56 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. De Paz

*
G.R. No. 86436. August 4, 1992.

PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs.

JOVENCIO DE PAZ, accused-appellant.

Evidence; Criminal Law; Being wife and daughter of victim

do not make said witnesses not credible.·The fact that Anacorita
and Myrna Florendo were the wife and daughter of the victim,
respectively, does not necessarily indicate that they are biased
witnesses as

__________________

* SECOND DIVISION.

57

VOL. 212, AUGUST 4, 1992 57

People vs. De Paz

to impair the credibility of their testimonies which are otherwise

positive and clear. Relationship between the victim and the
witness does not undermine the credibility of the latterÊs
testimony. Established is the rule that the mere fact that the
witness is a relative of the victim is not a valid or sufficient
ground to disregard the formerÊs testimony nor does it render the
same less worthy of credit, in the absence of ill motive. On the
contrary, it would be unnatural for such persons interested in
obtaining justice for the victims of the crime to impute the same
to any person other than those responsible therefore.
Furthermore, when there is nothing in the records which would
show a motive or reason on the part of the witnesses to falsely
implicate the accused, identification should be given full credit.
And when there is no evidence and nothing to indicate that the
principal witness for the prosecution was moved by improper
motives, the presumption is that he was not so moved, and his
testimony is entitled to full faith and credit.
Same; Same; Alibi weakest of all defenses.·Alibi is the
weakest of all defenses especially in the absence of proof that it
would have been physically impossible for said accused to have
been at the scene of the crime. To establish alibi, accused must not
only show that he was present at some other place at about the
time of the commission of the alleged crime but that it was also
physically impossible for him to have been at the place where the
crime was committed either before, during or after the time he
was at such other place, which accused failed to do in the case at
bar.
Same; Judgment, Judges; Due Process; Judge who did not
hear case may write decision thereon.·While it is true that the
trial judge who conducted the hearing would be in a better
position to ascertain the truth or falsity of the testimonies of the
witnesses, it does not necessarily follow that a judge who was not
present during the trial cannot render a valid and just decision
since the latter can also rely on the transcribed stenographic
notes taken during the trial as the basis of his decision.

APPEAL from the decision of the Regional Trial Court of

Palo, Leyte, Gal-lang, J.

The facts are stated in the opinion of the Court.

The Solicitor General for plaintiff-appellee.
Manuel L. Villegas for accused-appellant.

58

58 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. De Paz

NOCON, J.:

This is an appeal1
by accused-appellant Jovencio de Paz
from the decision dated June 25, 1987 of the Regional Trial
Court of Palo, Leyte, Branch VIII, Eighth Judicial Region
in Criminal Case No. 5767, the dispositive portion of which
reads:

„PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Court finds Jovencio de Paz

guilty beyond reasonable doubt of the crime of Murder which is
punishable by Reclusion Temporal in its maximum period to
death. Applying the Indeterminate Sentence Law, he is sentenced
to suffer the penalty of Prision Mayor in its maximum period to
Reclusion Temporal in its medium period or TEN (10) YEARS and
ONE (1) DAY to SEVENTEEN (17) YEARS and FOUR (4)
MONTHS, with all the accessory penalties provided for by law, to
indemnify the heirs of Floro Florendo the amount of THIRTY
2
THOUSAND (P30,000.00) PESOS and to pay the costs.‰

On October 14, 1983, an information was filed against

Silverio Mijares, Jr., Telesforo Almaden and Jovencio de
Paz for the crime of MURDER committed as follows:

„That on or about the 13th day of August, 1983, in Brgy. Salvador,

Municipality of Tanauan, Province of Leyte, Philippines, within
the jurisdiction of this Honorable Court, the above-named
accused, conspiring and confederating with one another, taking
advantage of their superior strength and with treachery, did then
and there willfully and feloniously attack and assault, with the
use of deadly weapons, Floro Florendo, inflicting upon the latter
multiple incised wounds on the left arm, an amputating wound on
the right arm, and seven separate incised wounds on the different
parts of his body, which injuries caused the death of Floro
3
Florendo.‰

On November 8, 1983, a warrant of arrest was issued

against the three accused but only Silverio Mijares, Jr. was
arrested and when arraigned pleaded guilty to the lesser
offense of homicide and was accordingly convicted.

