PEOPLE v. SABIDA

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, Plaintiff-Appellee vs. DEMETRIO SABIDA y SADIWA, Accused-Appellant

G.R. No. 208359

June 19, 2017

FACTS

Based on the prosecution's evidence, it was established that on July 7, 2009, at 6:30 a.m., Richard Pimentel (Pimentel) and the victim, MacArthur Mawac (Mawac), were walking towards the mountain since Pimentel planned to clean his banana plantation while Mawac was on his way to work as a guard on duty at the Transco Tower located at the foot of the mountain in Barangay Calingag.

While Mawac and Pimentel were walking, Sabida unexpectedly emerged from the road and repeatedly stabbed and hacked Mawac with a bolo. Afterwards, Sabida turned to Pimentel and uttered, "Isa ka pa," prompting the latter to run away. Sabida run after Pimentel but he failed to catch the latter. Immediately thereafter, Pimentel reported the incident to Barangay Captain Hintay, who in tum reported the incident to the police station of Pinamalayan.

At around 8:00 a.m. of the same day, P03 Thaddeus Ferancullo (P03 Ferancullo) and Investigator. Ruelito Magtibay (Investigator Magtibay) proceeded to the crime scene and found the dead body of Mawac on the side of the road, covered with blood, and had several stab wounds at different parts of his body.

Subsequently, P03 Ferancullo and Investigator Magtibay, accompanied by Pimentel, went to Barangay Malaya since it was the last direction where Sabida was seen when he ran off. At around 3:00 p.m., the police officers received a call from Barangay Captain Hintay and was informed that Sabida was seen hiding in an abandoned house. Thereafter, the police officers, alongside Pimentel, went to the abandoned house and found Sabida wearing a sheet of tin under his shirt with a bolo. The police officers then arrested Sabida, confiscated the bolo and apprised him of his rights. 

For his part, Sabida admitted killing Mawac and invoked self-defense. He said that he had a misunderstanding with Mawac and the latter's wife because the couple accused his domestic animals of destroying their palay. He alleged that the couple retaliated by poisoning and stealing his chickens and other farm animals on different occasions. He further narrated that on July 7, 2009, while he was working in his vegetable garden, he saw Pimentel and Mawac walking by. He then heard Pimentel warning Mawac to be careful as he was nearby to which Mawac allegedly responded, "Sige, unahan mo na." This prompted him to confront the two and ask why Mawac was intending to kill him when what he merely wanted to know is where his chicken went. He said that Mawac tried to draw out the bolo tucked under his waist but Sabida was able to defend himself so they struggled and fought off each other. Meanwhile, Pimentel fled the scene while they were fighting. He said that he left Mawac lying on the ground, who, even then, was still taunting him to continue fighting. 

Sabida further said that he sought the help of his aunt Soledad but he was not able to go to her house so he just stayed and rested at an unnamed woman's house. Then he moved to an uninhabited nipa hut and rested there. After an hour, Barangay Captain Hintay arrived, together with armed men, and he surrendered to them. 

After trial, the RTC rendered judgment convicting Sabida of the crime of murder qualified by treachery and sentenced him to suffer the penalty of reclusion perpetua, without the possibility of parole. He was ordered to indemnify the heirs of the victim with PhP30,000 as actual damages, PhP50,000 as civil indemnity;•and PhP50,000 as moral damages.

Sabida filed a Motion for Reconsideration but it was also denied. Thereafter, he filed a Notice of Appeal9 before the CA.

Upon review, the CA dismissed the appeal and affirmed the conviction of Sabida, hence, he appealed his conviction to this Court.

ISSUE

Whether the guilt of sabida for the crime of murder has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

HELD

Yes, it is indisputable that Sabida failed to show that Mawac exhibited unlawful aggression against him. Being the party initiating the attack and armed with a deadly weapon, Sabida cannot successfully claim that there was unlawful aggression. Sabida's self-serving claim of self-defense coupled with the fact that he did not sustain any injury from his supposed attacker fails to support any claim of unlawful aggression. The trial court aptly noted that there was no clear and credible evidence that Mawac was the one who instigated the fight and that Sabida was merely fending off an attack.