[ G.R. No. L-1333. December 14, 1948 ] 82 Phil. 312
[ G.R. No. L-1333. December 14, 1948 ]
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, PLAINTIFF AND APPELLEE, VS. VALENTIN HERNANA ET AL., DEFENDANTS, TOMAS SASING, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANT. D E C I S I O N
PARAS, J.:
Tomas Sasing, Guillermo Alcordo and Gervasio Ygot, with seven others, were accused in the Court of First Instance of Cebu with the offense of robbery in band with murder. At the instance of the prosecution, the trial court dismissed the case as against Gervasio Ygot in order to enable the prosecution to use him as a witness. After trial, the lower court convicted Tomas Sasing and Guillermo Alcordo of the complex crime of robbery with murder, aggravated by the circumstances of night time and armed band, and sentenced them to reclusion pertpetua and its accessories, to indemnify the heirs of the deceased in the sum of two thousand pesos, and to pay the costs. All the other accused were acquitted. Only Tomas Sasing has appealed to this Court. The evidence for the prosecution in substance tends to show that at about nine o’ clock in the evening of July 3, 1946, Inocentes Hermosilla and his wife Macaria Capuyan heard voices emanating from outside their isolated house in “barrio Capotolan, municipality of Danao, province of Cebu, demanding that the door be opened to the “harianon” (ruler), Hermosilla did not comply with the persistent demands of the visitors, saying that he was tired. Someone from the outside asked whether Hermosilla was going to resist, whereupon the latter went to the kitchen to fetch his wife. As they were entering the door leading to the hall, several shots were fired from the outside. Hermosilla, who was hit on several parts of his body, instantly died. The malefactors cut the rope which fastened the door, after which Tomas Sasing, Guillermo Alcordo and an unidentified companion, all armed with pistols, entered the house while the others remained below. Tomas Sasing and his two companions then took from the family trunk clothings worth P100.00, P235.00 in cash and P18.00 worth of jewelries, aside from three fighting cocks which the marauders carried away.
One of the two principal witnesses for the prosecution is Gervasio Ygot, appellant’s co-accused who was excluded from the case at the instance of the fiscal for the very purpose of becoming a state witness. This witness, in the first part of his testimony, disclaimed any knowledge of the facts alleged in the information. Upon being reminded by the fiscal of his extrajudicial confession (Exhs. F and P-l), however, Ygot began to relate” the recitals in his confession Incriminating the appellant and all the other accused. Upon cross-examination, Ygot reverted to his first statement that he did not know anything about the crime. After conferring with Ygot, the fiscal announced to the court that this witness was ready to tell the whole truth, whereupon the latter, allowed to take the witness stand again, testified in accordance with his confession.
The other principal witness for the prosecution is the wife of Hermosilla who testified that although she did not actually see the persons who entered her house on the occasion in question, she recognized the appellant as being one of them because of his voice.
We are unable to find the appellant guilty upon such kind of evidence. Gervasio Ygot, who was as unpredictable as the changeable weather, certainly does not deserve credence. The explanation that he refused to incriminate the accused in view of the latter1s threats, cannot readily be accepted, since the same moral weakness that may be implied from the fact I that Ygot is easily victimized by threats may be invoked in support of the probability that he testified In accordance with his confession because he was maltreated and threatened by the military police; and Ygot’s lack of credibility undoubtedly accounted for the acquittal of all the other accused.
The testimony of the window of Hermosilla might perhaps have served as corroborating evidence, if the same is not free from criticism. It is true that one’s identity may be established by or gathered from his voice, if familiar to the witness. But where, as in this case, the witness failed to state that the appellant had uttered any specific statement during the commission of the alleged offense which enabled her to recognize his voice, we cannot, without entertaining some doubt, hold the appellant responsible for so grave crime as that charged in the information. While the window testified that she heard others coming from the outside, this of course does not mean that she heard said orders as having been given or uttered by the appellant.
The alleged discovery in the appellant’s house of an empty magazine of a sub-machine gun does not strengthen the case for the prosecution, it appearing that, according to its own version, the appellant was armed with a pistol.
The appealed judgment will therefore be, as the same is hereby, reversed, and the appellant, Tomas Sasing, acquitted with costs de oficio. So ordered.
Moran, C.J., Feria, Perfecto, Bengzon, and Briones, JJ., concur.