_________________

1 Penned by Presiding Judge Lolita O. Gal-lang.

2 RTCÊs Decision, p. 7, Rollo.
3 Page 13, Record.

59

VOL. 212, AUGUST 4, 1992 59

People vs. De Paz

On March 28, 1984, accused-appellant Jovencio de Paz

was arrested in Manila and when arraigned on February
19, 1985, entered a plea of not guilty with the assistance of
his counsel.
The facts as found by the trial court are as follows:
At around 2:30 P.M. of August 13, 1983, while the victim
Floro Florendo, his wife Anacorita and their 3 children
Myrna, Florita and Solario, all surnamed Florendo, were
cleaning the garden at Barangay Salvador, Tanauan, Leyte,
the accused-appellant Jovencio de Paz together with his
co-accused Silverio Mijares, Jr. and Telesforo Almaden, all
armed with long bolos, approached and surrounded the
victim. Suddenly, accused-appellant hacked the victimÊs
breast with his bolo. The victim retreated from the accused-
appellant but fell on the ground after only a few steps, with
his face-up. As the victim lay defenseless on the ground,
Silverio Mijares, Jr. and Telesforo Almaden hacked him in
different parts of his body with their bolos.
While said incident was happening, Anacorita Florendo
and her 3 children were about 5 meters away, shouting for
help and pleading with the 3 accused to spare the victimÊs
life. Anacorita even picked up a piece of wood to strike her
husbandÊs attackers in a futile effort to defend him from his
assailant but only to retreat when Silverio Mijares, Jr.
turned toward her.
Thereafter, accused-appellant and his 2 companions left
and went toward Barangay Salvador leaving the lifeless
body of the victim lying prostrate on the ground.
Anacorita Florendo, on the other hand, immediately
proceeded to the house of Barangay Captain Conrado
Ifugat and reported the incident in question. The barangay
captain together with a PC soldier accompanied Anacorita
to the place where she left her husbandÊs lifeless body and
brought the same to their house.
An autopsy of the victimÊs body was conducted by the
municipal health officer of Tanauan, Leyte, Dr. Paciencia L.
Ofalla, who stated in her report as follows:

„1. Incised Wound·4 1/2 inches long, 1 1/2 inches wide

with brain tissue exposed located at the right
temporal region.
2. Incised Wound·of the mouth 3 inches long 1/2 inch
wide injuring the upper and lower lips, with the
teeth underneath destroyed.

60

60 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. De Paz

3. Incised Wound·at the left lateral portion of the

neck with 3/ 4 of the neck circumference
amputated, and with the skin, muscles, blood
vessels and crecoid cartilages severely destroyed.
4. Incised Wound·right arm half amputated, with
muscles, blood vessels & bone severely damaged.
5. Right forearm distal portion, amputated.
6. Multiple incised wounds·left arm laterally with
1/3 portion of the arm circumference affected.
7. Incised Wound·3 inches long 1 1/2 inches wide and
2 inches deep, left arm medially with, muscles &
blood vessels affected.
8. Incised Wound·dital portion of the left arm
laterally, injuring blood vessels & muscles, 2 inches
long, 1 1/2 inches wide & 1/2 inch deep.
9. Incised Wound·anterior portion of the chest cages,
to the left side, 8 1/2 inches long, 3 inches wide,
injuring the distal portion of the sternum, muscles,
ribs, blood vessels, and exposing the heart and the
lungs.

