion Sur, Maddela, Quirino. He had a drinking spree with one Rey Nicolas. The other persons thereat were his wife Josie, Wilfredo Bolhayon and Racquel Agapen. Their drinking session lasted for an hour and at 10 p.m., he went out with his wife together with Wilfredo and Racquel to eat "arozcaldo" (sic) at the highway. Rey Nicolas was left at the stall because he fell asleep. After eating, they went back to the stall and prepared themselves to sleep. He slept with his wife on top of a table inside the restaurant while Wilfredo and Racquel stayed in the kitchen. Rey slept 3 meters away from them. While already asleep, he was awakened by his wife's scream. He woke up and saw her on the floor bloodied. He went to her and embraced her. Their other companions were also awaken (sic). Wilfredo and Racquel went out and returned in the company of policemen. Rey also went out, but did not return to the place anymore. He denied having inflicted the wounds on his wife. Neither is he aware of who did that to her. On cross-examination, he said that he saw a knife near his wife and picked it up. Worried about what has happened to her, he tried to kill himself with the knife. 3 EATCcI
As stated, the RTC convicted Andaya of parricide on the basis of the positive identification made by two witnesses of the Prosecution, and also because of his spontaneous declaration while cradling his dying wife inside the restaurant that he "will also commit suicide because I stabbed my wife." 4 The RTC disposed:
WHEREFORE, premises considered, judgment is hereby rendered finding Alfredo Andaya GUILTY beyond reasonable doubt of parricide and sentences him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua. However, his preventive imprisonment shall be fully credited to him in the service of his sentence pursuant to Article 29 of the Revised Penal Code, as amended.
Accused is ordered to pay the heirs of Josie Nicolas Andaya the amount of: 1) P25,000.00 as temperate damages; 2) P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; 3) P50,000.00 as moral damages; and 4) P30,000.00 as exemplary damages, all with interest of 6% per annum from the date of finality of the decision until fully paid.
With the category of the accused as a national prisoner, the Clerk of Court is directed to prepare the corresponding mittimus or commitment order for his transfer to the Bureau of Corrections and Penology, Muntinlupa City.
SO ORDERED.
On appeal, the CA, according weight to the positive identification of Andaya as the killer of his wife by the State's witnesses, affirmed the judgment of conviction through the assailed decision. 5 The CA observed that the witnesses were consistent in their identification of Andaya as the last person seen with his wife, and in attesting that he had stabbed her; that he had also stabbed Wilfredo Bolhayon, one of the witnesses; that Andaya had stabbed himself in the abdomen; and that he had uttered that he "will also commit suicide because I stabbed my wife;" that whatever were the inconsistencies in the testimonies of the witnesses were too trivial to affect the substance of the evidence against him; and that his bare denial did not prevail over the witnesses' positive identification of him as the killer. The fallo states:
WHEREFORE, the appeal is DENIED. The appealed decision of the trial court finding accused Alfredo Andaya GUILTY of the crime of parricide, is hereby AFFIRMED.
SO ORDERED. 6
Issue
The Office of the Solicitor General (OSG), 7 and Andaya, represented by the Public Attorney's Office, 8 separately manifested that they were adopting their respective briefs filed in the CA and would not be submitting their supplemental briefs.
In this appeal, therefore, Andaya insists that the findings by the RTC and CA were contrary to facts, law and applicable jurisprudence; 9 that inconsistencies pertaining to the lighting of the area where he was found with his deceased wife, the position of his deceased wife when he supposedly stabbed her, and the failure of the Prosecution to present Rey Nicolas and the investigating police officers as witnesses were significant enough to acquit him of the charge of parricide. 10
Ruling of the Court
We affirm the findings of the RTC and CA.
To prove parricide, the State must establish beyond reasonable doubt three things, namely: (1) that a person is killed; (2) that the accused is the killer; and (3) that the deceased is either the legitimate spouse of the accused, or any legitimate or illegitimate parent, child, ascendant or descendant of the accused. 11 The Prosecution and the Defense can stipulate on the legitimate relationship of the accused and the victim at pre-trial, which is what happened herein. Thus, the Prosecution herein only needed to establish the first and second elements of parricide.
