You're currently signed in as:
User
Add TAGS to your cases to easily locate them or to build your SYLLABUS.
Please SIGN IN to use this feature.
https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c3e9b?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09
[PEOPLE v. LEODIZON HONRADO](https://www.lawyerly.ph/juris/view/c3e9b?user=fbGU2WFpmaitMVEVGZ2lBVW5xZ2RVdz09)
{case:c3e9b}
Highlight text as FACTS, ISSUES, RULING, PRINCIPLES to generate case DIGESTS and REVIEWERS.
Please LOGIN use this feature.
Show printable version with highlights

[ GR No. L-16499, Sep 30, 1963 ]

PEOPLE v. LEODIZON HONRADO +

DECISION

118 Phil. 939

[ G.R. No. L-16499, September 30, 1963 ]

THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. LEODIZON HONRADO, ET AL., DEFENDANTS AND APPELLANTS.

D E C I S I O N

BENGZON, C.J.:

This is an appeal from the decision of the Court of First Instance of Pangasinan finding the above appellants guilty of murder and sentencing each of them  to  life imprisonment and to indemnify the heirs of the deceased Tan Sek Yee in  the sum of P6,000.00, with costs.

Said appellants were charged with murder allegedly committed  in May, 1959, in barrio Carmen, municipality of Rosales, province of Pangasinan.  The information alleged that said accused,  conspiring together and mutually aiding one another with  intent to kill, feloniously attacked Tan Sek Yee and inflicted upon him wounds and injuries that caused  instant death.

After a plea of not  guilty, trial ensued  and judgment was subsequently  rendered, from which all of the above accused, seeking acquittal therefrom,  presented appeals to this Court.  The  lower  court, they contend, erred  in  finding:  (1) that the  offended party had  been  killed with treachery; (2) that in the commission of the  crime, conspiracy among the three appellants had existed.

The prosecution has  proved that  in  the afternoon of May  30,  1959, in  the United  Restaurant of Carmen,  Rosales,  Pangasinan, Leodizon  Honrado and Regino  Leonin sat with one named "Kenkoy" engaged in a drinking spree. While sipping beer, one of them tossed a bottle under the table whereat the waitress Gliceria  Quicho and her companions were enjoying  their  lunch.  Presently, the  said two  accused, Leodizon and  Regino caused a disturbance, bumping and toppling down  the chairs.  So, Tan Sek  Yee, the old Chinese owner  of the restaurant, emerged from his room to stop the trouble..  But the two resisted, fought the owner,  even dragged him outside  the restaurant, where the said two accused continued  boxing their victim,  who naturally - defended himself.  At this  juncture, a passenger jeepney bearing plate No.  42489, (Pangasinan) arrived; and  Anselmo  Leonin, alighting  from  the vehicle,   pulled an iron bar from its front  seat and then rushed  to  join the scuffle.   Without warning,  said Anselmo struck the Chinese with the  iron bar three  times.  The first blow on the left side of the head forced  Tan Sek  Yee to fall  into a sitting position.  The  second  and third blows,  hit the left side of his neck.  Whereupon, the Chinaman  fell on the ground, and  Anselmo rushed back  to his jeepney to drive away on the road to  Manila.  The accused  Regino and Leodizon, after the victim had fallen, returned to the Restaurant.

The Chinaman  died immediately of cerebral hemorrhage due to fracture of the skull and laceration of the brain. Dr. Rodolfo C. Flores, who  performed the autopsy, attributed the   wound and  fracture  to  blows from a blunt instrument, like an iron bar.

Both  Regino Leonin and  Leodizon Honrado denied all participation in the commission of  the offense.  Regino swore that all the time, he and Leodizon Honrado were at the United Restaurant drinking liquor; that they had proceeded to said place  after  having imbibed some wine in the market of Carmen;  that while they were there, nothing beyond the ordinary happened inside the said restaurant ; that as he was drunk, he could not remember  anything,  except having gone back and forth from his seat and that later, a PC soldier took him to the municipal building.

Leodizon Honrado corroborated the testimony of Regino. He stated that on May 30, 1959, after having had  some drinks in the Rosales market, he went to the United Restaurant and met Regino on the way; that there he drank some more, this time with another man called" Kenkoy"; that while they were drinking, the owner of the restaurant, Tan Sek Yee, went to their table and inquired who of them would  pay the bill; that when said "Kenkoy" answered that he  would, the Chinese insulted them, calling: them "balasubas; that upon  hearing this insult, he stood up, pushed "Lolo" (the Chinese)  to  the door of the  restaurant and told the latter to  leave them (the drinkers)  alone; that when  he returned to their table, his  companions Regino and "Kenkoy" were gone; that he once more sat down to resume his lebation.  He  also swore that  although he knows Anselmo Leonin, he did not meet him that day, May 30, 1959, nor the  day before.