Cause of Death; Shock

4
due to profuse hemorrhage due to
multiple wounds.‰
Against the positive testimony of Anacorita and Myrna
Florendo, accused-appellant set up the defense of denial
and alibi. He denied killing the victim and claimed that he
left Kiling Salvador, Tanauan, Leyte at around 2:00 P.M. of
August 13, 1983 in a passenger bus to take the M.V.
Ozamis which was bound to leave for Manila at 5:00 P.M.
that same day. This was corroborated by Juan Tangpus
when the latter testified that he executed an affidavit
dated August 26, 1983 stating that the accused-appellant
was a co-passenger in the same bus that he rode bound for
Tacloban City and that the accused-appellant boarded
5
the
M.V. Ozamis at 1:00 P.M. of August 13, 1983. However,
accused-appellant admitted, before he left for Manila, that
his father and the victim had a dispute over a piece of land.
Silverio Mijares, Jr. who was previously convicted for the
killing of Floro Florendo claimed killing the latter alone
with

_______________

4 Page 3, Record.
5 T.S.N. July 30, 1986, pp. 3-8.

61

VOL. 212, AUGUST 4, 1992 61

People vs. De Paz

6
his bolo. This was corroborated by Antonio Copino, a
businessman and barangay councilman of Barangay
Salvador, Tanauan, Leyte, who testified that Silverio
Mijares, Jr. surrendered to him alone at 4:00 P.M. of
August 13, 1983 after informing him that he killed Floro
Florendo.
The appeal is devoid of merit.
Accused-appellantÊs contention that the trial court erred
in giving full faith and credence to the testimonies of the
prosecution witnesses, Anacorita and Myrna Florendo, for
being biased; self-serving and highly improbable
considering that said prosecution witnesses are relatives of
the victim and that Silverio Mijares, Jr. had already
testified and admitted during the trial that he was the lone
assailant of the victim, does not convince Us.
The fact that Anacorita and Myrna Florendo were the
wife and daughter of the victim, respectively, does not
necessarily indicate that they are biased witnesses as to
impair the credibility of their testimonies which are
otherwise positive and clear. Relationship between the
victim and the witness does not undermine the credibility
of the latterÊs testimony. Established is the rule that the
mere fact that the witness is a relative of the victim is not a
valid or sufficient ground to disregard the formerÊs
testimony nor does it render the same less worthy of credit,
in the absence of ill motive. On the contrary, it would be
unnatural for such persons interested in obtaining justice
for the victims of the crime to impute the same to any7
person other than those responsible therefore.
Furthermore, when there is nothing in the records which
would show a motive or reason on the part of the witnesses
to falsely implicate the accused, identification should be
given full credit. And when there is no evidence and
nothing to indicate that the principal witness for the
prosecution was moved by improper motives, the
presumption is that he was not so moved, 8
and his
testimony is entitled to full faith and credit.
Anacorita, Myrna, Florita and Solario Florendo knew ac-

________________

6 T.S.N., February 28, 1986, p. 7.

7 People vs. De Guzman, 194 SCRA 618 (1991).
8 People vs. Doctolero, 193 SCRA 632 (1991).

62

62 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. De Paz

cused-appellant even before the incident since they were all

residing in the same barangay. Thus, Anacorita and Myrna
Florendo could not have been mistaken in their
identification of the accused-appellant. Moreover, the fact
that Anacorita and her children did not run from the scene
of the crime and instead cried for help and sought to defend
the victim when he was being hacked by the accused-
appellant and his two companions made their testimonies
highly credible since in spite of the danger to their persons,
their first impulse was to help and defend the victim. As
correctly observed by the trial court:

„3. Aside from being neighbors and barangay mates,

the prosecution witnesses were only five meters
from the place where they saw a loved one slowly
agonizing to meet his tragic demise by the
simultaneous and continuous infliction of the
wounds. There is no compelling reason why their
testimonies should not be believed, they did not
have an ill motive to point to the persons if it is not
true. Even when they reported the fact of death of
the deceased to the barangay captain and
councilman, Myrna and Anacorita spontaneously
mentioned the names of Jovencio de Paz, Silverio
Mijares and Telesforo Almaden, Antonio Copino,
the councilman, a defense witness confirmed this,
too.
4. More, the accused have not shown any fact or
circumstance from which it can be reasonably
inferred that said witnesses falsely testified or that
they were actuated by improper motives. Indeed, it
is hardly credible that a 13 year old girl could
harbor any grudge so deep as to implicate Jovencio
de Paz in a very serious offense as Murder, if she
did not see him deliver the first hacking wound on
the breast of his father followed by other wounds
inflicted by the three accused as proved by 9 the
autopsy report. (People vs. Ali, 29 SCRA 756).‰