The fact of death of the late Josie Andaya was duly established by the testimony of her father, Abe Nicolas, who had personally seen and positively identified her lifeless remains in the hospital, and who had then brought the remains to the embalmer before the remains had been placed in the wooden casket he had himself made. His testimony sufficiently established that the victim had died.
As to the perpetrator of the crime, Racquel Agapen and Bolhayon, the witnesses presented by the State, individually positively identified Andaya as the person who had wielded the knife that he pulled out of his wife's chest. They described how Andaya had lunged at them upon seeing both of them coming out of the other room, injuring Bolhayon in the process. They also attested to his spontaneous declaration as he cradled his dying wife about killing himself should she die. There is no question, indeed, that Andaya had stabbed her, and thereby caused her death.
Andaya pointed to supposed inconsistencies on the part of the Prosecution witnesses. However, the supposed inconsistencies were properly held by the CA to be insignificant because they did not disprove the commission of the crime. The identification of Andaya as the perpetrator was firm and positive enough. In this connection, the non-presentation of the investigating police officers and of the medico-legal report did not diminish the proof of guilt adduced herein.
We reiterate that the factual findings of the RTC as the trial court were entitled to respect as it was the RTC that had the best position to make such findings and reach conclusions on the veracity and credibility of the witnesses. We stress that Agapen and Bolhayon, who consistently narrated during direct and cross examination the acts of Andaya in committing the crime, were entitled to greater credence than the latter who tendered nothing but bare denial. 12
Pursuant to Article 246 13 of the Revised Penal Code, the penalty is reclusion perpetua due to the passage of Republic Act No. 9346. 14
Nonetheless, to conform to prevailing jurisprudence, 15 the Court increases the amounts granted to the heirs of the late Josie Nicolas-Andaya to P75,000.00 for each of the civil indemnity, moral damages, and exemplary damages; and imposes P50,000.00 as temperate damages (in lieu of actual damages for the funeral expenses).
WHEREFORE, the Court AFFIRMS the decision of the Court of Appeals promulgated on July 31, 2014 in all respects subject to the MODIFICATION that the accused shall pay to the heirs of the late Josie Nicolas Andaya P75,000.00 as civil indemnity; P75,000.00 as moral damages; P75,000.00 as exemplary damages; and P50,000.00 as temperate damages, plus interest of 6% per annum on all such items of civil liability reckoned from the finality of this resolution until full satisfaction.
The accused shall further pay the costs of suit. DHITCc
SO ORDERED."
Very truly yours,
(SGD.) WILFREDO V. LAPITANDivision Clerk of Court
Footnotes
1.Rollo, pp. 2-11; penned by Associate Justice Romeo F. Barza (now Presiding Justice), and concurred in by Associate Justice Hakim S. Abdulwahid and Associate Justice Ramon A. Cruz.
2. CA rollo, pp. 36-41; penned by Judge Menrado V. Corpuz.
3.Rollo, pp. 2-6.
4.Supra note 2.
5.Supra note 1.
6.Rollo, p. 11.
7.Id. at 24-29.
8.Id. at 19-21.
9.Id. at 12-13.
10. CA rollo, pp. 19-34.
11.People v. Macal, G.R. 211062, January 13, 2016, 780 SCRA 656, 666.
12. See People v. Nepomuceno, G.R. 127818, November 11, 1998, 298 SCRA 450, 464.
13. Art. 246. Parricide. — Any person who shall kill his father, mother, or child, whether legitimate or illegitimate, or any of his ascendants, or descendants, or his spouse, shall be guilty of parricide and shall be punished by the penalty of reclusion perpetua to death.
14.An Act Prohibiting The Imposition of Death Penalty in The Philippines, repealing Republic Act 8177 otherwise known as the Act Designating Death by Lethal Injection, Republic Act 7659 otherwise known as the Death Penalty Law and all other laws, executive orders and decrees.
15.People v. Delfin, G.R. No. 201572, July 9, 2014, 729 SCRA 617, 630.