On his part, the accused Anselmo Leonin  claimed that on May 30, he drove his jeepney to   pick up  passengers beginning at about 6:00 o'clock in the morning; took his lunch  in Carmen  at noon, and  continued his  driving until about  6:00 o'clock in the afternoon when he  was arrested for the  death of Tan  Sek Yee.   To confirm  his story, he presented Wilfredo Cabegas, the conductor of his jeepney. After carefully  examining the record, we are persuaded beyond reasonable doubt that the evidence sufficiently shows both   accused  Regino Leonin and Leodizon Honrado  to have laid violent hands upon Tan Sek Yee; and that appellant Anselmo Leonin delivered the fatal blow with an iron bar.

Under the  circumstances, however, is it right to hold all three accused,  guilty of murder?  Did conspiracy exist in the commission of  the crime?

The trial court found conspiracy to exist because Leodizon Honrado and Regino Leonin entered the United Restaurant together and provoking the victim to anger, they dragged him around the place and beat him up; and during the scuffle, Anselmo Leonin, brother of Regino, entered the scene to deliver the fatal blow with an iron bar.  Thus the lower court concluded that there  was a common purpose to liquidate the Chinaman, the said two accused, Regino and Leodizon having performed acts  without  which Anselmo  Leonin could not have treacherously made the attack.

The  evidence introduced during the trial, does not support the  conclusion that when Leodizon Honrado and Regino Leonin entered the restaurant, they had made plans to kill the deceased.  No motive has been shown that would kindle the desire to liquidate said Chinaman.  The arrival of the accused Anselmo was purely coincidental.  The fight happened in a street that said  Anselmo regularly  passed with his jeepney.  He joined the scuffle upon the impulsie of the moment. Seeing his  brother  in  a  mix-up,  he  reacted spontaneously.

In People vs. Ibañez, 77 Phil. 664, Cosme  Magalong and Sixto Ibanez  had a quarrel.   Cosme ran and was pursued by Sixto Ibanez.  Overtaking him, Sixto held Cosme around the neck from behind.  And while they were struggling, Irineo, who  had followed  Sixto (his brother)  suddenly stabbed Cosme to death.  As held by this Court, only Irineo was guilty of murder.  Sixto  was acquitted, because he was not  aware of the murderous intent of his brother. The same doctrine was applied in People vs. Delfin, L15230, L-45979-81,  July 31, 1961.   In that case, while Francisco and Renato were fighting, Eladio (cousin of  the latter) approached and suddenly stabbed Francisco.   We held Eladio to be solely responsible for frustrated murder, in the absence of conspiracy, the wounding having been unexpected.

The alibi of the defendants  must be  discounted.  Prosecution witnesses David Knopt [1] and his wife, saw and described the  events.   Their testimonies  are  consistent, corroborative and clear.  These witnesses being complete strangers to the appellants, could have no motive to falsely testify; and Jesus Gloria, 55, identified them too.  Finally, the arrest of Anselmo and Regino on the  same day clinched the case.

Considering that when the accused Anselmo mortally hit the victim, Tan Sek Yee was trying to defend himself (by parrying the blows from the accused Regino and Leodizon) he could not have been aware of any other assailant.  And as the attack of Anselmo was sudden, there was treachery. In view of the foregoing, we hold that as recommended by the Solicitor-General, Regino Leonin and Leodizon Honrado should be held guilty only of slight physical injuries; but  Anselmo  Leonin should be convicted of murder.

Consequently,   heeding  the  official   recommendation, appellants Regino Leonin and  Leodizon  Honrado are each sentenced to 20 days of arresto menor under Art. 266 of the  Revised Penal  Code.   On the other hand, appellant Anselmo Leonin is sentenced to reclusion perpetua and to pay the heirs of the deceased Tan Sek Yee, the amount of P6,000.00  Costs against appellants.

Padilla, Labrador, Barrera, Paredes, Dizon, Regala, and Makalintal, JJ., concur.

 


[1] Wrote down the license number of the jeepney in a Free Press magazine which he then carried.

tags