Accused-appellantÊs defense of alibi must fail in view of his

positive identification by the prosecution witnesses who
had known him for years. Alibi is the weakest of all
defenses especially in the absence of proof that it would
have been physically impossible for said accused to have
been at the scene of the crime. To establish alibi, accused
must not only show that he was present at some other
place at about the time of the commission of the alleged
crime but that it was also physically

_______________
9 RTCÊs Decision, pp. 14-15; Rollo, p. 7.

63

VOL. 212, AUGUST 4, 1992 63

People vs. De Paz

impossible for him to have been at the place where the

crime was committed either 10before, during or after the time
he was at such other place, which accused failed to do in
the case at bar. As correctly pointed out by the trial court:

„7. Jovencio de PazÊs alibi that he was not present during the
incident as he left for Manila could not be believed. He
might have left for Manila after his participation in the
killing of the deceased. He admitted that his father was
allegedly having a quarrel with the deceased while he was
preparing to leave the barangay for Manila. Under the
circumstance, a good son cannot in conscience leave alone
his father faced an adversary. Hence, with two other
companions, Jovencio, Silverio and Telesforo sought the
deceased in his garden on August 13, 1983, in the
afternoon after coming from a drinking spree in his
brother-in-lawÊs house.

Defense witness Tangpus, collaborating with Jovencio de Paz

that at twelve oÊclock Noon, August 13, 1983, they were co-
passengers in a bus for Tacloban City is not believable. Tangpus is
an old man with defective eyes. He admitted in Court that he did
not have a time piece, neither did he know how to tell and read
the time. His contention that it was twelve oÊclock noon was
because the sun was over his head. More, barangay Salvador was
only six kilometers from the poblacion Tanauan, Leyte. It appears
that Jovencio de Paz left ahead after stabbing the deceased. The
stabbing as claimed by Anacorita took approximately ten minutes.
If he immediately left at 2:40 oÊclock in the afternoon for Tanauan,
then to Tacloban City, Jovencio could still be on time to take the
11
five oÊclock trip for Manila.‰

Accused-appellantÊs contention that the trial judge did not

have the opportunity to observe the conduct and demeanor
of the witnesses since he was not the same judge who
conducted the hearing is also untenable. While it is true
that the trial judge who conducted the hearing would be in
a better position to ascertain the truth or falsity of the
testimonies of the witnesses, it does not necessarily follow
that a judge who was not present during the trial cannot
render a valid and just decision since the latter can also
rely on the transcribed stenographic notes taken during the
trial as the basis of his decision.

_______________

10 People vs. Mandapat, 196 SCRA 157 (1991).

11 Id., pp. 15-16.

64

64 SUPREME COURT REPORTS ANNOTATED

People vs. De Paz

The trial court, however, erred in the penalty imposed for

the crime of MURDER qualified by TREACHERY. The
penalty prescribed by Article 248 for said crime is reclusion
temporal in its maximum period to death. Since the
Indeterminate Sentence Law is not applicable in the case
at bar there being no generic mitigating or aggravating
circumstance, the penalty imposed by the trial court should
be modified to reclusion perpetua. Likewise, the death
indemnity has been increased to P50,000.00 under our
present jurisprudence.
WHEREFORE, finding no error in the decision of the
trial court, the same is hereby AFFIRMED but with the
MODIFICATION that the proper penalty imposable is
reclusion perpetua and the death indemnity which the
accused-appellant should pay to the heirs of the victim
increased to P50,000.00. Costs against appellants.
SO ORDERED.

Narvasa (C.J., Chairman), Padilla and Regalado,

JJ., concur.

Decision affirmed with modification.

Notes.·Alibi is an inherently weak defense and can

only be accepted upon the clearest proof that the defendant
was not or could not have been at the scene of the crime
when it was committed (People vs. Peralta, 193 SCRA 9).
A judge may validly render a decision although he has
only partly heard the testimony of the witnesses (Ayco vs.
Fernandez, 195 SCRA 328).

··o0o··

65