G.R. No. L-32477 October 30, 1981
THE PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES, plaintiff-appellee, vs. FRANCISCO APOSAGA and CONSTANCIO MONTE, accused-appellants.

FACTS

Atty. Jose Barranda was murdered on December 13, 1965, on a trail in Barrio Palkan, Polomolok, South Cotabato. He was last seen alive leaving his house after a morning meeting with his farm administrator, accused Constancio Monte. Shortly after, he was chased and hacked to death by three armed men. His body was concealed in a dry well, and his portfolio was buried separately. The crime remained unreported for 48 days until January 20, 1966, when Pio Francisco, after visiting his son Jesus Francisco in the barrio, learned of the killing from Jesus and Sotera Salongcong. Pio reported this to PC authorities, initially under the mistaken belief that one of the killers was a different wanted individual. This report triggered an investigation leading to the exhumation of Barranda’s body and the recovery of his belongings.
The investigation implicated several individuals, including appellants Francisco Aposaga and Constancio Monte, as well as Jesus Francisco, Alfredo Villanueva (alias Calbo), Sotera Salongcong, and the victim’s common-law wife, Gloria Salongcong. At trial, two eyewitnesses, Noe Cabrera and Felomena Cabrera, testified they saw Aposaga, Monte, and Villanueva attack Barranda. The defense consisted of alibis and denials, with Monte claiming he saw Jesus Francisco chase the victim but did nothing, and Aposaga alleging he was elsewhere during the incident.

ISSUE

Whether the guilt of accused-appellants Francisco Aposaga and Constancio Monte for the crime of murder has been proven beyond reasonable doubt.

RULING

Yes, the Supreme Court affirmed their conviction but modified the penalty to reclusion perpetua due to the lack of necessary votes for the death penalty. The Court found the testimonies of the two eyewitnesses, Noe and Felomena Cabrera, to be credible and sufficient to establish guilt. Their accounts were consistent and detailed, identifying Aposaga and Monte as active participants in the concerted attack. The Court rejected the appellants’ alibis as weak and unsubstantiated. For Monte specifically, the Court highlighted several pieces of circumstantial evidence inconsistent with innocence: his failure to act upon seeing Jesus Francisco chase the deceased, his inaction during the victim’s 48-day disappearance despite being the farm administrator, his evasive answers to Gloria Salongcong’s inquiries, and his escape from jail, which indicated a guilty conscience. The Court concluded that the evidence, both direct and circumstantial, proved their guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The decision also ordered the Minister of Justice to conduct a further investigation into the possible criminal liability of Sotera Salongcong, Jesus Francisco, and Gloria Salongcong, noting strong motives existed for them to desire the victim’s death.